[Peter Wieck]

On Mar 28, 5:59=A0pm, Audio Empire wrote:

In my case, I used a similar device based on the fact that MOST audiophil=
es
DO think that new stuff is better than old. Hell, much of the business mo=
del
of home audio is based upon the audiophile striving to "upgrade" his
components to the latest and the greatest. The reality is that while many
audiophiles do not think that newer stuff is necessarily better than olde=
r
stuff, the vast majority probably do. But, by reminding the reader of thi=
s
widely held wisdom, I create a literary "peg" to hang my anecdote on.
Oh, yes, and one more thing. I STILL work as an equipment reviewer and I'=
ve
been with the same publication for more than 16 years.

hmmmm..... Business Model - I get that. And in order for the business
to survive, it _must_ support and adopt the myth (for lack of a better
word) that new equipment is necessarily better than old equipment. And
this is an absolute necessity when the equipment in question does not
age in a linear, predictable manner as to many other consumer goods -
vehicles, appliances, clothing and so forth - nor does it go in or out
of fashion as other consumer goods, nor does it become more or less
energy-efficient as do appliances, vehicles, or safer as do appliances
and vehicles as they advance. If {insert favorite maker name here}
states that the amplifier made and sold today is absolutely the best
there is upon which no improvement may be made - where does that leave
them tomorrow?

Audio 'improvements' remind me of that proverbial Vanishing Bird (not
to be mistaken for the Ooh-AHhhh bird) that flies in ever decreasing
circles until it finally vanishes up its own fundament (the Ooh-AHhhh
bird is a one-pound bird that lays a two-pound egg).

I know more than a few audiophiles - and more than a few purveyors of
audio equipment. I have found from long association with both that the
one more-or-less excludes the other during the sales process. I know
one (1) reviewer-of-equipment at a professional level - and bluntly, I
would not trust that individual to call it daytime at noon. A decent
individual - but within that profession no better than any given
congress person.

Ah, well. I really do not believe for one hummingbird heartbeat that
"new" is necessarily better than old - and in many cases I would posit
that it is far worse. Nor do I think that outside of transducers and
other analog media (tape, vinyl, FM *analog* tuners) that there is
much room for improvement. See "vanishing bird" above. And I also
would suggest that at least within my limited experience most
audiophiles - really - with even half-a-brain pretty much know what
they like and pretty much leave it at that eschewing the magic Kool-
Aid entirely. Starting with cables and other interconnects....

It was Mr. Menken who wrote that famous phrase: Nobody ever went broke
underestimating the intelligence of the American public.

The high-end audio industry lives by that. Nor, of course do I think
that "all amps sound alike". The one does not follow from the other.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

[Arny Krueger]

"Peter Wieck" wrote in message


... in order for
the business to survive, it _must_ support and adopt the
myth (for lack of a better word) that new equipment is
necessarily better than old equipment.

Or at least more suitable.

And this is an absolute necessity when the equipment in question does
not age in a linear, predictable manner as to many other
consumer goods - vehicles, appliances, clothing and so
forth - nor does it go in or out of fashion as other
consumer goods, nor does it become more or less
energy-efficient as do appliances, vehicles, or safer as
do appliances and vehicles as they advance.

All excellent points. The fact that some audiophiles are willing to pay
exhorbitant prices for certain pieces of legacy audio gear, and brag about
its superior sound quality exactly supports your points.

If {insert
favorite maker name here} states that the amplifier made
and sold today is absolutely the best there is upon which
no improvement may be made - where does that leave them
tomorrow?

The manufacturer can grow laterally, but he sacrifices repeat customers. In
order to grow laterally he has to create the impression that his product is
superior to the alternatives.

Audio 'improvements' remind me of that proverbial
Vanishing Bird (not to be mistaken for the Ooh-AHhhh
bird) that flies in ever decreasing circles until it
finally vanishes up its own fundament (the Ooh-AHhhh bird
is a one-pound bird that lays a two-pound egg).

LOL!

I know more than a few audiophiles - and more than a few
purveyors of audio equipment. I have found from long
association with both that the one more-or-less excludes
the other during the sales process. I know one (1)
reviewer-of-equipment at a professional level - and
bluntly, I would not trust that individual to call it
daytime at noon. A decent individual - but within that
profession no better than any given congress person.

This is confirmed by our experience with blind tests that show that
reviewers and dealers do not necessarily hear small differences any better
other audiophiles.


It was Mr. Menken who wrote that famous phrase: Nobody
ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the
American public.

