[Spirit]

Had a chance to speak to a very well known manufacturer of high-end
audiophile CD Transports and DACs.  I won't reveal
his name, as it was a private conversation.  I had noticed recently that his company
had not released a new
product in several years.  I asked him why so, and his answer surprised me.
Here are a few of his comments - paraphrased -:
1: People do not listen to music crititcally anymore.  It is mostly a background
distraction such as music in the car or an Ipod on the Subway.  There are very
few true hifiers any more.
2: There is no point in bringing out new state-of-the-art digital gear.  A $79.00
CD or DVD player from Walmart will give you about 80% of the audio quality of a $4000
DAC.
Sort of puts our hobby in jeopardy, me thinks.
Comments?

[Carlman]

Sounds you like you spoke to someone bitter about declining sales... and perhaps their job and/or company is in jeopardy of going out of business. 

The market is fairly crowded with hifi gear.  Good riddance to someone with that attitude.

-C

[MT POCKETS]

Well, them Bose is back on my short list 

[nathanm]

1. Yeah, so?  Haven't there ALWAYS been very few "true hifiers" and isn't that exactly how they like it?  It's a niche hobby by nature and that's something to be celebrated, not lamented.  Why any audiophile would be bummed that they aren't involved in some mainstream activity with incredible sales figures is beyond me.  I thought it was supposed to be cool to have a keen ear and refined tastes so you could thumb your nose at the filthy bumpkins with their crude boomboxes.

2. I personally agree to an extent.  I think the digital medium is pretty damn good and maybe it's plateaued out.  The key, as it has always been and always will be, lies in the skill of humans to make music that other people want to listen to.  Technology alone cannot achieve that.  And if 512KHz 64-bit audio on a billion dollar system in the theoretically perfect room isn't good enough for you then you can always hire a band to come play at your house and there you go, instant 1:1 analog sonic perfection without any losses whatsoever...and much cheaper!

[R_burke]

IMO his comments are pretty much right on, but I have a different take on them

As to the general buying public he is dead on, but the hobby isn't about the general buying public and if his company is trying to cater to the majority then they should sell $80.00 units at places like wall mart, K-mart, etc.

As to the digital medium I can only agree to a certain extent.  The straight forward technology of digital reproduction can be made/purchased cheaply, but the ability to achieve that last 20% is where we all live and die.

[PaulHilgeman]

The thing about his comments are that they have been true for the past umpteen years. 

1)  The majority of listening by the public as a whole has always been background music.  Lately is has just been more compressed stuff through earphones than a budget system in the next room.  Bottom line - this is nothing new, not in the last 40 years.

2)  15 years ago, the best CDP's werent very good, nor were the cheap ones.  The cheap ones didnt cost $80 either.  The whole market has slid down, deal with it.  There are always ways to innovate, the engine that drives this type of economy.  Imagine if high-end audio manufacturers stopped making new products, expiramenting with things, trying new ways to do things, finding ways around obstacles that people previously thought were impossible to get around, they would all go away.  Bottom line - this guy has a self fulfulling prophecy.

If he had the right mindset, he could develop a product that he things is better than other things for similar prices, support his believe (in a polite way), work hard, and maybe he would find some enjoyment and fulfillment in it, and his attitude would change for the better .


My last point is that these things will continue to be true, undoubtedly, forever, and in all markets, audio or otherwise. 

An example in the audio market:  Henry Kloss Table Radios - didnt we all think the table radio was DEAD?


-Paul Hilgeman (New to this side of the audio business and happy I am here)

[macrojack]

I think he's right. Personal audio and computer based systems are the choice of most young people and because of home theatre the emphasis has moved from music, which really only receives lip service, to sound effects. Most surround sound systems don't amount to much more than car stereo for the home.
Consider also that most of us have worked our way into our expensive systems over many years of trading and/or incremental acquisition, whereas a young person dealing with declining wages, higher cost of living and student loans is seldom in a position to consider the products touted in high profile publications. When I was coming up in this hobby, the carrot (ultimate system) was within sight. We had reason to strive. Dream speakers were $2500. The modern counterpart of that speaker is $30,000. 
Then, lastly, those of us who are established players have suffered depletion of our ranks. We are switching to HT, divorcing, losing jobs, losing interest, losing hearing, finding new hobbies, paying for college, or just dying. However you slice it, our demographic is aging. I sometimes feel as if I am propelled in this pursuit more by established momentum and habit, than by actual interest. When Srajan started talking about realsization, he got my attention. I'm now thinking that way.

