[KH]

On 12/1/2013 8:17 AM, Audio_Empire wrote:
On Saturday, November 30, 2013 5:22:52 AM UTC-8, KH wrote:
On 11/28/2013 8:27 AM, ScottW wrote:
snip

Well, they're not better than the stereo system that *I* grew up with:

Good for you, but you are much more the exception than the rule IME.

snip


But I digress and I think you are missing my point. I'm not comparing the "iPod"-like
appliances to the stereos of my youth, merely the buyers.

Nor was I, except to make the point that the desire to upgrade decreases
as the disparity in available quality decreases.

An audio enthusiast is always
going to want a decent stereo system and always has, and the average joe is going to
want convenience, low prices and what's considered cool by the standards of the day
- always has.

It's the level required for "decent" that has changed.

snip

Forgive me, but that seems like a pretty naive question. Obviously, one can't carry one's
stereo system with them. That's what portable devices are for. Same with car stereos. Not
really satisfying on a performance level, but it's nice to have tunes in the car.

Clearly then you use a different definition of "satisfying". With an
external DAC/amp for a nice set of "buds" I find the performance very
satisfying for the hours I spend in airports, on planes, in hotels, etc.
If I enjoy the music, and the sound is good enough that I am not
conscious of needing something better, I'm satisfied.

There is another area where earphones (any of them) are less capable,
and that's comfort.

Have to agree there.

snip

As Scott said, it is the golden age of hi-fi. It's just not the era of big $$ hi-fi. Convincing young
people they need to spend big $$ on audio gear is going to take an ad campaign equal to the
one the
gov't is waging to convince them to buy overpriced health insurance.

But that's the thing; I don't think you will ever convince millenials
that they *need* high dollar audio gear. The iPod level gear they've
grown up with is not *so* far away from "good stereo" that they are
blown away (as I was, and you likely were) when they first hear one.
They are also used to a different musical environment, the convenience,
the streaming, etc., that simply wasn't a part of "our" equation.

In their world, they have to give up a lot to get that improvement in
sound. And most pop recordings don't allow for a huge difference in
quality either. So what's the "hook"? I don't see one, not for the
young folks I know.

Once again, the vast majority IN ANY GENERATION are not that interested in audio quality on any level!

True, but as the quality delta decreases, and cultural impacts increase,
that majority will grow ever larger on a percentage basis.

snip

Very true. But that's the point...they sounded *terrible*! That was
*our* baseline for comparison. We all knew they sounded like crap, but
that's what we had.

I don't think that the people who bought that stuff knew it was crap or cared. It made a noise
"good tone". That's all they cared about. Todays kids listen to low bit-rate MP3s. Is there really
that much of a difference between those two types of buyers?

No. But for the ones who are concerned with quality, they have a
cheaper, easier upgrade path than we did.

The only difference between today and then, is those same types of people now buy iPods instead of brown-goods.

I probably should have added here that the same types of people now buy iPods AS THEIR MAIN
MUSIC SOURCE.

True. But they are still listening to better quality, typically, than
Old Joe did.

Yes, but iPods don't sound like crap, or needn't anyway, and that's the
big difference. The Apple earbuds do, but that's another issue.

Again, kids use low bit rates so that that they can get more music into their 16 or 32 Gigs. They don't care about how it sounds

Most do, but they have other options when/if they choose.

You may not like earbuds, and I don't use them except when traveling, but
the quality is simply orders of magnitude better than the "brown-goods"
junk I grew up with.

Again that's not the point. YES, an iPod-like device will surely sound better than the tiny
(and tinny) 6- transistor radios that we used to walk around with pressed to our ears,
but that was OUR portable music. And it isn't that I have anything against earbuds. it's
just that I can't wear them. They won't stay in!

JB Weld works wonders ;-)

I don't know about you, but even then, that transistor radio was my "portable" player,
not my main source of music enjoyment. I certainly never turned the thing on in my
room. I listened to my stereo system. Which sounded pretty goddamn good to me then.

Some of us were monetarily challenged. I didn't have a stereo until
college.

Are you seriously going to try to equate the sound from an ipod to a classic console with
BSR/ceramic cart groove grinder?

You forgot about the penny taped to the headshell...
We had a Magnavox Mediterranean console big enough to bury a Hippo in.
Five bucks worth of electronics and the BSR etch-a-sketch. Boy could
that thing rattle. Gimme earbuds any day.

Sure, Kids today don't listen to RCA Victor Hi-Fis, or Magnavox, or Zenith, or Sears Silvertone.
They buy iPods, and Sensas, and use their smart phones or tablets as music sources - along with
earbuds.

And they are lucky to be able to do so.

The sad fact is that we could have had a decent stereo for the price of
that music dumpster. Of course, in that event, I would have been
subjected to "high quality" reproduction of my folks' country favorites.
The mind shudders...

Keith