Bravo to Robert Harley
TONEPUB -- Thu, 03/11/2010 - 14:13
Robert:
Just read your editorial in the current TAS about the grumpy reader complaining about the cost of high end audio. I thought your response, stating that the only crime was that he was listening to music on a pair of JBL's and a Crown DC-150 was absolutely brilliant!
It needed to be said and it needs to be said more often. Good sound requires spending a few bucks and some careful attention to detail. Granted, high end audio is a luxury, but it comes with a cost, just as a fine car or watch does.
Again, hats off to you for speaking the truth!
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Ditto.
I read the same article and I have a bit different comment. First off, cutting down the other guys system to "win" a disagreement is something the wolves that hang out on other message boards do to shut up any dissenting opinion. Although RH did it quite politely it is still, in my opinion, dirty pool. As far as the perceived dearth of affordable gear reviews in TAS, that is simply not true. I don't know what the actual numbers are but it seems to me that I read more and more reviews of lower priced gear every year. Another letter writer got it right on the money by pointing out that this is a capitalist economy. The price of most goods is set by the market. When some company charges a mint for an inexpensively produced drug that you have to have to stay alive, that is price gouging. Charging a mint for some giant stereo speakers is simply participating in the market. The automotive analogy that both RH and the above poster used is an interesting but not always applicable one. When it comes to high performance automobiles, their performance advantage is nearly always measureable. Even when we are fairly sure of our performance advantage in audio, it isn't always something we know how to measure. There are a few examples such as Rolls Royce where the value is unrelated to performance and is simply opulence for its own sake. High priced watches are the same thing. They simply have no performance advantage over a Toyota Camry or a digital Casio and only exist as a means of demonstrating the owner's wealth. I believe many mega priced amps and preamps and digital players fall into this category. Sure they are extremely expensive to build but not much of it has anything to do with making music. There are a few things in high end audio that have no automotive analog. I will leave the snake oil out because there is quite a bit of that in the automotive world too although it usually isn't as high priced as in audio. There exist some pretty simply built audio products with prices that just seem silly and yet there is a ready market for them. Flea watt SET amplifiers using dead simple circuits and construction methods sometimes have astonishing price tags. The auto equivalent would be a Fiat 500 or Mini sized car that had a top speed of 37 mph but cost $250,000 because of the unbelieveably pure enjoyment one received from driving it. Those that drove it and were unimpressed apparently either had dead rear ends or were simply not good enough drivers to perceive the magic. Sounds silly. Well, 5 figure price tags for 3 watt amps sounds silly to me too. There is really nothing wrong most of it. No one is forcing anyone to buy this stuff. When I read TAS's reviews of expensive gear, I either lust after it and wish I could afford it or just shake my head and wonder who buys this stuff. If you think LP demagnetizers and CD "clarifiers" are stupid as I do then don't buy them. The good news that the letter writer seemed to miss is that you don't have to spend Bill Gates money to get good sound. Every time I help another friend put together an inexpensive system (that seems expensive to them) I am astonished at what is available today. You can put together a complete cd based system for less than $1500 that just blows peoples minds when they first turn it on. If you shop used you can do it for less than half of that. Having said all that I do think some of the copy written on cable web pages borders on fraud, not because of the pricing but because even it they do improve your system they most certainly do NOT do what the maker claims they do. Making false claims to sell products is dishonest any way you cut it.
Actually, the automotive performance advantage is not always measurable, just like in hifi. Let's take for example the Corvette ZR1, The Aston Martin DBS, The Porsche GT3 and the Audi R8. All mega performance cars, to be sure (and yes, I've driven all of these cars), and all have somewhat similar "specs." They all go 0-60 within a few tenths of a second of each other, all stop 60-0 within a few feet of each other, all hit top speeds of about 200 mph and all pull about 1g on a skidpad, so you would think that these cars drive pretty similarly on paper....
But getting behind the wheel, it's a completely different experience, a completely different feel. I guarantee that if you drove all four of these cars back to back, you would respond to one much more strongly than the other three. And the Porsche owner will doggedly defend his purchase vs. the other three as would the owners of the other three cars, etc. etc.
However, the bottom line is that they are all excellent cars, and light years ahead of the standard sedan in performance. (and a lot more expensive)
Sound a little like high end audio? Hmmm.
My point was that the performance difference between high priced performance car and the run of the mill more reasonably priced cars is usually measurable. Not the preferences between cars in the same price class. The performance difference between my $1300 NAD amp and a $10,000 amp of the same power output is measurably nearly 0. In fact, some measurements might favor the NAD. Most audiophiles would not say, however, that there was no performance difference. Even more than in the automotive field we assume performance differences (and even invent them) based on large price disparities even when they might not exist.
I've never seen an editor take a letter writer to task like that before. I loved it! We need make no apologies for the fact that this is a hobby where the very best equipment can be very expensive (analogous to a Ferrari Enzo) yet where one can also find superior products that offer much of the cost-no-object experience for far less (i.e., Honda S2000). But, and this is a big but, one must be informed to find these hidden gems and this is where publications like TAS are indispensible.
Obviously you never read the original TAS back when it was under the aegis of Harry Pearson.
Seek out some of those back issues, the letters section was often the highlight of the magazine.
I don't think that it's "dirty pool" to point out that Crown amplifiers driving JBL loudspeakers is not a recipe for good sound.
