[Makiah S]

Spoiler

there is nothing forcing a product to be the best because it's the most expensive. even down to earth economical reasons like limited quantity, or massive R&D don't say anything about the resulting quality. only that it must cost a lot to cover cost.
but because you guys keep that nonsensical idea of expensive=best, more and more products come out with a ludicrous price tags simply as a marketing idea to make you think they are good products. and it works because amateur audio people almost never fact check anything, nor look too hard into objective fidelity.
even worst, in this hobby we've come to assume that a technology is better simply because it costs more. like tubes vs solid state, R2R kind of chips vs delta sigma, balanced vs single ended...
Iriver as a DAP manufacturer had been almost completely forgotten after a few IMO cool DAPs back in the days. they came up with zero new technology and instead went for a rebranding. named the stuff A&K, put a ludicrous price on a really average device with massive defects, and sold it like it was the best stuff ever made for the elite of this world. all based on marketing and the decision to price some crap chips on PCB like they're a luxury item. later on they corrected a few of the defects and instead of saying sorry, went to sell that for double the price. and again it worked and they sold plenty. didn't take a genius to guess what they would do next. "let's see how far we can go before those suckers stop paying" is obviously what everybody thought.
sony also on the verge of being forgotten by elite audiophiles because of their consistently sub par amp section, saw that and jumped on board. started selling some good looking DAP for too much money when it didn't measure better than an iphone. became all the rage when it came out. so of course like a good student, sony also went for the new stuff at twice the price joke.
headphones are even worst IMO. prices are stupid, half of the expensive ones don't even comes with a certified fidelity or signature. the stuff measured on demos is often not what the consumer will buy, the same model will go though X silent revisions and if you liked the first one, well F you. in the end you basically we pay crazy prices for an EQ into something that isn't even always comfortable. but it's above 1k$ so it has to be the best am I right?

pricing is a complicated process but when you say stuff like "...if you have money, you buy the costlier and the better...", you're showing how they're right to keep rising prices purely as a marketing stunt no matter the quality of the product. because why bother with objective quality when you can ride on a great fallacy like the preconception that better and expensive are one and the same?

if a product was clearly and objectively the best, I would find it alright to have an exaggerated price. excellence is truly special and anybody who's the best at something has IMO the right to make up his own value as long as nobody can challenge him. but that implies evidence of being the best in the first place, and accountability when it's proved to be untrue. something that doesn't exist in consumer audio. so until we get better accountability, high prices mean nothing aside from how many hours we worked to get that value

.

I agree, I'm a bit afraid that HifiMan is going down this route! My HE 4 is amazing, and after trying the Hifiman HE X I really don't see how they can justify quadrupling the price, not for such a marginally small improvement.

Though, I'm happy to say that not every one is taking that route! I think what Mass Drop is doing, getting excellent hardware out at a very competitive is smart. I also like the price on the new Denon D7200, a smart move by them I think!

 

[richard51]

It seems nobody seems to understand my point... The price is not linearly linked to an upgrade product, all of you already know that for sure... But some simple experiment with vibrations cancelling, and EMI correction, can transform at low cost a mid-fi product in an almost TOTL product that is my point ....I dont dream to upgrade anymore... The war between different companies that sells their products excluded that: minimum investment with maximum profit for the ears... They rather sell always costlier product for a "better " so called listening experience...

 

[alota]

somoetimes it is this way but not always. then if we say that the price does not reflects the improvement is another question

 

[gregorio]

you´re right but you understand that i can only talk about things listened in my house. ... and in my opinion the sound in mojo is more natural and detailed ...

You don't appear to appreciate the massive contradiction here. As you've only listened in your house, you don't know what the recordings you're listening to are supposed to sound like. You don't know what the "natural" sound is supposed to be therefore you can't know if the mojo is more natural, all you've got for reference is what you think/believe "natural" should sound like. Also, you can compare one DAC with another and decide which is more "detailed" but that still doesn't tell you which DAC is actually better or more Hi-Fi because you don't know how detailed the recording is supposed to sound. Maybe you, like many other "audiophiles", have a personal preference for as much detail as you can get, regardless of fidelity! If so, of course you're entitled to your preference but that doesn't make a DAC which fulfils that preference a better DAC, it may actually be a worse DAC as far as accuracy and fidelity are concerned and only better in terms of your personal preferences!

It seems nobody seems to understand my point... The price is not linearly linked to an upgrade product, all of you already know that for sure... But some simple experiment with vibrations cancelling, and EMI correction, can transform at low cost a mid-fi product in an almost TOTL product that is my point ...

