[Freo-1]

This really is a pointless discussion, because you are convinced that
none of the best equipment on the market is worth the price that is
asked of it, because you have deemed it so.

While I "feel your pain", the discussion, for myself at least, has not been pointless at all. I have learned a fair bit about the subject during the course of this rant, both reasonably and unreasonably stated.  Whenever I can learn something new, I always consider it a good day (even if I may have felt better before I learned the truth).   

There are a lot of variables that go into the equation.  For example. the large manufactures can and do produce equipment that the small guys cannot compete with. If one looks at the technology packed into a reference Denon, Sony ES, Onkyo, Yamaha, etc, piece of gear, a small guy trying to make the same thing would have to charge a substantial amount more to achieve something near the same quality, and it most likely will have more issues with as well.  The unit cost for these specialty audio manufactures is higher, and that cost gets passed along.

Another example, the Polk Lsi series is a very well engineered mass market speaker, and one that probably is as good or better than than the smaller boutique speaker outfits at their price points. They can buy those vifa tweeters at a lower price point due to their size, and pass it on.

So, for most of us that to live within budgets, we try to get the best sound for the dollar, which excludes us from owing the most expensive items. That does not mean that we have to settle for anything less that the best we can afford. Well, for affluent who feel the same way we do, it opens doors for them we do not have, and more power to them for it. 

I get my maximum value by taking something like a Harmon Kardon Citation II, and restoring it with a new front end topology, better parts power supply, etc, and make use of those very nice output transformers.  If I could afford a 30K amp, I would at least try it out and see for myself if it is worth it.

And that is the part that is worthless to debate. Everyone's value of worth is based on their life experiences, and, as far as that goes. "viva la difference" aa

[TONEPUB]

Freo:

I couldn't agree with you more.

Everyone enjoys something different about the audio world and hence has a different
experience.  Some guys really enjoy whatever new tweek is on the market and for
them if they can hear something different (whether it reveals more music or not)
is what makes them happy.

Some people like DIY and really enjoy building things.

Others just want to have the most expensive thing there is and can afford it.

There are hundreds of other variations on the theme and they are ALL valid.

Personally, I like it all, that's why I started TONE.  And it's really been a lot of
fun to share it with so many people.  The learning goes both ways....

[Double Ugly]

Folks, I apologize for the interruption, but I've had to remove a couple of posts. 

Actually, only one had to be removed, but the other was in response and didn't make much sense without the former.

In any event, I ask that you please conduct yourselves as you would in a personal, face-to-face meeting.  If you would hesitate to impugn the character, honesty or integrity of a person standing in front of you (ex's excluded, of course ), please apply the same measure of thoughtfulness to your posts here.

Further, I've asked macrojack to refrain from posting in Audio Central.  I will say no more about it, nor will I address questions, accusations, etc. pertaining to macrojack's absence.  It's done, and unless my decision is overturned by the powers that be, macrojack won't be back, at least for a while.


Jim/Double Ugly
Facilitator, Audio Central

[Rob Babcock]

Why are you so bent out of shape over this?

If anybody is making big money its people like Adobe who sell you a one
dollar DVD with Photoshop Creative Suites that goes for 1600 bucks.

Why aren't you squealing about them?

Or what about Glaxo Wellcome who sells my mom a little bottle of
pills to keep her cancer at bay.  Those babies are six thousand dollars
a month for 30 pills.  I know there can't be 6k worth of crud in those
little pills.

This discussion is really getting tedious.  You don't get it, you don't
want to get it and you want to keep complaing.

To be fair, plenty of people squeal about this, too.   Although obviously the $1 disc contains software created with thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of man hours of skilled labor, developed at the cost of millions of dollars.  And while 75% of the budget of a drug company is devoted to advertising, R&D is still a huge expense.  Whether or not the cost is "fair" is just as open to debate, but there's less option in the case of drugs:  people are indeed "dying" to get their hands on them. 

Without putting words into anyones mouths, I think many of us wonder if it really costs 50x as much to design a Halco amp or if it's "Mark Levinson Syndrome" (ie a fast & dirty rebadging, accompanied by a move of the decimal point one space to the right. ).

