Why Don't More People Love Audio?

Much of the above thread emphasizes a people are lazy-stupid-inbred-indifferent line of reasoning. While convenient to make, this argument is really a cop-out and probably misses the underlying causes for the growing lack of interest in high-end audio.

Consider that the number of consumers purchasing high-end gear has consistently declined, and by marked amounts, since the mid-90's. Are we to believe that there has been a dramatic acceleration in laziness, stupidity, indifference, and inbreeding in so short a span of time? If not, then something else must account for the rejection of the high-end by so many people. I can only give my experience and would not be so bold as to proffer that it is typical of everyone or even most.

My first brush with the high-end came in 1979 when I heard a reference rig consisting of KEF 105's, Crown reference amplification, and a Linn analog front end. The experience was magical, but the $8K-$10K price tag was well beyond my means at the time. I settled a few years later for Hafler amplification, an ADCOM pre, Maggies, and an early generation CD player.

Recently, I decided to completely replace the entire system and was delighted that I now had sufficient means to purchase a high-end setup. After extensive research and many trips to area audio salons, I am disappointed to say the least. First, the sound of the modern reference rigs is not fundamentally better than what I heard in 1979, period! But the price tag is now in the $100K+ range. Moreover, if anything has changed, it is not a marked improvement in the quality of the high-end, but rather the narrowing of the gap between the mid-fi/near-high-end and the "true high-end."

So you tell me, when I can buy a very respectable 2-channel rig for $6K or so, buy an Audi S8, spend two weeks cruising the Greek isles, and purchase $20K worth of art --- OR buy a $100K stereo system, which should I do? This is really a no-brainer.

Simply put, the high-end audio industry has failed miserably in innovating and developing new products that are substantially better in any significant sense. The value per dollar quotient has never looked poorer, and people are not so stupid that they are unaware of this.

Count me as another defector.

P.S. Would the last one out please remember to turn out the lights?

Although basically I would agree with you, that since the beginning of the eighties, the advances in the high end have mainly been prices and advertising skill, I would say that in dissolving such finer points as the various rythms inherent in the musical web and the widening of the dynamic scale, especially down in the ppp region have been considerable. Also the ability of creating a reasonable facsimile of the soundspace has improved . Especially the ability to better recreate the intricacies of the rythm element is an important factor to make a system seem more musical and closer to the truth. This ability has also begun to seep through to mid priced gear. So, though your point is partially valid, in defecting you are missing quite a bit in my opinion.
It will still take quite a time, if at all, until we turn out the light. I guess, you have gone to bed a bit too early. (-:, Regards,

I don't think the emphasis is so much on people being lazy or ignorant as it is on people not "caring" about better sound - it's (inexplicably to some of us) unimportant to them. This isn't the result of rapidly increasing laziness on the part of the population but, IMO, the combination of a rapidly increasing amount of stimuli in the world (which certainly has occurred over the past few decades) coupled with technological advancements that do put pretty good sound at such an affordable level that many don't think twice about ever spending more, and the stuff rarely breaks.

Trying to advance the sound quality of a system takes both time and money (basically synonymous for any adult), and there's only so much to go around and, as stated earlier, rapidly increasing amounts of things vying for both time and money. Depending on how one defines "high-end", it's somewhere between difficult and impossible to get most people to even fathom the concepts as important, much less act on them. Of all the people I know, there is only one who doesn't scratch their head if you talk about spending more than a few hundred bucks on any component. If somebody asked me for advice in purchasing a system, I'd be doing well to get them to appreciate what you can get for, say, $2K and, if they bought it, they'd probably think they'd blown their lifetime wad for equipment and, since it would never break, they'd never look to improve it. It would also sound markedly better than anything they'd ever owned before, better than anything they ever hear at a friends house, and there'll be a million other things banging at their door for their money and time.

I don't know how many people have to be "converted" to restore the high-end to "healthy", but I don't see it happening with what appears to currently be defined as high-end.

Kthomas, following on yr thread, audio is not (yet) a lifestyle option. HT sometimes is, and people get together to enjoy an evening before the screen. How many times do people invite others to an evening of music -- as an accepted, discussed and "conventionalised" past-time. By way of comparison, people purchase Ferraris; some owners cannot, or are not allowed to drive these autos to optimum speeds. But they still buy them. IMHO, that's a market. Audio is, at best, a cottage niche.
Unfortunately, this also means that gear is expensive (i.e., manufacturers' purchasing power???); can U imagine prices for large-scale production hi end gear manufactured by the likes of Siemens... No offence to Cos but, how can our "biggies" (say, Krell even Linn, a $~20 mil. company) compete with that: we have to pay for the R&D.
Regards

Home theatre better matches the "zeitgeist" of the times than high end audio. Previous posters have hit on a lot of the factors defining the current situation, let me put it a different way. For a number of years, going back at least to the mid-90's, society has been in a highly experiential phase. It has even been called the "Experience Economy" in business circles.

With this mindset, everything has to be "extreme" to even get noticed. Realtiy isn't good enough, it needs to be pumped up. From sports to movies to recreational activities it has to be more exagerated, more impactful and more staged than ever before just to get to leave an impression. You can't watch TV w/o loud intrusive sound effects inserted for no reason (You Are the Weakest Link or the NFL on Fox for example). Exagerated visual effects in movies have replaced plot lines and artistic cinematography. Even martial arts films (the original extreme genre) has had trouble being extreme enough. Now you have to fly as you beat the crap out of your opponent, or lacking flight capabilities, just add more blood. Best Picture, Gladiator & Titanic, you see where I'm going with this.

In the music world, you can't have a rock band with just four or five musicians anymore- now they need to be fronted by 8 choreographed dancers putting on a stage show that sometimes also claim to be the "singers." These muscial "acts" have replaced bands. In this environment, nobody even notices Jerry Springer anymore. You could call it the WWF'ing of America. Looked at cynically, you could say it's technology playing to the lowest common denominator across a wide range of activities. Another view might be we've been on a bit of a technology bender with lower prices bringing these gooodies into the realm of the average man.

In this period of exageration the home theatre "experience" with it's countless channels and audio processing and manipulation is giving people more of what they want. They don't want reality- the holy grail that has been fueling the audiophile quest for the last 40 years, they want to be dazzled with an enhanced, or pumped up version of reality. And they can be dazzled for a farily small amount of money (for those that aren't too discerning) or they can invest $50K in a home theatre for those that need to brag "mine is bigger than yours."

What is missing from all this is the appreciation ofthe art of music and the purity of it's reproduction that we audiophiles value. While critically listening to music is certainly experiential, it seems an almost quaint activity in a world that wants to be blown away by sensory overload.

No my friends, we are not living in a era that values or even understands subtlety or nuance of the type that makes art and it's reproduction an audiophile's passion. And until the pendulum starts swinging back the other way, don't be surprised if the totally awesome, extreme and radical audio video experience keeps the purist relegated to second class status.

Dude, did you hear that someone's comin' out with a 20 foot big screen with 10 channel make you puke and your ears bleed fully surround sound gut rumbling digisynthesizerprocessor? Awesome......