Article: It Is The Best of Times . . . Hands Down

[The Computer Audiophile]

10 minutes ago, DuckToller said:

As a result of having less budget available the number of young/new audiophiles pursuing the hobby may be more limited than in the 80s.

This is probably the biggest issue for all manufacturers of goods and providers of services that aren’t “needed” to stay alive. The number of things vying for discretionary spending/ disposable income is huge today. Back when many members of this community were kids, there were 3 TV stations and they didn’t even have programming overnight. 
 

I think stratospherically priced audio could actually be better for the industry by making people aware that it actually exists. I don’t pay much attention to Rolls Royce, but when the company announced the $13M Sweptail, I stood up, shared it with friends, and still remember it years later. 

[DuckToller]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Hi Tom, as always, a thoughtful and respectful reply from you. Yes, we disagree but that’s part of what makes it interesting. 
 

An interesting article I recently read, Millennials Set To Become The Richest Generation in History. No clue if it checks out, but it’s food for thought. 

 

https://fortune.com/2024/02/29/america-wealthest-one-percent-minimum-millennials-richest-generation/amp/

paywall - but found it on yahoo
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/millennials-become-richest-generation-history-122845663.html?guccounter=1
however, I may assume there might be some changed demographics behind it, like older parents from the top bracket (example Robert de Niro) - with a limited number of kids inheriting earlier than the majority of our generation.

I have friends older than me with parents in their 90s, which seems to be great, but rationally its less great from a personal wealth perspective as it is in focus in the fortune article, which -imho-  shows a couple of numbers that aren't worthwile without context.

Another thing not effectively explained is the difference in net value compared to the base (i.e. 1980). There is a rate of inflation, rocketing imobilia prices and such. You may not inherit more than your parents (a house, some ground, some money, some gold) , but the nominal value may be tripled ...

[DuckToller]

23 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

This is probably the biggest issue for all manufacturers of goods and providers of services that aren’t “needed” to stay alive. The number of things vying for discretionary spending/ disposable income is huge today. Back when many members of this community were kids, there were 3 TV stations and they didn’t even have programming overnight. 
 

I think stratospherically priced audio could actually be better for the industry by making people aware that it actually exists. I don’t pay much attention to Rolls Royce, but when the company announced the $13M Sweptail, I stood up, shared it with friends, and still remember it years later. 

You are officially my first source of information for Rolls Royce now. I have actually never heard of that model. ;-)

[AudioDoctor]

"The limited budget of young people make different technologies and services compete against each other."

 

This could be said of anything, not just audio, though. You and I were both young once, we didn't wake up one day around age 50 and decide to become an audiophile. At least I didn't. Through the years my playback quality, and cost of equipment, has steadily increased as I bet yours has as well. Likewise, I can't do every hobby or activity I want to do, due to finances as well. I have to decide where to put my funds and what will be most important to me. I bet this is a common decision that most people have to make, regardless of age, perhaps the hobbies even get more expensive too.

 

Lastly, audio companies make high priced equipment for the same reason car manufacturers make HALO models and race. To get people in showrooms to buy the lower priced models. No one needs a Porsche 918 for 1 million bucks, but that car sure gets interest and bodies in Boxsters/Caymans.

[firedog]

2 hours ago, AudioDoctor said:

"The limited budget of young people make different technologies and services compete against each other."

 

This could be said of anything, not just audio, though. You and I were both young once, we didn't wake up one day around age 50 and decide to become an audiophile. At least I didn't. Through the years my playback quality, and cost of equipment, has steadily increased as I bet yours has as well. Likewise, I can't do every hobby or activity I want to do, due to finances as well. I have to decide where to put my funds and what will be most important to me. I bet this is a common decision that most people have to make, regardless of age, perhaps the hobbies even get more expensive too.

 

Lastly, audio companies make high priced equipment for the same reason car manufacturers make HALO models and race. To get people in showrooms to buy the lower priced models. No one needs a Porsche 918 for 1 million bucks, but that car sure gets interest and bodies in Boxsters/Caymans.

Yes. In my first system when I was 17, I started with headphones and no speakers, as I couldn't afford decent ones together with the amp and turntable. I then got one speaker and listened in mono, headphones for stereo. I bought the second speaker after a few months to complete the system. I got the most audiophile gear I could afford at the time. Then multiple upgrades over the years. Money wasn't what kept me from being an audiophile.

 

I know lots of young people - kids of friends. None see the need to spend serious amounts of money on sound equipment. Some of them appreciate my system, but they listen over headphones and BT speakers. It's more lifestyle and convenience for them.