We do understand your point but you seem to be missing our point, which is: In reality, for many/most audiophile products, the cheap versions are already as Hi-Fi and TOTL as it's possible to get and therefore no "transform" at any cost is going to provide any audible improvement, that is our point! Of course, this inconvenient fact would put many/most makers/sellers of audiophile products out of business, so they change the facts. Typically, they come up with invented or inapplicable problems/issues with cheaper products, implying or stating that therefore those products are only standard or mid-fi, problems/issues which their products solve, which makes their products hi-fi/TOTL. In a surprisingly high number of cases those TOTL products don't even improve the so called "issues " any more than the cheap products and not uncommonly, they actually do a significantly worse job. That doesn't matter in today's audiophile market though, what matters is what you can convince audiophiles to believe, not what the products actually do. Entire segments of the audiophile industry now rely exclusively on this principle!

G

 

[richard51]

It seems to me that you trash the baby with the bath waters... One thing is criticizing the gullabillity of the consumers, and the market practice, another thing to think that improvement , great one, are possible at low cost...Repeating the same denying argument, even sometimes in some case a right one, would not solve all problems in one shot.... I only affirm that contrary to some industry marketing practice it is possible to get an almost TOTL at low cost with some easy experiments.... If i read you right you say to me that when i upgrade my 3 first amp for a better one, i were only naive, in a delusion mode, because they all sound the same, in your world all change is of no avail....It is impossible to discuss any affirmation, if it is a dogma... I think that your dogma is in fact no more useful than the marketing mantra.... experimenting is the key for me....It is the substance of my message to some of my audio fellows that look for a direction, and low cost solutions, and some hope, not wanting to spend big money ...What experience told me is that any audio product are plague with vibration, negative resonance, and EMI, at some variable degree,whatever the price; diminushing or erasing that noises and negative interferences that is my endeavor, and that is a program of research not a dogma ...

By the way little by little i have constructed my own audio room environment, with homemade cheap and efficient room treatment, and the same goes on with all my equipment piece, i treat them with solutions at low cost to maximize their sounding potential; then even if my listening conditions are different and like none other, and even if my judgement is subjective and only my own, my point is it is POSSIBLE by some gradual experimenting choice to optimize your room and equipment, and if no one perceive exactly the same, at last some relative improvement is objectively evident for some open mind, the hardest one to suggest is my unforgiven non audiophile but undogmatic wife...


Gregorio said :
We do understand your point but you seem to be missing our point, which is: In reality, for many/most audiophile products, the cheap versions are already as Hi-Fi and TOTL as it's possible to get and therefore no "transform" at any cost is going to provide any audible improvement, that is our point! Of course, this inconvenient fact would put many/most makers/sellers of audiophile products out of business, so they change the facts. Typically, they come up with invented or inapplicable problems/issues with cheaper products, implying or stating that therefore those products are only standard or mid-fi, problems/issues which their products solve, which makes their products hi-fi/TOTL. In a surprisingly high number of cases those TOTL products don't even improve the so called "issues " any more than the cheap products and not uncommonly, they actually do a significantly worse job. That doesn't matter in today's audiophile market though, what matters is what you can convince audiophiles to believe, not what the products actually do. Entire segments of the audiophile industry now rely exclusively on this principle!

G[/QUOTE]

 

[alota]

You don't appear to appreciate the massive contradiction here. As you've only listened in your house, you don't know what the recordings you're listening to are supposed to sound like. You don't know what the "natural" sound is supposed to be therefore you can't know if the mojo is more natural, all you've got for reference is what you think/believe "natural" should sound like. Also, you can compare one DAC with another and decide which is more "detailed" but that still doesn't tell you which DAC is actually better or more Hi-Fi because you don't know how detailed the recording is supposed to sound. Maybe you, like many other "audiophiles", have a personal preference for as much detail as you can get, regardless of fidelity! If so, of course you're entitled to your preference but that doesn't make a DAC which fulfils that preference a better DAC, it may actually be a worse DAC as far as accuracy and fidelity are concerned and only better in terms of your personal preferences!





G

Ok. i´m going to put on a cross. Happy?

 

[gregorio]

If i read you right you say to me that when i upgrade my 3 first amp for a better one, i were only naive, in a delusion mode, because they all sound the same, in your world all change is of no avail....It is impossible to discuss any affirmation, if it is a dogma...

