Which country has the best hi fi industry in the world

[Marco]

There is an awful lot of bs in hi-fi circles and when people start telling me that cheaper hi fi is as good, it goes against my experiences of upgrades and pretty much every other area of consumerism where you get what you pay for.

So why not instead entertain the notion that Martin *may* have a point, which you'd like to investigate and see whether there's any truth in it, instead of being so closed-minded as to dismiss it completely out of hand? Or are you one of these stubborn and pigheaded people who refuse to change their opinions EVER?

Therefore, in the interests of said investigating, here's a question: would you be willing to attend a meet/bake-off in your area, where some of the bespoke equipment we're talking about was put up against similarly priced and/or more expensive commercial equipment?

Yes or no?

Marco.

[Dynamics]

If they knew the costs. But if it was totally blind, and they just have to say which they prefer, you might be down a house. It can be very strange what people prefer especially when they can't see the kit making the noise. Check some of the blind speaker tests from the old Hi Fi Choice if you don't believe me.

I don't think preferring some kit necessarily makes it better per see as a stereo. If it's subjective and ones preference , it takes out the issue of what is better. Obviously you buy what you think is best, so that's the measure. It's subjective in that sense.

But there are things you can measure in a listening sense, like dynamics, scale, realism, clarity, which a more expensive system can often do better.

I could say I don't like any bass and I want an iPod dock, that's what I like, but it doesn't make it better than a system that conveys bass better, much deeper and punchier, and is £5k. The measure is what faithfully reproduces the music better. The issue with hi fi is if you sent people in with audiophile experience and asked them to score these areas - bass punch, clarity, dynamics. These are all things which make a hifi good or not. Then you'd explain it better as to what is good. If you then said do you prefer that system with better dynamics or scale, they'd probably say yes if each measure is better, which is likely.

People can't ever say that cheaper systems are better than more expensive ones as that introduces more error and multiplying each persons view. So if you wanted to do this, you have to have some science to it. Preference is another matter. But if you conceded it's just about preference you'd have to say a £150k system could be better than a £5k one even if it was not technically better on these testing variables of scale etc, i.e. Just by chance.

That's when the subjectivenss of hi fi comes in for people to then think that's not great value, my system sounds better for the money, it's not a huge difference. These are all things which make us think ours is better than more expensive systems, or difference in taste. You can put something down if the bass is less or more or whatever. But I never think that mine is best, as I know another is better. But I'm happy with what I have, more than happy.

[Macca]

So why not instead entertain the notion that Martin *may* have a point, which you'd like to investigate and see whether there's any truth in it, instead of being so closed-minded as to dismiss it completely out of hand? Or are you one of these stubborn and pigheaded people who refuse to change their opinions EVER?

.

I don't mind. I'm used to people dismissing what I say out of hand

You do something for 30 years you have to learn something. And I'm not one of these people who took a break from the hobby for work or children or whatever. I've been doing it the whole time, even when money was really tight. I don't have ay issue with people who prefer to go to dealers and buy brand new respected badge equipment. Their choice and their money. They don't want to learn all about hi-fi, they just wasn't something good to listen to their music on.

What I'm into is the thrift aspect. How good can you get it without spending top dollar? Much more interesting, much more of a challenge. You have to start learning how it all works. Not to the point where you could design and build it yourself, although plenty of people have done just that, but just to the point where you can make informed decisions about where and how to spend the budget.

[Marco]

If they knew the costs. But if it was totally blind, and they just have to say which they prefer, you might be down a house.

Indeed. In that respect, I look forward soon to being the proud new owner of Simon's Sussex pile!

In any case, the idea that you get what you pay for, whilst often the case, ignores the fact (especially in high-end audio) where you can pay massively over the odds simply for the badge, and/or the notion of exclusivity, especially when you get to the likes of £150k systems.

How much of what you're paying for is 'brand/badge desirability', and crucially, how much is down to what is perceived by the manufacturer as what the market will stand?

In that respect, my experience of folk (and remember I've worked for specialist hi-fi dealerships in the past, so I'm familiar with their clientele), is that if it's too cheap they won't buy it!!

That's why some hi-fi equipment costs the huge sums it does: to create an air of exclusivity, which appeals to their customers., not because it's necessarily any better than something that's half the price, or less...

So once you've knocked all of the above off of the price tag, how much has *actually* been spent where it matters most, 'under the hood'...? *Only then* will you know if 'you get what you pay for', in terms of out-and-out sonic performance, or not!

Marco.

[Arkless Electronics]

You could buy an arm from Johnny at Audio Origami and I believe Linn can sell you everything else or if you prefer proper big speakers there's Tannoy

Ah yes Tannoy moved there ages ago! Linn can keep their erm.. "hi fi" gear

[Dynamics]

So why not instead entertain the notion that Martin *may* have a point, which you'd like to investigate and see whether there's any truth in it, instead of being so closed-minded as to dismiss it completely out of hand? Or are you one of these stubborn and pigheaded people who refuse to change their opinions EVER?

