[Audio_Empire[_2_]]

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

On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 6:35:32 PM UTC-8, Audio_Empire wrote:

On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 9:51:01 AM UTC-8, ScottW wrote:



On Monday, November 25, 2013 4:38:37 PM UTC-8, Audio_Empire wrote:



But we part company when you start comparing iPod and iPod-like devices and ear-buds favorably with a good stereo system.


I think you're kind of missing the bigger picture here. An iPod and
earphones are a much better "stereo system" than *I* grew up with. It
was an easily understandable desire, in our formative days, to want a
better 'standard' stereo system than we actually had. The difference
between "typical" and "good" stereo systems was simply enormous. At
least in my neighborhood.

Well, they're not better than the stereo system that *I* grew up with: Beogram
1000 with SP-12 cartridge, Viking 1/4-track Stereo R-to-R tape deck, Eico HFT-90
Tuner with Knight-Kit Stereo multiplex decoder (KS-11), two Knight-Kit model
83YX797 18 Watt integrated amplifiers (the system started out mono), Two bass
reflex cabinets in Walnut made for me by my Dad (who was a great amateur woodworker)
each containing a Knight version of the Electrovoice Wolverine 12" speaker (KN-812)
and a Layfayette supplied Japanese horn tweeter. Not much by today's standards. But
with a good FM station from Washington D.C. playing a live concert from the
Watergate barge or the State Department Auditorium or The Atrium of the Museum
of Natural History (National Symphony concerts). It sounded damn good to me
(no volume compression or limiting in those days).

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. 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.

snip

Maybe such a playback is satisfying to you, but I know many audiophiles including myself, that
would not find these portable devices anything more than a convenient way to carry their
music with them when they need to do so.

I don't understand your point here. If you don't find these 'portable
devices' satisfying - at the time and place you use them - then why use
them, convenient or not? They are not, to me, *as* satisfying as my home
system is, but they are orders of magnitude more satisfying than the
dreck I grew up listening to.

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.

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!

But the average joe has NEVER been into hi-fi.

No...the average younger joe has grownup with hi-fi to the point they take it for granted.
Big $$ systems aren't going to give them any appreciable value.

When I was a teen and just getting into the hobby, I knew only one guy, a tech-rep friend of
my dads who was into Hi-Fi and had a decent system.
I knew a number of people who loved music, including my high-school music teacher. They all
had, what we called in those days, "brown-goods" hi-fis and stereos.
These were consoles or luggage finished portables that had flea-Watt, single-ended amplifiers,
tiny output transformers and cheap, stamped-basket speakers with
one-ounce magnets. They sounded terrible, but that's what most people bought.

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?

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.

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


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!

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.

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.

It's really hard to argue with such a fallacy.

Reality is people every where are listening to great sounding audio and the gap between the absolute best and consumer grade "brown-goods" ipods has shrunk to near nothing.

Well I certainly don't think you can go that far. There's still a huge
difference IMO. BUT, and it's a Huge BUT, for a Millenial that
improvement also requires a significant sacrifice in lifestyle - over
and above money - that we never experienced. It was ALL upside for us
as long as we had the cash.

Keith