No, you didn't read (or understand) my post! I said that "entire segments of the audiophile world now exclusively rely" effectively on marketing, not ALL segments. Some segments only rely on it partially. In the case of amps, an amp's performance is ultimately dictated by it's load. The amp in an iPhone is great, providing it's driving an appropriate load. If using a set of headphones requiring more power, then a more expensive amp (with a higher power output) will be, and will sound, significantly better. The principle (or "dogma" as you call it), still commonly applies to audiophile amps though, as the performance of some/many audiophile amps can be matched for a tiny fraction of the cost, as famously demonstrated by Carver 3 decades or so ago. Other segments of the audiophile industry, such as segments of the interconnects market for example are entirely dependent on the principle though. There is no dependence on load (or any other factors) and there are no performance improvements, from virtually the cheapest products all the way to the most expensive costing 1,000 times more.

G

 

[alota]

No, you didn't read (or understand) my post! I said that "entire segments of the audiophile world now exclusively rely" effectively on marketing, not ALL segments. Some segments only rely on it partially. In the case of amps, an amp's performance is ultimately dictated by it's load. The amp in an iPhone is great, providing it's driving an appropriate load. If using a set of headphones requiring more power, then a more expensive amp (with a higher power output) will be, and will sound, significantly better. The principle (or "dogma" as you call it), still commonly applies to audiophile amps though, as the performance of some/many audiophile amps can be matched for a tiny fraction of the cost, as famously demonstrated by Carver 3 decades or so ago. Other segments of the audiophile industry, such as segments of the interconnects market for example are entirely dependent on the principle though. There is no dependence on load (or any other factors) and there are no performance improvements, from virtually the cheapest products all the way to the most expensive costing 1,000 times more.

G

I agree with som your points.
you spoke about the great Bob Carver. i had in the past two power amplifiers from Bob Carver. really good in my opinion and in my house and please don´t restart with the same music.
the problem is that seems to me that you´re the teacher and we are the students. this is a forum not a school. your ways are a bit rough

 

[pctazhp]

I get a chuckle ever time I come here, which isn't often because this thread isn't very active. Two sides talk past each other, and both sides have their own dogma. Been that way since I first got into home audio in the early 70s. Just a lot more of it now with the internet.

My desktop is an entertainment center, not a lab. i have neither the interest nor qualifications to conduct scientifically valid DBTs, and there are few reported ones. I know what I enjoy, and just laugh at those who try to tell me I'm stupid.

 

[sonitus mirus]

I get a chuckle ever time I come here, which isn't often because this thread isn't very active. Two sides talk past each other, and both sides have their own dogma. Been that way since I first got into home audio in the early 70s. Just a lot more of it now with the internet.

My desktop is an entertainment center, not a lab. i have neither the interest nor qualifications to conduct scientifically valid DBTs, and there are few reported ones. I know what I enjoy, and just laugh at those who try to tell me I'm stupid.

It is often science clashing with marketing and something about a fool and his money. I enjoy wonderfully sounding music and laugh all the way to the bank.

 

[pctazhp]

It is often science clashing with marketing and something about a fool and his money. I enjoy wonderfully sounding music and laugh all the way to the bank.

Unfortunately I have not been blessed with your superior knowledge and insight. Maybe that's why my banker often frowns whenever he sees me.

 

[castleofargh]

aside from putting too much faith in the price as a rating of practical value, another big difference in mentality IMO is about looking at gear as gear, or as something as artistic and subjective as picking a song.
it's very rare for me to see a DAC as more than a bunch of cheap electronic components. I do not underestimate the work put into the design by the engineers, but that's their job. if they can't do that well they should do something else. and I would never think in term of sounstage, realism... it's a PCB with stuff on it in charge to turn my digital signal to analog signal, that's all it is to me and all I care about. I look at the output signal and it has good fidelity measured or it doesn't. that what makes me think it is worth more money than another DAC or not. I couldn't care less that it was made by the queen of England or had whatever FOTM dac chip in it. only the fidelity measured at the output has a financial value to me.
I have a few buddies who look at DACs the way they would look at their favorite artist. admiration, respect, envy... of course they are willing to pay more than I am for a DAC, they have many extra criteria when they estimate the value of a DAC. and then there are those who simply don't care about objective fidelity and will judge the value based on how they enjoy the sound(whatever the reason). those might be willing to spend the most money if they think they have found what they want.