The high-end audio industry lives by that. Nor, of course
do I think that "all amps sound alike". The one does not
follow from the other.

Also: "Hope springs eternal." High end audiophiles who make a steady
stream of serial acquisitions always beleive that superior sound is just
around the corner.

[Audio Empire]

On Tue, 5 Apr 2011 05:30:19 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

It was Mr. Menken who wrote that famous phrase: Nobody
ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the
American public.

The high-end audio industry lives by that. Nor, of course
do I think that "all amps sound alike". The one does not
follow from the other.

Also: "Hope springs eternal." High end audiophiles who make a steady
stream of serial acquisitions always beleive that superior sound is just
around the corner.


The entire market is based on that. With fewer and fewer young people
becoming audiophiles, the chance to sell new components to new clientele
becomes becomes more and more remote. Manufacturers HAVE to sell new
components for old to the same (or shrinking) market size (and niches within
that market) year after year.

[Audio Empire]

On Mon, 4 Apr 2011 18:22:50 -0700, Peter Wieck wrote
(in article ):

On Mar 28, 5:59=A0pm, Audio Empire wrote:

In my case, I used a similar device based on the fact that MOST audiophil=
es
DO think that new stuff is better than old. Hell, much of the business mo=
del
of home audio is based upon the audiophile striving to "upgrade" his
components to the latest and the greatest. The reality is that while many
audiophiles do not think that newer stuff is necessarily better than olde=
r
stuff, the vast majority probably do. But, by reminding the reader of thi=
s
widely held wisdom, I create a literary "peg" to hang my anecdote on.
Oh, yes, and one more thing. I STILL work as an equipment reviewer and I'=
ve
been with the same publication for more than 16 years.

hmmmm..... Business Model - I get that. And in order for the business
to survive, it _must_ support and adopt the myth (for lack of a better
word) that new equipment is necessarily better than old equipment. And
this is an absolute necessity when the equipment in question does not
age in a linear, predictable manner as to many other consumer goods -
vehicles, appliances, clothing and so forth - nor does it go in or out
of fashion as other consumer goods, nor does it become more or less
energy-efficient as do appliances, vehicles, or safer as do appliances
and vehicles as they advance. If {insert favorite maker name here}
states that the amplifier made and sold today is absolutely the best
there is upon which no improvement may be made - where does that leave
them tomorrow?

Yes, all of that is true. How do you sell the same thing (say an amplifier)
to the same people over and over unless your customer base believes that your
current latest and greatest is better than your previous latest and greatest
and better than your competition's latest and greatest, past or present?

Audio 'improvements' remind me of that proverbial Vanishing Bird (not
to be mistaken for the Ooh-AHhhh bird) that flies in ever decreasing
circles until it finally vanishes up its own fundament (the Ooh-AHhhh
bird is a one-pound bird that lays a two-pound egg).

I know more than a few audiophiles - and more than a few purveyors of
audio equipment. I have found from long association with both that the
one more-or-less excludes the other during the sales process. I know
one (1) reviewer-of-equipment at a professional level - and bluntly, I
would not trust that individual to call it daytime at noon. A decent
individual - but within that profession no better than any given
congress person.

I certainly have known reviewers that fall into that category. You can
usually tell them when you encounter them. Some reviewers (like me) will
always turn down an assignment to review things like cables and
interconnects, cable lifts, blocks of wood that sit on one's components and
makes them somehow "sound better" and other audio "voodoo" products. The
other kind will embrace this nonsense and actually get several thousand words
about the "sound" of these soundless or non-functioning devices.

Ah, well. I really do not believe for one hummingbird heartbeat that
"new" is necessarily better than old - and in many cases I would posit
that it is far worse. Nor do I think that outside of transducers and
other analog media (tape, vinyl, FM *analog* tuners) that there is
much room for improvement. See "vanishing bird" above. And I also
would suggest that at least within my limited experience most
audiophiles - really - with even half-a-brain pretty much know what
they like and pretty much leave it at that eschewing the magic Kool-
Aid entirely. Starting with cables and other interconnects....

I wish those you know were in the majority, but alas, they are not.

It was Mr. Menken who wrote that famous phrase: Nobody ever went broke
underestimating the intelligence of the American public.

Amen to that.

The high-end audio industry lives by that. Nor, of course do I think
that "all amps sound alike". The one does not follow from the other.

They don't, but, as I've said several times the difference is like counting
angels on the head of a pin; not worth the effort.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA