[WindowsX]

   
Not at all.
 
If someone wants to purchase something because it looks cool, has a nice feel to it, seems better built, is engineering overkill, has status, and imparts pride of ownership. No problem!
 
I do so, too.
 
But if you claim it sounds better, well....that's a different story.
 
I buy mechanical watches for reasons of aesthetics, history, artisanship, looks, etc.  But I don't have to pretend they actually tell time more accurately than my cell phone or a cheap Casio G-shock because they don't.

 
Many buy highend stuff because it sounds better and I'm sure most highend audiophiles listen to those gears before making a decision for what to buy. There's also factors like looks, history, support, brand awareness, resale value and price in consideration to weight with sound quality. Some also buy simply for the sake of boasting with their peers too.
 
If it doesn't sound different at all, many would have chosen what looks most pretty and cool in their room and be done with it. Yet I see so many highend audiophiles including myself buying highend gears with less good looking ones when they can hear it really sounds better than alternatives.

 

[watchnerd]

   
many would have chosen what looks most pretty and cool in their room and be done with it. 

 
Many do, and they're called "McIntosh customers", one of the most successful (from a sales point of view) and long-lasting brands in high-end audio.
 

 

[sonitus mirus]

   
Many buy highend stuff because it sounds better and I'm sure most highend audiophiles listen to those gears before making a decision for what to buy. There's also factors like looks, history, support, brand awareness, resale value and price in consideration to weight with sound quality. Some also buy simply for the sake of boasting with their peers too.
 
If it doesn't sound different at all, many would have chosen what looks most pretty and cool in their room and be done with it. Yet I see so many highend audiophiles including myself buying highend gears with less good looking ones when they can hear it really sounds better than alternatives.

 
Many believe stuff sounds better.  The measurements wouldn't seem to indicate that it should sound better based on the knowledge that we understand about human hearing abilities.  To date, there hasn't been any conclusive evidence to suggest that improvements can be identified with music, when the measurements clearly indicate that the differences should not be audible.
 
Science does show that humans are easily fooled with regards to our senses, audio not being exclusive, but certainly significant in this regard.
 
What am I to think?  Just repeating opinions over and over again is not moving the conversation forward.    It is troll-like behavior.
 
What high-end gear is better, and what is it better than?  How is it better?  Can we start there?  That is something we can discuss and possibly analyze.

 

[WindowsX]

Aren't you guys bored in keep talking like highend audiophile don't have reliable ears and made a purchase that doesn't really bring better sound? Have you seen any highend audiophile looking for measurement results alone without listening before purchasing? NO! They see actual product and  listen after checking other background about product themselves.
 
It's audible to their ears and they spend money with trust on their ears. Most highend audiophiles do that but if you guys choose to trust in data from measurements over your own ears, that's up to you.

 

[watchnerd]

 
Most highend audiophiles do that but if you guys choose to trust in data from measurements over your own ears, that's up to you.

 
Cool. 
 
So I guess you're done with us and will be moving along now?

 

[WindowsX]

   
Cool. 
 
So I guess you're done with us and will be moving along now?

 
My point in this post is asking your opinion about highend audiophile and I got it now. Thanks.

 

[watchnerd]

   
My point in this post is asking your opinion about highend audiophile and I got it now. Thanks.

 
You're welcome.  
 
Bye bye.

 

[WindowsX]

   
You're welcome.  
 
Bye bye.

 
So long. I'll muss you.

 

[spruce music]

  Aren't you guys bored in keep talking like highend audiophile don't have reliable ears and made a purchase that doesn't really bring better sound? Have you seen any highend audiophile looking for measurement results alone without listening before purchasing? NO! They see actual product and  listen after checking other background about product themselves.
 
It's audible to their ears and they spend money with trust on their ears. Most highend audiophiles do that but if you guys choose to trust in data from measurements over your own ears, that's up to you.

 
It's audible to their ears and they spend money with trust on their ears.
 
One of the most valuable things such people could learn is they place too much trust in their ears ability to guide them.  It is a misplaced trust.
 
As a result of understanding how things work, yes many here choose to trust data and measurement over our own ears.  It gives better results. It fits with physical reality better.  Yes, audiophiles typically, as appears to be the case with you, trust those ears over everything else.  If ears say one thing and measurements, data and blind tests something else they throw out the stuff other than their ears.  Us here in sound science will look at a long list of evidence, and when they all agree except for our ears we understand the ears are the odd man out.  The ears along with bias created in our human brain are rightly discounted. 
 
So if you continue to approach this as if we could only hear what you hear, hear real high end systems (how else could we disagree unless we never heard high end systems), and then we would agree with you, then your going to continually be in disagreement. That is not the approach we take and believe to be the most truthful when it comes to reproduced music.  Your ears conspire with your brain to lie to you all the time.  Your hearing is only a moderately reliable guide at best. It often is not at its best.