 

[pctazhp]

aside from putting too much faith in the price as a rating of practical value, another big difference in mentality IMO is about looking at gear as gear, or as something as artistic and subjective as picking a song.
it's very rare for me to see a DAC as more than a bunch of cheap electronic components. I do not underestimate the work put into the design by the engineers, but that's their job. if they can't do that well they should do something else. and I would never think in term of sounstage, realism... it's a PCB with stuff on it in charge to turn my digital signal to analog signal, that's all it is to me and all I care about. I look at the output signal and it has good fidelity measured or it doesn't. that what makes me think it is worth more money than another DAC or not. I couldn't care less that it was made by the queen of England or had whatever FOTM dac chip in it. only the fidelity measured at the output has a financial value to me.
I have a few buddies who look at DACs the way they would look at their favorite artist. admiration, respect, envy... of course they are willing to pay more than I am for a DAC, they have many extra criteria when they estimate the value of a DAC. and then there are those who simply don't care about objective fidelity and will judge the value based on how they enjoy the sound(whatever the reason). those might be willing to spend the most money if they think they have found what they want.

I believe there are many different reasons people buy audio gear. I may be a lawyer, but I studied advanced physics as an undergraduate at Princeton during the 60s and earned my expert Ham license (KY7A). I have a deep respect for the scientific method, which is probably why I don't respect a lot of self-proclaimed "objectivists" on threads such as this.

I don't assume any piece of audio gear is necessarily better because it is expensive. But I don't refuse to audition something because there are cheaper alternatives. Going all the way back to Julian Hirsch and Stereo Review in the 70s, I have often detected a distinct condescending attitude on behalf of strictly "measurement" people. This type of discussion has been going on forever, and nothing ever changes. Human nature is the one constant, and most of us like to feel we have all the answers.

 

[sonitus mirus]

I don't know why I allow myself to get involved in stupid discussions like this. Evolution and creationism have nothing to do with this particular discussion other than to serve as a feeble attempt to promote "objeciveness" dogma in an audio discussion. There are thousands and thousands of audio products at all price range. No one can credibly make blanket statements about all these products. Some, like Schiit products, are built by engineers who I easily guess have far more technical knowledge and experience than you do.

What blanket statement would that be? No one is suggesting that everything sounds the same. There can be differences. I haven't seen evidence to suggest there might be differences heard without seeing a reason why. However, take the Schiit line of DACs. None of the differences between their most inexpensive version and any costing significantly more have specifications that would indicate that anyone should be able to hear any differences between them. The science behind this premise is difficult to refute, and I have seen almost no evidence to suggest otherwise. When a similar logic is applied to Red Book and Hi Res, it is difficult to stand behind the marketing rhetoric and anecdotes that claim sonic superiority.

I'm left wondering if there really is any audible difference between multi-thousand dollar digital audio gear and equipment that costs far less.

There is a relatively small group attempting to educate consumers. The information is available. I greatly appreciate those that have gone out of their way to help promote a more honest outlook. It is common sense to me, not rocket science. Don't expect to see this from the industry insiders. That is common sense to me, too.

 

[pctazhp]

Your blanket statement was about laughing all the way to the bank, implying that people who buy more expensive gear are self-delusional.

Schiit is very careful about not making claims of SQ advantages of one product over the other. They describe the technology involved in each product and let it go at that. And both Mike and Jason make themselves readily available to answer all kinds of questions on several different threads here at HeadFi. There are plenty of HeadFi posts from people who have listened to different Schiit multibit DACs and don't think there is a lot of difference in SQ. There are likewise a lot of posts from people who believe their is a noticeable difference, but usually they are pretty careful about saying that is just their personal experience. One can also find places where people have conducted blind tests and surprised themselves at the difficulty they had in distinguishing between, for example, the Gumby and Yiggy.

One of the big differences as you go up the line of Schiit DACs are more input options to accommodate personal preferences. But that can get into another entire discussion of whether that really matters.

Schiit offers a 15-day return privilege with a 5% restocking fee. They sell returned units as B-stock and those are usually pretty hard to find.

I love my Bimby. But sooner or later I will try either a Gumby or Yiggy. I am accountable to no one but myself for whatever decision I make. If you are satisfied making your decisions based purely on measurements, then that is the best approach for you. But I would hope you don't try to shame anyone who would approach it differently. There is a favorite saying among 12-step recovery types: "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation." — Herbert Spencer

Edit: I personally don't believe there is a noticeable difference between Redbook or HiRes, but that is my contempt without instigating. My source of music is almost exclusively Tidal HD, and that works fine for me.