[Audio_Empire]

On Monday, December 30, 2013 8:15:30 AM UTC-8, =
wrote:
This week 's online stereophile continues in its series of articles=20
=20
bemoaning the poor state of hifi.

'The new audio geek'=20

"It's no secret that the high-end audio industry has done a=20
poor job o
reestablishing the mainstream respect it enjoyed through the=20
latter
half of the 20th century, but its lack of reach has never been =20
as
painfully obvious as it is today. Teens are inextricably tied=20
to
smartphones, moms and dads are infatuated with Bluetooth=20
streaming, and
most people would rather pay too much for an MP3 than anything=20
at all
for a DSD download. In a world dominated by fancy gadgets and
intriguing technologies, the pursuit of true high-fidelity=20
sound
remains an obscure pastime for a relatively small group of =20
aging males."

And the answer to why the hifi industry is in its death rattle comes a =
bit =20
down in a "review" of wire. Expensive wire pushed for every reason =
not=20
related to hifi explains it all. Hifi gear is now a commodity item =
except=20
for speakers.

Digital tech toys have also replaced hifi just as hifi in part =
displaced=20
radio as the "guy" thing to do.

Stereophile is deluded as they are part of the problem. Audio is =
supposed to=20
be a hobby. But two things have taken it out of that realm. First is the =
prices
that many companies charge for their gear. There is simply no excuse for =
any
piece of audio equipment to cost what some of this stuff costs these =
days. A=20
pair of speakers that cost as much as decent-sized house in some =
markets?=20
Gimme a break! By chasing the nouveau riche market, they have left the =
traditional
audio hobbyist out of the picture entirely, and magazines like =
Stereophile,
whether on purpose or not, send the message: "This stuff is so =
expensive, that
it's only for the very rich. Youngsters and average working Joes need =
not apply."=20
How are you going to get new blood into any hobby when, on the surface =
of it,
it looks as if a decent stereo system will cost more than a new Ferrari?=20=

The second thing that has taken audio out of the "interesting hobby " =
category
of leisure activities, is that there really isn't any "hobby" left. You =
buy an=20
outrageously expensive piece of gear, set it on a shelf, connect it to =
other
outrageously priced pieces of gear and then listen to it. That makes =
modern=20
audio not only ghastly costly, but no more of a hobby than a big-screen =
TV!

It used to be that excellent equipment could be had cheaply. And to get =
even more
hobby-like (and cheaper still) there were kits. People could get =
involved with their
equipment and add to their pride of ownership, the added pride of =
accomplishment.
Today, buying new cables and other dubious tweaks such as wood blocks =
and cable
elevators are really all the involvement that the modern "hobbyist" can =
have over=20
his audio system.=20

When I was a teenager, I had a very good system. It was built completely =
from kits
which either I bought from money earned by doing odd jobs or were given =
to me=20
for Christmas or birthdays (the equipment was that reasonable. My dad, a =
talented=20
amateur cabinet maker, built my speaker cabinets for me, and in those =
days, one=20
generally made one's own interconnect cables by soldering tin-plated RCA =
plugs
onto lengths of coaxial cable. You were really involved with your =
system. This=20
attracts teenage kids and certainly started me on a lifelong search for =
good sound.
But I have to admit it was more fun back then, and my Knight-kits, Eico =
Kits, and=20
Heath-kits sounded as good my young ears then as the best equipment =
sounds to=20
me today. It really didn't, of course, but I didn't know that.=

[Oregonian Haruspex]

On 2014-01-02 22:52:00 +0000, Audio_Empire said:

On Monday, December 30, 2013 8:15:30 AM UTC-8, wrote:
This week 's online stereophile continues in its series of articles
bemoaning the poor state of hifi.

'The new audio geek'
"It's no secret that the high-end audio industry has done a poor job o
reestablishing the mainstream respect it enjoyed through the latter
half of the 20th century, but its lack of reach has never been as
painfully obvious as it is today. Teens are inextricably tied to
smartphones, moms and dads are infatuated with Bluetooth streaming, and
most people would rather pay too much for an MP3 than anything at all
for a DSD download. In a world dominated by fancy gadgets and
intriguing technologies, the pursuit of true high-fidelity sound
remains an obscure pastime for a relatively small group of aging males."

And the answer to why the hifi industry is in its death rattle comes a
bit down in a "review" of wire. Expensive wire pushed for every reason
not related to hifi explains it all. Hifi gear is now a commodity
item except for speakers.

Digital tech toys have also replaced hifi just as hifi in part
displaced radio as the "guy" thing to do.