 

[WindowsX]

   
It's audible to their ears and they spend money with trust on their ears.
 
One of the most valuable things such people could learn is they place too much trust in their ears ability to guide them.  It is a misplaced trust.
 
As a result of understanding how things work, yes many here choose to trust data and measurement over our own ears.  It gives better results. It fits with physical reality better.  Yes, audiophiles typically, as appears to be the case with you, trust those ears over everything else.  If ears say one thing and measurements, data and blind tests something else they throw out the stuff other than their ears.  Us here in sound science will look at a long list of evidence, and when they all agree except for our ears we understand the ears are the odd man out.  The ears along with bias created in our human brain are rightly discounted. 
 
So if you continue to approach this as if we could only hear what you hear, hear real high end systems (how else could we disagree unless we never heard high end systems), and then we would agree with you, then your going to continually be in disagreement. That is not the approach we take and believe to be the most truthful when it comes to reproduced music.  Your ears conspire with your brain to lie to you all the time.  Your hearing is only a moderately reliable guide at best. It often is not at its best.

 
How about we sit in some rooms with good highend systems and listen together? We can exchange our opinion with the same listening experience that way. I hope you won't go as far as saying all highend audiophiles has a misplaced trust on their ears. That's quite arrogant if not incompetent for such statement. Anyway, it's your opinion and you're free to judge anything you feel like. I asked for it after all.

 

[VNandor]

What does high end system mean to you? is it something that is stupidly expensive, is it something that you personally like, or is it something that measures well? Maybe some odd mixture of those? I'm asking it because you seem to refuse the third option (which is what I mean by hi-end system, by the way).
 
Also assuming that you are (and some chosen "highend audiophiles") above expectation bias is quite egoistic.

 

[watchnerd]

  I hope you won't go as far as saying all highend audiophiles has a misplaced trust on their ears.
 

 
It's much bigger:
 
All human beings have a misplaced trust in their own ears.

 

[sonitus mirus]

   
How about we sit in some rooms with good highend systems and listen together? We can exchange our opinion with the same listening experience that way. I hope you won't go as far as saying all highend audiophiles has a misplaced trust on their ears. That's quite arrogant if not incompetent for such statement. Anyway, it's your opinion and you're free to judge anything you feel like. I asked for it after all.

 
They aren't listening with just their ears, though.  They are seeing what they are listening to, and this creates bias that is not easily overcome by humans.  
 
I don't need to be in the room with you.  Why don't you sit in a room with a high-end system, have someone randomly play the same mastered song either using a cheap mp3 player with a lossy file or at the highest playback quality offered on that system to see if you can identify what is playing without knowing what is actually playing.  I'm sure you would be surprised.  

 

[spruce music]

   
How about we sit in some rooms with good highend systems and listen together? We can exchange our opinion with the same listening experience that way. I hope you won't go as far as saying all highend audiophiles has a misplaced trust on their ears. That's quite arrogant if not incompetent for such statement. Anyway, it's your opinion and you're free to judge anything you feel like. I asked for it after all.

 
This is what you keep doing.  Building a straw man that we haven't heard high end and if we only could we would get it. I do listen to such gear with friends.  I know better than to believe my ears sometimes.  Much high end gear is very good.  It might cost more than needed, but it might have better looks or construction.  It is a luxury good which doesn't mean it is no good or totally not worth extra money.  The high end ideas about some of these being necessary for good sound is where we differ.  Especially on cables. 
 
My own speakers cost north of $10k.  I have owned them quite a number of years and might more or less equal them for less now. That isn't even considered very expensive in some circles.  Nevertheless you seem to have this idea we are sitting around listening to Logitech computer speakers next to our desktop telling each other how these guys are wasting money on expensive gear in the high end.  That isn't the case.
 
Though not a guarantee or a one to one relationship (what is) money, even big money on speakers can get you better sound.  Same for large rooms and well treated rooms.  Amps maybe, but I am talking reasonable designs not some $50,000 SET with 6 wpc blessed by special monks on Mount Fuji.  After that however things have gotten so good so quickly for so little many can't accept that.  The need for $10k DACs and good sound is a myth.  Cables altogether are a myth.  Some speaker cables matter, some cables on TT matter.  Even then they aren't expensive before to get to unassailable performance levels. 
 
So what is the point, if we sat around and shared a listening experience what do you think would happen?

 

[cjl]

Yet I see so many highend audiophiles including myself buying highend gears with less good looking ones when they can hear it really sounds better than alternatives.

The strange thing about that, though, is that for some strange reason, they can only hear that it sounds better when they can also see what it is. When they don't have knowledge of what is playing, it frequently mysteriously sounds exactly the same as other, cheaper gear (assuming competent engineering and component selection in all cases). I wonder why that might be?