Jump to content
IGNORED

Is Audiophiledom a confidence game?


crenca

Recommended Posts

TAS's latest attempts to hold back the collapsing dam of MQA (here):

 

 

Got me thinking about just how much this industry is dependent on the confidence game.  If you look at the responses to the latter "political" article you find "the industry" (TAS staffer Mr. Quint, Berkeley Audio principle Michael Ritter, etc.) saying essentially "we have the knowledge, the experience to know what is real/true/right, you don't.  Trust us".  When you don't, well they don't take it very well at all - angry and resentful is the best way to describe their response.  They appear impervious to objective refutation of MQA's false claims - they simply regurgitate their assertions and question who and what you are as a consumer.  Mr. Quint does not appear to even get the irony of his own place in the industry when lamenting about the allegedly "political" in the consumer response to MQA

 

Being a man of limited experience and means, I am unfamiliar with any other industry that is as dependent on the confidence game as Audiophiledom and "High End" excepting perhaps large portions of my local state fair.   I would say the supplement industry (i.e. vitamins, herbal remedies, etc. - at least here in America) rivals it but I am not sure exceeds it.

 

What other industries can you guys think of that suffers this ill?  All of them to some degree, but I mean to this extant?

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment

Audio may need   the " confidence game " because it can involve quite expensive products which in turn most consumers  ( myself included ) have no practical means of  independently and objectively verifying performance.  

 

The pushing of alternate MTB wheel sizes by the cycle industry in recent years has some parallels  as it encourages consumers to invest all over again in a new  format on the basis of  claimed  performance gains that may prove somewhat intangible to the average rider in real world situations.

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, marce said:

Yes and No

Yes to help the mystique and exclusively...

No its over priced to achieve the above.

And cable prices are the Goose that lays golden eggs.....

I meant, does it need to be expensive in order to perform well. Of course it needs to be expensive in order to be expensive.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, Norton said:

 

 

The pushing of alternate MTB wheel sizes by the cycle industry in recent years has some parallels  as it encourages consumers to invest all over again in a new  format on the basis of  claimed  performance gains that may prove somewhat intangible to the average rider in real world situations.

 

Interesting, did not know that about the MTB market.

Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math!

Link to comment

Raw materials costs. Engineering costs. Manufacturing costs. Marketing costs. 

It all adds up.  However, super expensive audio equipment is at least 50% jewelry.

You, most likely, can get the same sound quality at affordable price points.

 

if you can afford the jewelry go for it.  

In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake ~ Sayre's Law

Link to comment
39 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

Interesting, did not know that about the MTB market.

 

It is much worse than that, and not just limited to mountain bikes.  It is no longer unusual for people to spend $7K to $10K on a road or mountain bike, with carbon frames and components, sometimes electronic shifting and hydraulic disc brakes, and various other things that the industry is pushing as essential.  The fact remains that you can get a perfectly reasonable bike, new, for about $1K if you look around, and 80% of the population would be well-served by a bike that costs half that.  (I'm totally guilty of this.  I do have a steel frame on my main road bike, but it was custom-made, so it is as expensive as a high-end carbon frame.  I spend far more on bikes than audio, fwiw.  But my 20 year old kid on a bike that cost 1/8 of what mine did can still kick my arse, so that is the ultimate reality check.  The engine is far more important than the bike.)

 

Maybe we should ask if the whole of the capitalist economic system is a confidence game...

Link to comment
22 minutes ago, wgscott said:

It is no longer unusual for people to spend $7K to $10K on a road or mountain bike, with carbon frames and components, sometimes electronic shifting and hydraulic disc brakes, and various other things that the industry is pushing as essential.

All those things have demonstrable advantages, even if the casual rider is unlikely to benefit (much) from them. In audio, people pay silly amounts of money for gimmicks that are demonstrably useless.

Link to comment
47 minutes ago, wgscott said:

 

It is much worse than that, and not just limited to mountain bikes.  It is no longer unusual for people to spend $7K to $10K on a road or mountain bike, with carbon frames and components, sometimes electronic shifting and hydraulic disc brakes, and various other things that the industry is pushing as essential.  The fact remains that you can get a perfectly reasonable bike, new, for about $1K if you look around, and 80% of the population would be well-served by a bike that costs half that.  (I'm totally guilty of this.  I do have a steel frame on my main road bike, but it was custom-made, so it is as expensive as a high-end carbon frame.  I spend far more on bikes than audio, fwiw.  But my 20 year old kid on a bike that cost 1/8 of what mine did can still kick my arse, so that is the ultimate reality check.  The engine is far more important than the bike.)

 

Maybe we should ask if the whole of the capitalist economic system is a confidence game...

 

Just buy a used Tour de Whatever bike, they all have little motors in them so the cheating cheaters can ride up a hill without effort.

In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake ~ Sayre's Law

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, NOMBEDES said:

 

Just buy a used Tour de Whatever bike, they all have little motors in them so the cheating cheaters can ride up a hill without effort.

 

You kidding? Swiss pro Fabian Cancellara was so fast that he was actually accused by the race referees of hiding a motor in the seat tube of his bike.

Link to comment
5 hours ago, mansr said:

Sorry, I couldn't find a stating-the-obvious emoji.

Emoji/smileys are overused and lazy.  I've had long intellectually stimulating discussion using only gifs.

 

 

5 hours ago, crenca said:

 

Interesting, did not know that about the MTB market.