Stereophile is deluded as they are part of the problem. Audio is
supposed tobe a hobby. But two things have taken it out of that realm.
First is the prices
that many companies charge for their gear. There is simply no excuse for any
piece of audio equipment to cost what some of this stuff costs these
days. Apair of speakers that cost as much as decent-sized house in some
markets?Gimme a break! By chasing the nouveau riche market, they have
left the traditional
audio hobbyist out of the picture entirely, and magazines like Stereophile,
whether on purpose or not, send the message: "This stuff is so expensive, that
it's only for the very rich. Youngsters and average working Joes need
not apply."How are you going to get new blood into any hobby when, on
the surface of it,
it looks as if a decent stereo system will cost more than a new
Ferrari?The second thing that has taken audio out of the "interesting
hobby " category
of leisure activities, is that there really isn't any "hobby" left. You
buy anoutrageously expensive piece of gear, set it on a shelf, connect
it to other
outrageously priced pieces of gear and then listen to it. That makes
modernaudio not only ghastly costly, but no more of a hobby than a
big-screen TV!

It used to be that excellent equipment could be had cheaply. And to get
even more
hobby-like (and cheaper still) there were kits. People could get
involved with their
equipment and add to their pride of ownership, the added pride of
accomplishment.
Today, buying new cables and other dubious tweaks such as wood blocks and cable
elevators are really all the involvement that the modern "hobbyist" can
have overhis audio system.
When I was a teenager, I had a very good system. It was built
completely from kits
which either I bought from money earned by doing odd jobs or were given
to mefor Christmas or birthdays (the equipment was that reasonable. My
dad, a talentedamateur cabinet maker, built my speaker cabinets for me,
and in those days, onegenerally made one's own interconnect cables by
soldering tin-plated RCA plugs
onto lengths of coaxial cable. You were really involved with your
system. Thisattracts teenage kids and certainly started me on a
lifelong search for good sound.
But I have to admit it was more fun back then, and my Knight-kits, Eico
Kits, andHeath-kits sounded as good my young ears then as the best
equipment sounds tome today. It really didn't, of course, but I didn't
know that.

Excellent equipment can be had cheaply, if you know what to look for.
Consumer-grade hifi setups range (of course) from iffy to,
surprisingly, amazing at this time. But the bigger issue is not
Stereophile, it's the market. If Yamaha and Sony can produce a very
respectable full system, speakers and all, for $600 on up where's that
leave the niche player in the market? They will chase the high margin
segment of the market where they can make decent profits shipping a few
dozen to a few thousand units per year.

Stereophile is a blip on the radar when it comes to influencing the
market. I would guess Amazon's rating system influences ten thousand
buyers for every one that Stereophile does.

Another thing to consider is the habits of consumers these days. Have
you ever looked at the way that people's televisions are adjusted?
They have the contrast cranked as well as the color, because the
picture is 'bolder' that way. In fact new TVs come pre-****ed-over
from the factory to give the person the impression that their TV is
working properly! Realistic flesh tones? Fah! Stereos are another
example - have you heard how people have their EQ adjusted? The
manufacturers that produce respectable middle proced systems also have
the default settings leaning way toward heavy bass so that the consumer
is happy with their stereo. Then the consumer's first act, after setup
(and likely before they even listen to any program material) is to
crank the bass even more, or even to engage Super Bass or other types
of systems that tend to come standard on every A/V receiver these days.

It's not a big deal though, I don't think. These settings can be
adjusted properly by a knowledgable listener and most halfway decent
consumer stereos can sound really good when properly adjusted. For the
people who care, who can listen, and who have ears, the equipment works
fine after a bit of fiddling. For those who don't care, what's the
point in trying to convince them?

As far as fidelity is concerned, the typical earbud and over-the-head
types of phones (closed or open) these days are hit and miss, but Apple
for one makes some very nice earbud headphones with proper response.
The iPod phones that came standard through at least 4th Generation are
rather good even compared to certain German headband phones costing
into the $300 range. If the program material is heavily compressed
it's a loss, but lossless files on an ancient iPod with original iPod
earbuds provide a listening experience that might only be had for the
cost of the iPod itself.

As a caveat, I have never used any of the newer Apple headphones, so I
don't know if they still use the good rare earth drivers. But they
used to be of perfectly respectable quality.

[news]

I agree with all of the above, plus an observation that the greatest crime
of the magazines and advertisers is to give the impression that you can
"buy" better quality or better sound the more money you spend.

Alas, the reproduction problem is an acoustical one, not a component one.
You can make great sound inexpensively in a good room, but in a bad one no
amount of money can change anything about it.

Gary Eickmeier