Therefore, in the interests of said investigating, here's a question: would you be willing to attend a meet/bake-off in your area, where some of the bespoke equipment we're talking about was put up against similarly priced and/or more expensive commercial equipment?

Yes or no?

Marco.

Absolutely yes. People can come to mine if they like. Maybe try £2k worth of amps against say my £7k Cyrus stuff. Use my pmc speakers as control.

I don't have to entertain a notion if it's not lacking credibility for my view. It's like saying you can go and have a burger for £1 outside b and q, or go into town and have a £7 one in a gourmet type burger place. I don't need to question if the £1 one might be better, most people would just go and have a decent meal. Also for real world realisations as I mentioned, and my experiences of buying hi fi and every other stuff. I've never bought anything in luxury purchases like hi fi that are better when cheaper. Probably tens of items in my life. Not only that but with all other purchases too.

What would be have to compare do you reckon.

But isn't your suggestion a leap of faith if maybe nobody knows what my Cyrus stuff does as a complete system. Your hypothesis is to test cheaper is better before you maybe know what the more expensive Cyrus system is like.

[Macca]

I don't think preferring some kit necessarily makes it better per see as a stereo. If it's subjective and ones preference , it takes out the issue of what is better. Obviously you buy what you think is best, so that's the measure. It's subjective in that sense.

But there are things you can measure in a listening sense, like dynamics, scale, realism, clarity, which a more expensive system can often do better.

I could say I don't like any bass and I want an iPod dock, that's what I like, but it doesn't make it better than a system that conveys bass better, much deeper and punchier, and is £5k. The measure is what faithfully reproduces the music better. The issue with hi fi is if you sent people in with audiophile experience and asked them to score these areas - bass punch, clarity, dynamics. These are all things which make a hifi good or not. Then you'd explain it better as to what is good. If you then said do you prefer that system with better dynamics or scale, they'd probably say yes if each measure is better, which is likely.

People can't ever say that cheaper systems are better than more expensive ones as that introduces more error and multiplying each persons view. So if you wanted to do this, you have to have some science to it. Preference is another matter. But if you conceded it's just about preference you'd have to say a £150k system could be better than a £5k one even if it was not technically better on these testing variables of scale etc, i.e. Just by chance.

That's when the subjectivenss of hi fi comes in for people to then think that's not great value, my system sounds better for the money, it's not a huge difference. These are all things which make us think ours is better than more expensive systems, or difference in taste. You can put something down if the bass is less or more or whatever. But I never think that mine is best, as I know another is better. But I'm happy with what I have, more than happy.

Your confusing best in a technical sense with 'which one do you want to take home with you?'

It is one or the other, either you judge on measurements or on preference for how it sounds. Getting a load of audiophiles to listen and mark them out of ten for 'bass punch' or whatever isn't at all scientific, it's just making a meal of it.

[Dynamics]

I don't mind. I'm used to people dismissing what I say out of hand

You do something for 30 years you have to learn something. And I'm not one of these people who took a break from the hobby for work or children or whatever. I've been doing it the whole time, even when money was really tight. I don't have ay issue with people who prefer to go to dealers and buy brand new respected badge equipment. Their choice and their money. They don't want to learn all about hi-fi, they just wasn't something good to listen to their music on.

What I'm into is the thrift aspect. How good can you get it without spending top dollar? Much more interesting, much more of a challenge. You have to start learning how it all works. Not to the point where you could design and build it yourself, although plenty of people have done just that, but just to the point where you can make informed decisions about where and how to spend the budget.

I'd agree it's much more difficult. A seriously more difficult question to get £500 speakers sounding like £4000 ones. That's my point which you are making for me. And Id never critique anyone wanting to spend the money and get the most out if it, but that's a different question to best hi fi.

[Dynamics]

Your confusing best in a technical sense with 'which one do you want to take home with you?'

It is one or the other, either you judge on measurements or on preference for how it sounds. Getting a load of audiophiles to listen and mark them out of ten for 'bass punch' or whatever isn't at all scientific, it's just making a meal of it.

I am confusing it purposefully because if you wanted to test the question is a £150k hi fi better than a £5k one, you'd have to test it on measurable standards and scientifically. I'm not talking sound meters but an element of scoring dynamics etc. It wouldn't be making a meal out if it. It would be testing a hypothesis and analysing that hypothesis. On what ingredients make the sound best and most faithful, what they are, i.e. The variables for this, and scoring.

I could do that with an iPod dock and my system and it would be an extreme test, but if I then got others to rate dynamics on a scale according to best, better, worse etc, you could score what's better to the hypothesis.

[Dynamics]

Ps You also have to link ones blind preference for the sound in the two systems to what you consider better, and see apatern of this preference for expense. And what then significance you place on the preference test for the hypothesis test I mention. As with any hi fi our preference is so much dependent on what systems we've had.