Well, it just isn't the way you were told.  There was a fairly significant technological and safety based innovation in regards to how the wheel is locked onto the frame and fork.  Seeing as this is an audio forum I'll make it short.  Through axle wheel mounting which as a consumer it is greatly advantageous to have everyone making new products switch over to at once.  The market supports the older equipment and will do for many many many years until the gross distribution of parts has outnumbered demand for a considerable time.  

 

Through axles will soon be on every type of new bike because they offer the convenience of a quick release with security and stiffness greater than bolt on track wheels.

 

 

Link to comment

If you live inside a tiny box inside a shoe box, this would be a great question; "What other industries can you guys think of that suffers this ill?  All of them to some degree, but I mean to this extant?".

 

Here are few items to add to your list:

  • Religion
  • Art
  • Collectables
  • Wine
  • Fashion

Those are some obvious starters. Skipping over Religion, Art is a multi-billion dollar unregulated global market. Q - Who determines value in the Art market?

 

Link to comment
On 9/28/2017 at 1:04 PM, rando said:

Through axles will soon be on every type of new bike because they offer the convenience of a quick release with security and stiffness greater than bolt on track wheels.

 

Thru-axles generally now accompany disc brakes.  I have older-generation bikes that have dropouts in the forks.  Although my Enve CX (1st gen) has drop-outs-at least they point forward.  The problem is applying the disc brake puts a downward force on the wheel, which can cause it to move or even eject.  (Mine moved around a little bit until I bought some 10 lb Dura Ace quick release levers for $100 to solve the damn problem).

 

Fig3-1024x534.jpg

 

This seems to be more of a problem on road bikes for some reason. Maybe the carbon fork is too slick.  The newer version of my fork is a thru-axle.  To upgrade, I would have to shell out $600 for a new fork and probably $100 per hub (I have 2 wheel sets) to convert, so I'll live with the Dura Ace clamps until I break the fork, or something horrific happens.

 

For rim brakes, I doubt there is any compelling reason to have a thru-axle fork.

Link to comment

What was influencing your decision to build or buy this bike mid-changeover?  Maybe you should consider dealing with more reputable sources if you are of a mind they burned you.  I'm going to leave it at that since it isn't anywhere near a confidence game in the sense audio is.  

Link to comment
2 hours ago, rando said:

What was influencing your decision to build or buy this bike mid-changeover?  Maybe you should consider dealing with more reputable sources if you are of a mind they burned you.  I'm going to leave it at that since it isn't anywhere near a confidence game in the sense audio is.  

 

I don't feel burned at all.  I got the bike in 2014, before road/cx thru-axle was available.  It was a custom (steel) frame and build.  Shimano's disc brakes had just come out (and were bundled with Di2 at the time, and only Dura or Ultegra level). Enve's 1st-gen CX fork has the forward-facing drop-out.  This is by far the best bike I have ever owned.  I'm simply acknowledging that thru-axle would be a welcome improvement, but my current set-up, now that I bought some really strong quick-releases, is perfectly fine.  If I were doing it all over again, I would get the thru-axle version, as it is a significant improvement, and I believe it is now the only option with that fork (and what my builder now uses exclusively anyway).  However, it is only a significant improvement in the context of disc brakes, so the one improvement (which many people dislike) necessitates another. I was insistent upon the Shimano hydraulics, so Di2 came along for the ride.  (SRAM had just had their recall, and I've never liked their brakes).

 

In retrospect, maybe I also should have coughed up an additional $1K for titanium, but my frame builder said it would primarily lighten my wallet, and that he could build me a steel frame that would be at least as comfortable as a more expensive titanium one.  (He also suggested I get mechanical brakes/shifting and wait until hydraulics became unbundled to consider if I needed to upgrade.) It was kind of refreshing not being up-sold, even if I did it to myself anyway.

Link to comment

What is the difference between something written by Michael Lavorgna and Lewis Carroll?

 

 

Lewis Carroll knew he was writing nonsense and fantasy. 

And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. 

Link to comment
On 9/28/2017 at 7:20 PM, mansr said:

All those things have demonstrable advantages, even if the casual rider is unlikely to benefit (much) from them. In audio, people pay silly amounts of money for gimmicks that are demonstrably useless.

Probably true. But with high end audio, it's common that 50-70% of the MSRP is due to item cosmetics. There are markups and financing costs  all through the retail channel, and each dollar you add to the cost of a component to make it look nice, ends up multiplied in the MSRP.

But let's face it, manufacturers do it because looks sell, and higher prices also cause more sales to many high end buyers.

 

One of the reasons direct internet sales are often appealing. 

Of course that begs the question of how some of those direct internet sales also reach those price points. 

Main listening (small home office):

Main setup: Surge protector +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Isolation>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments.

Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three .

Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup.
Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. 

All absolute statements about audio are false :)

Link to comment
On 9/27/2017 at 10:54 AM, crenca said:

Got me thinking about just how much this industry is dependent on the confidence game.

 

Do you not see the irony is this comment coming from you?? You are one of the biggest victims of this confidence game. All that stuff you buy (and blindly promote) that you think is helping the sound quality of your system is just about the biggest part of that game.

Link to comment
53 minutes ago, firedog said:

Probably true. But with high end audio, it's common that 50-70% of the MSRP is due to item cosmetics.

I'd have no problem with bling if it were sold as bling rather than with sketchy claims of superior performance. Hell, I might even pay a little extra for better-looking amp, just as I wear a $1000 watch even though it tells time no better than a cheap Casio.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...