Is highend audio evil science?

Jan 15, 2017 at 2:23 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 80

WindowsX

Member of the Trade: Fidelizer Audio
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Posts
1,962
Likes
369
It costs a fortune for better sound quality. Everything costs a lot and there's no clear scientific evidence that can prove for better sound. Yet a few wealthy audiophiles are willing to purchase them and appreciate them.
 
Jan 15, 2017 at 3:02 AM Post #3 of 80
It often involves audio improvement without audible measurements at very high price. Won't objectivist think of it that way?
 
Jan 15, 2017 at 4:45 AM Post #5 of 80
False statements won't get you far.

 
Let's talk about $5k cables, $10-20k equipment, $30-50k speakers. That's pretty common for highend audiophiles. If objectivist won't think of them as "audio improvement without audible measurements at very high price.", that'd be great.
 
Regards,
Keetakawee
 
Jan 15, 2017 at 5:53 AM Post #6 of 80
   
Let's talk about $5k cables, $10-20k equipment, $30-50k speakers. That's pretty common for highend audiophiles. If objectivist won't think of them as "audio improvement without audible measurements at very high price.", that'd be great.
 
Regards,
Keetakawee


Nothing to talk about.  Other than draining your pocket book $5k cables don't do anything for your sound quality.  The other items, depends upon what they are and why they cost so much.
 
Jan 15, 2017 at 12:50 PM Post #7 of 80
 
Nothing to talk about.  Other than draining your pocket book $5k cables don't do anything for your sound quality.  The other items, depends upon what they are and why they cost so much.

 
I agree cables can be needlessly expensive but the same could be said for their own preference too. I don't why highend audiophile often treat $1k cables as cheap stuff though some of them can make better synergy than $10k ones in some systems.
 
Jan 15, 2017 at 1:45 PM Post #8 of 80
I agree cables can be needlessly expensive but the same could be said for their own preference too. I don't why highend audiophile often treat $1k cables as cheap stuff though some of them can make better synergy than $10k ones in some systems.


You do appear to be trolling. You're not sneaking anything in like that. There is no synergy at any price. Cables are a non factor. You seem intent on ignoring what is known about them insisting on a subjectivist view. Don't know why you persist with this other than trolling this sub forum.
 
Jan 15, 2017 at 1:46 PM Post #9 of 80
High end audio isn't science.

 
^^^ This.
 
The entire question is moot as most high end audio isn't based on selling science (there are exceptions).
 
High end audio these days is a luxury goods and lifestyle market that has much in common with fashion and watches (as a watch collector, I know).  
 
The difference is that the fashion sector is more honest with itself.
 
Pro audio is different.  It's more (but not totally) results oriented and practical.  It's tool-oriented, not lifestyle-oriented.
 
Jan 15, 2017 at 1:46 PM Post #10 of 80
You do appear to be trolling. You're not sneaking anything in like that. There is no synergy at any price. Cables are a non factor. You seem intent on ignoring what is known about them insisting on a subjectivist view. Don't know why you persist with this other than trolling this sub forum.

 
Accusing me for trolling from this? Seriously? That's not nice way to put it. You also ignored commenting about others aside cable too. Should that be trolling too?
 
Jan 15, 2017 at 1:50 PM Post #11 of 80
   
^^^ This.
 
The entire question is moot as most high end audio isn't based on selling science (there are exceptions).
 
High end audio these days is a luxury goods and lifestyle market that has much in common with fashion and watches (as a watch collector, I know).  
 
The difference is that the fashion sector is more honest with itself.
 
Pro audio is different.  It's more (but not totally) results oriented and practical.  It's tool-oriented, not lifestyle-oriented.

 
When you put it that way, I've realized something. Highend audio is what most audiophiles can't afford they wouldn't dream to really try or learn anything from it. While some could only be exotic without science, some also focus only on great sound and audiophiles who appreciate in such product are willing to buy it.
 
Jan 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM Post #12 of 80
   
When you put it that way, I've realized something. Highend audio is what most audiophiles can't afford they wouldn't dream to really try or learn anything from it. While some could only be exotic without science, some also focus only on great sound and audiophiles who appreciate in such product are willing to buy it.

 

 
Jan 15, 2017 at 1:54 PM Post #13 of 80

 
If that bug can make me rich enough to throw a fortune for silly toys without affecting highend quality of life, I'd rather have that bug honestly.
 
Jan 15, 2017 at 1:57 PM Post #14 of 80
  It often involves audio improvement without audible measurements at very high price. Won't objectivist think of it that way?

 
1. If it's not an audible improvement, then it's obviously not an "improvement", or at least, not an aural improvement, though possibly a visual improvement. Measurements are very useful and can (depending on what we're measuring and what the measurements are) tell us all we need to know but other times, measurements may be inconclusive, in which case we have to look elsewhere for an answer and by far the most reliable place is some form of DBT.
 
2. I object to your classification system and clearly defining me as an objectivist. The main reason I love my work as an audio engineer is because it's almost entirely about subjectivity; making subjective evaluations and then creating subjective corrections/modifications based on those subjective evaluations. Few jobs are as subjective as mine and I'm paid for my subjective abilities. I am in fact therefore a subjectivist, the exact opposite of what you're tying to classify me as!!
 
3. "Very high price" is a weapon audiophiles commonly use in a futile attempt to make a some point or other. It's futile and foolish for two reasons: 1. The point it most commonly proves is nothing other than how gullible/susceptible to marketing BS they are and 2. It's a pathetic, puny little weapon compared to the weapons many of us (you're calling "objectivists") routinely use. My speaker system cost about $30,000 and I've spent around double that figure on acoustics. I regularly work in rooms/systems which cost over $1m and occasionally in ones which cost $20m or so.
 
Despite my own roughly third of a million dollar environment and my experience in other commercial environments costing nearly 100 times more than that, I've never bought (or seen in any other studio) a USB cable which cost more than about $10! Compared to the hundreds of thousands or millions spent, a few grand for a USB cable is a relatively insignificant amount money which we would/could easily purchase if such a USB cable actually made any difference but as expensive USB cables don't make even the tiniest of audible differences, I (and the far more costly studios) would far rather spend our money on items which do actually make a difference or not spend it in the first place! Bare in mind that even a relatively modest facility like mine has to spend at least $1k-$2k on cables any way, so it's nothing to do with any aversion to spending money on cables, where it makes a difference!!
 
So please, enough of the "high-end" and other nonsense because I doubt you've ever experience really high-end!
 
G
 
Jan 15, 2017 at 1:58 PM Post #15 of 80
Discussions such as this bring to mind Andrew Jones. A man capable of designing reasonably priced, and capable speakers for the masses, as well as mega-buck systems for those with very deep pockets. I attended a seminar in which he explained the compromises and trade-offs he has to make when designing to a "price point". It was very enlightening.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top