 

They don't like music less than me, they just don't "sit and listen" in front of a system.

 

Spending big bucks on listening equipment isn't an idea they subscribe to. BTW, almost none of  their parents still have/use a good system, even if they once had one. They've also gone for convenience space saving, etc. The system sits idle - if it is still there. Many aren't even willing to pay $10 a month for streaming. They think free Spotify and YT are good enough. Why pay for music if it's free? Very few listen in anything other than mp3. 

 

A few of the youngsters have invested in good headphones. Possibly in 15-20 years if they are settled and with a bigger living space, they will buy components  - probably as part of a movie-TV  playback system.

 

[DuckToller]

28 minutes ago, firedog said:

Spending big bucks on listening equipment isn't an idea they subscribe to. BTW, almost none of  their parents still have/use a good system, even if they once had one. They've also gone for convenience space saving, etc. The system sits idle - if it is still there. Many aren't even willing to pay $10 a month for streaming. They think free Spotify and YT are good enough. Why pay for music if it's free? Very few listen in anything other than mp3. 

Very true, this !

I've played my youngest son's favorite piano piece for him through his IPhone - BT - Spotify to (then mine/now his) active speakers - and then made him listen to the same in 24/96 flac. He completely appreciated the day/night difference in sound quality, though he continued listening with Spotify quality by BT. He is not buggered at all by this difference, as he values ad-hoc conveniance in daily live much higher than having to invest (time, money, knowledge) into exceptional quality.

I have the feeling that the pure act of listening to music and it's sound qualites as standalone task that receives full concentration is likely quite uncommon for today's younger generations.  Consequently, the perceived value and the attached active invest may be at different levels than with the boomer and gen x.

[Apollo]

Although I can think of many reasons, for me the most important one is mobility.

 

We had to physically go to a specific place where to find information, listen to music, watching TV.

Now, information in the broadest meaning, is available to youngsters (and ourselves of course) everywhere to go and whenever they want.

It has become an extention of ourselves ( with possible big changs coming in the near future with implants)

 

And as a consequence, youngsters are distracted all the time, very hard to be focussed on one 'task' at a time.

 

[joelha]

7 hours ago, firedog said:

Yes. In my first system when I was 17, I started with headphones and no speakers, as I couldn't afford decent ones together with the amp and turntable. I then got one speaker and listened in mono, headphones for stereo. I bought the second speaker after a few months to complete the system. I got the most audiophile gear I could afford at the time. Then multiple upgrades over the years. Money wasn't what kept me from being an audiophile.

 

I know lots of young people - kids of friends. None see the need to spend serious amounts of money on sound equipment. Some of them appreciate my system, but they listen over headphones and BT speakers. It's more lifestyle and convenience for them.

 

They don't like music less than me, they just don't "sit and listen" in front of a system.

 

Spending big bucks on listening equipment isn't an idea they subscribe to. BTW, almost none of  their parents still have/use a good system, even if they once had one. They've also gone for convenience space saving, etc. The system sits idle - if it is still there. Many aren't even willing to pay $10 a month for streaming. They think free Spotify and YT are good enough. Why pay for music if it's free? Very few listen in anything other than mp3. 

 

A few of the youngsters have invested in good headphones. Possibly in 15-20 years if they are settled and with a bigger living space, they will buy components  - probably as part of a movie-TV  playback system.

 

This is my contention.

 

I only wish price were more of the issue.

 

There is quality audio equipment at almost every price point.

 

I confess I have no hard statistics but I read far more about many in the younger generation wanting to buy a more expensive graphics card or better monitor for their gaming PC than I do those trying to get enough money together to buy a decent integrated amp.

 

In short, for our hobby to compete on their list of priorities, it first must appear on their list of priorities.

 

Sadly, in far too many cases, I don't think it does.

 

Joel

[botrytis]

17 minutes ago, joelha said:

This is my contention.

 

I only wish price were more of the issue.

 

There is quality audio equipment at almost every price point.

 

I confess I have no hard statistics but I read far more about many in the younger generation wanting to buy a more expensive graphics card or better monitor for their gaming PC than I do those trying to get enough money together to buy a decent integrated amp.

 

In short, for our hobby to compete on their list of priorities, it first must appear on their list of priorities.

 

Sadly, in far too many cases, I don't think it does.

 

Joel

 

There is a difference between a 2K graphics card and a 150K set of speakers. The young people have different priorities. Totally agree.