To echo JLeeMD's note, I love it when we discover great gear that's affordable. The Cambridge 840C CD player ($1499 at the time of the review), the Odyssey Khartago amplifier ($795), the B&W 685 loudspeaker ($650 a pair), and the Naim Nait 5i ($1650) come to mind.
I'm a high-value guy at my core. It's interesting that JLeeMD mentioned the Honda S2000; I owned one for three years. It delivers quite a bit of the sports car experience for very little money.
The letter writer was going on about the high price of audio gear and accusing manufacturers of price gouging. Pointing out that his system sucks is what snotty audiophiles do to win every argument and in this case and most cases is not relevant to the discussion. A Wilson Audio megaspeaker is either worth it's price or it isn't and that buyer is not comparing it to some antique pro audio stuff to make his or her decision.
I didn't say that his system "sucks," to use your phrase. Rather, I pointed out the reader's rather odd perspective---that Crown amplifiers and JBL loudspeakers are his preferred equipment choices.
As I recall you called listening to JBL and Crown gear a crime. Its the same old story. Being snotty about someone else's system to make a point and then calling it a high minded critique later. I expect better.
Please don't misrepresent what I wrote. I never called it "a crime" to listen to Crown and JBL.
I am sorry. The first poster quoted you as saying that and it was misquoted. What you actually wrote was "the real insanity is listening to music through Crown and JBL gear." This sounds like a put down to me. Most of the world thinks that audiophiles are uppity snobs whose high priced stereo systems are more an extension of their egos than an actual tool for listening to music. There is no point in justifying those preconceptions. When challenged thus, I try to make my points without resorting to a put down of the other persons equipment choices. On the other hand, if I am in their house and know them well enough they shouldn't ask me how it sounds to me unless they really want to know. Of course I always accompany this opinion with a short list of reasonably priced alternatives.
It's important for publications like TAS to cover a variety of price points, which I think it does. I find this particularly helpful when researching potential purchases, as I am now with power amps. Uncertainty at work and the possibility of layoffs means I won't be buying right now, but the research continues. If I'm able to purchase something, it will not be based on price alone, but the satisfaction and ultimate value it provides. And the better buy isn't necessarily the cheaper one.
A good example might be my Pioneer Elite 111FD plasma, purchased about a year and a half ago. I'd researched it along with other TVs, and knew it was supposed to be good, but thought it too expensive for me. I later saw it in a flat panel shoot-out at a retailer's showroom, though I didn't get the best look at it. I returned a week later to buy a non-Elite 5010 I'd targeted which was well-discounted. The 5010 was a good set, and I could afford it. I brought a couple of DVDs for a personal audition and proceeded to watch. The 111 was next to it on the wall, and I thought, why not? I did the comparison, and the 111 was obviously better, compellingly so. I bought it instead. Even though I received a very nice deal on it, I still paid more money than I ever planned to or thought I would for a TV, yet there was no knot-in-the-stomach, buyer's remorse, or any discomfort whatsoever; only a sense of confidence and peace. I'd considered the 111 beyond me, but the reality of its performance didn't allow any misgivings to even show up. Because I was able to research various sets at various price points, I had a context within which to evaluate what I was seeing. And I knew that, barring something unusual, this would be my last TV despite what else comes out. I don't think I'd say that about the 5010.
So without the mixture of price points reviewed in TAS, we have no overall context or perspective for evaluating equipment we may want to buy. Within the high end, there is a low end and mid-level too. This is a good thing; if everything is cheap, or hugely expensive, that wouldn't help me much, or people like me. Give us the variety!
Hi-
I think TAS does a pretty good job of reviewing various types of equipment. I seem to remember under $100 headphones, and the High Resolution Technologies USB DAC being written about.
What I would like more of in the reviews of expensive equipment are mentions of more modestly priced alternatives.
For instance, "these wonderful reference speakers cost $30,000, but the XX speakers that retail for only $15,000 give them a run for their money, and should be considered also.Their cabinetry isn't as nice, but in sound reproduction they are in the same league." Or, "this DAC costs $5000, but for only a small drop off in performance, this $2000 DAC is worth checking out".
I'm not saying TAS doesn't do this, but I think it should do a bit more of it - make it a habit in reviews.
If they did that then the more expensive gear companies would be at a clear disadvantage and sales would be affected drastically. It's a double edged sword. The more reasonably priced companies could do lots more Buisness by selling more units because more people can affort it and they reach near reference level. On the other hand the exotic gear companies just need to sell a few units since the price is crazy. My guess is that either way the hi end audio is a very difficult Buisness to be in and is in more and more trouble as time goes by as youngsters keep buyin multiple iPods and keep listening with headphones. This hobby seems to be shrinking/dieying out. Pretty sad!
RH:
Are you sure that the Crown amps with JBL speakers do not produce a convincing musical presentation? Even without knowing the identity of the JBL speakers involved.
-atul
PS: I am testing a Crown stereo amplifier currently and will be happy to pass along my results.
I should have qualified my statement by noting that the last time I heard Crown and JBL was 20 years ago.
Hmmm ... I did a search on the Stereophile archives, and found a 1992 review of the Crown Macro Reference by Sam Tellig and Lewis Lipnick, weren't you there at the time? Anyway, they seemed to think it was okay - "This amp gives the big boys—eg, Krell, Threshold, Jeff Rowland Design Group, Mark Levinson—a run for their money." And I believe it was on the Stereophile Class B reference list in the 90's. Didn't think that JBL speakers would need 700 wpc, though. And I think I prefer your high value suggestions :-)
-- Daniel