[Audio_Empire[_2_]]

On Monday, December 2, 2013 4:18:36 AM UTC-8, Scott wrote:
On Sunday, December 1, 2013 8:12:29 PM UTC-8, ScottW wrote:
=20
On Sunday, December 1, 2013 7:17:58 AM UTC-8, Audio_Empire wrote:
=20

But I digress and I think you are missing my point. I'm not comparing=
the "iPod"-like=20
appliances to the stereos of my youth, merely the buyers. An audio en=
thusiast is always =20
going to want a decent stereo system and always has, and the average =
joe is going to =20
want convenience, low prices and what's considered cool by the standa=
rds of the day - always
has.=20

My point is that as the qualitative difference between what you conside=
r decent and what's readily
available shrinks....the number of audio enthusiasts who see value in t=
hat difference shrinks as well.=20

ScottW
=20
=20
=20
Maybe. Yet we are having this discussion in the midst of a youth driven m=
assive surge in sales of new vinyl. It's funny how each generation manage=
s to grow up, grow older and more sophisticated and=20
diverse in their tastes and interests. I really don't see Ipods as the do=
wnfall of high end audio. Some
youngsters will look for more. It happens with every generation.

Nothing changes to affect human nature. The same type of youngster that was=
attracted to music and audio in my day, is probably attracted today. I kne=
w youngsters in high-school and college who grew up with Brown goods, but d=
ecided that they wanted a better musical experience and went for component =
Hi-Fi as it was called then. I'm sure that there are youngsters today who w=
ould like to upgrade their listening experience from "iPods" to high-end au=
dio too. But you know what? It wouldn't surprise me to find that the prices=
of a lot of this stuff are very off-putting to them. When I was a kid, you=
could get kits from Heath, Knight (Allied Radio), Eico, even H.H. Scott, o=
ften at prices that a high-school kid with an after-school job could actual=
ly afford. Not so much anymore.=20