[PhilNYC]

1)  The majority of listening by the public as a whole has always been background music.  Lately is has just been more compressed stuff through earphones than a budget system in the next room.  Bottom line - this is nothing new, not in the last 40 years.

I disagree with this.  Before CDs, listening was something that more people did more seriously...to a large extent, it was because the effort involved in taking out an lp, cleaning it, putting it on a turntable, flipping it after 20 minutes, etc encouraged people to actually sit and listen.  People couldn't "fast forward to the next tracK' at the press of a button, so people tended to listen to whole album-sides.  You could argue that cassettes made it easier for people to listen, but it was still a pain in the neck to always rewind your tape back to the start of the song you wanted, so you still tended to listen to whole albums.

I remember back in the late 60s/early 70s that my older brother would have friends over, and they'd listen to whatever new lps they had just gotten (I was too young at that point)...and my brother is not an audiophile by any means.  Today (and since the CD was introduced), turning on music is far too easy...and as such, there is no "labor of love" to get it turned on...

[nathanm]

Today (and since the CD was introduced), turning on music is far too easy...and as such, there is no "labor of love" to get it turned on...

You kiddin' me?  Look at how much hassle you have to go through to get your computer running, the software installed, adjust the preferences for ripping a CD, finding artwork, tweaking the ID3 metadata, getting your network preferences set, pouring through screen after screen of router adjustment, researching the internet about how to get your wireless network figured out, searching message boards for answers, downloading new drivers and patches...then if you get all that squared away maybe you'll have time to listen to a song!

[sts9fan]

imho the "labor of love" of getting into music has nothing to do with hifi. It is going to the stinky ass clubs and working up a sweat....

[Horizons]

2: There is no point in bringing out new state-of-the-art digital gear.  A $79.00
CD or DVD player from Walmart will give you about 80% of the audio quality of a $4000
DAC.

True. That guy should be making speakers or room treatments.

http://www.matrixhifi.com/contenedor_ppec_eng.htm

[JLM]

1. A recent thread around here pointed out just how little even we, the audiophile community, critically listen.  Western society is addicted to stimulation.  Music alone isn't enough.  We need multiple simultaneous stimulations.  The more/faster/louder/bigger the better.  Beyond music, video, and print look to sports where folks go to the game to eat while watching another game.  And it goes on and on.

2. Yes, my daughter's iPod is miles beyond the pocket transistor radio I had in the 60's and it does sound good.  The question for the audiophile or audio manufacturer is how much enjoyment do you derive from this pastime, and compare it to all those other forms of entertainment that are available.  Any rational creature would be satisfied with the $80/80% MP3 solution and leave the left over $3920 CD/DVD/SACD option for other pursuits.  The "point of dimishing returns" effect can't be ignored, but there's the challenge to developers and manufacturers.  And part of the fault lies in many of the typical audio systems I've heard that promote excess detail (driven by that addiction to stimulation) beyond other sonic qualities, thereby leaving so little music sounding good (enjoyable to listen to). 

[WEEZ]

Even if one only listens to music as  'background'; i.e., not 'critically'....there is still a case to be made for better sound quality. Who knows...the 'average Joe' who hears more realistic playback might just sit down and actually 'listen'..at least once in a while.

Remote controlled TV just may have diminished the demand for audio for the so-called 'average' music listener. But, I suppose, the comment made in a recent "Stereophile" column concluded: '..most people don't like music, they just like the way it sounds' may have some merit.

WEEZ

[Scotty]

First of all a distinction needs to be made between critical listening in attempt to find flaws in the reproduction of music by your system and taking an hour of time to listen to a complete symphony or an entire CD of music without distractions or multitasking. I think fewer and fewer people find the time or make the time to listen to music as an end in and of itself. As far as reproduction quality is concerned I agree with the 80% figure. The neat thing is it is possible to closely approach state of the art Redbook and DVD-A reproduction with a modified Coby
or JVC DVD player. The key to this lies in the brand and model of the DAC used in the player and whether there is room to retrofit a clock along with shunt regulation and a buffered output stage into the player. The Wolfson and  AKM DACs have excellent inherent jitter rejection as well as an output stage that has voltage out without a POS built-in OP-AMP to handicap it's performance.
It is possible to buy a non-fatiguing DVD player to listen to CDs for as little as $40. This level of performance cost in the thousands of dollars only a few years ago.
Scotty

[Spirit]

First of all a distinction needs to be made between critical listening in attempt to find flaws in the reproduction of music by your system and taking an hour of time to listen to a complete symphony or an entire CD of music without distractions or multitasking. I think fewer and fewer people find the time or make the time to listen to music as an end in and of itself. As far as reproduction quality is concerned I agree with the 80% figure. The neat thing is it is possible to closely approach state of the art Redbook and DVD-A reproduction with a modified Coby
or JVC DVD player. The key to this lies in the brand and model of the DAC used in the player and whether there is room to retrofit a clock along with shunt regulation and a buffered output stage into the player. The Wolfson and  AKM DACs have excellent inherent jitter rejection as well as an output stage that has voltage out without a POS built-in OP-AMP to handicap it's performance.
It is possible to buy a non-fatiguing DVD player to listen to CDs for as little as $40. This level of performance cost in the thousands of dollars only a few years ago.
Scotty

Scotty:
Since I started this discussion, let me chime in.
It appears by your comments that you are indeed agreeing with the 2 main points that were made
to me.
Basically that there are very few true  serious music listeners and that spending a lot of money on
a digital front end is folly.
Having said that, it appears that you are very well versed on the digital side.
What do you use as your digital gear?

[Spirit]

Which leads me to another point:
There are those that say the following:
All amps sound the same.
Buy a cheap DVD player for $40.00 and it sounds great.
Use zip cord for speaker cable and a coat hanger for interconnects and they sound just
as good as anything.
If that is conceivably true, then one could buy a state-of-the-art system for about
$100.00, buy a good pair of speakers for a couple of hundred more and there you go.
End of hobby.
Anybody have a comment?

[lonewolfny42]

Which leads me to another point:
There are those that say the following:
All amps sound the same.
Buy a cheap DVD player for $40.00 and it sounds great.
Use zip cord for speaker cable and a coat hanger for interconnects and they sound just
as good as anything.
If that is conceivably true, then one could buy a state-of-the-art system for about
$100.00, buy a good pair of speakers for a couple of hundred more and there you go.
End of hobby.
Anybody have a comment?

Those must be the people that are deaf.....

[Scotty]

Spirit, I use a modified JVC NS-310 and a JVC NS-512 the 512 has the clock and advanced shunt regulation as well as a better spec-ed  AKM dac with a separate analogue supply pin. These players based on these DACs do not seem to appeal to people looking for warmer or fuzzier presentation. The space between instuments is not full of low level haze which is sometimes equated with air but which can obscure low level detail and smear images together. These DACs when not handicapped by the output stage they are used with have a very transparent window into the recording with a wonderful sense of fluidity to their sound.
They do not sound mechanical as though the sound was chopped into bits and reassembled poorly. The sound has a continuous quality to it that is like listening to an analogue source.
Scotty

[JLM]

Yes, Spirit those folks are ignorant and/or deaf.  Your example IMO pushes the point too far.

But for instance CAT5 makes for very good speaker cable (and interconnects with some work), reportedly the Best Buy house brand Insignia $50 speakers sound remarkably good, DIY.com is full of cheap chip amp examples (some with volume controls), and according to several around here the Oppo 970 sets the bar very high for $150.  So for south of $300 plus solder slinging you could be sneaking up on that 80% mark and quickly facing the "point of dimishing returns".

Without breaking a sweat and taking a more conveniently/accepted route a stock Squeeze Box 3, a pair of Red Dragon monoblocks, a pair of x-ls speakers from AV123, and Signal or Element Cable wiring should sound even better for south of $1300 and placing you into entry level audiophile status. 

Others could surely play this game better than I, but the 2nd point made in your 1st post is very valid.

[PhilNYC]

imho the "labor of love" of getting into music has nothing to do with hifi. It is going to the stinky ass clubs and working up a sweat....

Not everyone has access to the stinky ass clubs to hear the likes of Miles Davis, Led Zeppelin, the Boston Pops, etc.  So for the vast majority of people, home audio was the only way for them to hear such artists.  And once again, if someone is going to take the time of setting an LP up to play, chances were that they were going to listen to the whole album side.  Today, most people aren't forced to do this because of the ease of technology