Bear in mind I still have no problem if people want to spend their money that way.  I can't wrap my mind around the idea of spending $7,500 on a wristwatch that keeps no better time than my $30 Timex, but I still don't care if you want to spend that.  That's the free market.  But we also have free speech, ie the right to bitch about it.

Still, your point is well made, TonePub.

[Double Ugly]

Bear in mind I still have no problem if people want to spend their money that way.  I can't wrap my mind around the idea of spending $7,500 on a wristwatch that keeps no better time than my $30 Timex, but I still don't care if you want to spend that.  That's the free market. 

A logical and reasoned approach to the subject IMHO, but your closing comment...

But we also have free speech, ie the right to bitch about it.

...begs the question - IF it's someone else's money, and IF you don't care what they spend it on, why bitch?   

[contrarian]

Perhaps the operative word here is "right".  Not to put words in anyone's mouth, but he didn't say he wanted to bitch, just wants the right.  Without that right, it's not a free market.

[Daygloworange]

Then it would stand to reason that one has the right to "bitch" about someone else's "bitching" about how other people spend their money....

Then everybody's bitchin' 'bout everybody....

Cheers 

[Freo-1]

Then it would stand to reason that one has the right to "bitch" about someone else's "bitching" about how other people spend their money....

Then everybody's bitchin' 'bout everybody....

Cheers 

Sounds like when I was in the Armed Forces "A bitching service member is a happy service member" 

[contrarian]

Nice!, that's why, as I suggested before, that this post is nothing more than mental masturbation. AKA - bitch fest.

If I wanted to read a slew of bitching, I'd ask my wife to write something.   

OK, that was a bad joke, no offense to the better half.

[Rob Babcock]

Bear in mind I still have no problem if people want to spend their money that way.  I can't wrap my mind around the idea of spending $7,500 on a wristwatch that keeps no better time than my $30 Timex, but I still don't care if you want to spend that.  That's the free market. 

A logical and reasoned approach to the subject IMHO, but your closing comment...

But we also have free speech, ie the right to bitch about it.

...begs the question - IF it's someone else's money, and IF you don't care what they spend it on, why bitch?   

I didn't say I'd bitch, and I'm not.  But then it's not just me we're talking about.  To extend your argument a bit, why would one ever complain about anything at all?  The point is that someone may be philosophically opposed to that pricing structure, and his opinion may be as valid as mine or yours.  And along the same lines as your comment, if you don't wish to participate in the discussion (and assuming it's not overtly hostile) why not simply skip the thread?  Why should it bother you if a conversation that you don't care for occurs benignly without you?

Bear in mind I don't mean this as criticism, just an explanation of my personal internet philosophies.

[Double Ugly]

Bear in mind I still have no problem if people want to spend their money that way.  I can't wrap my mind around the idea of spending $7,500 on a wristwatch that keeps no better time than my $30 Timex, but I still don't care if you want to spend that.  That's the free market. 

A logical and reasoned approach to the subject IMHO, but your closing comment...

But we also have free speech, ie the right to bitch about it.

...begs the question - IF it's someone else's money, and IF you don't care what they spend it on, why bitch?   

I didn't say I'd bitch, and I'm not.  But then it's not just me we're talking about.  To extend your argument a bit, why would one ever complain about anything at all?  The point is that someone may be philosophically opposed to that pricing structure, and his opinion may be as valid as mine or yours.  And along the same lines as your comment, if you don't wish to participate in the discussion (and assuming it's not overtly hostile) why not simply skip the thread?  Why should it bother you if a conversation that you don't care for occurs benignly without you?

Bear in mind I don't mean this as criticism, just an explanation of my personal internet philosophies.

I suppose I could've been clearer; the "you" was the collective, not you personally.  Next time I'll be sure to use "someone" or "anyone" to ensure the thought or question is more accurately conveyed.

But the point of my question was and is, why would anyone want to exercise that right?  Aside from jealousy, that is.  I'M philosophically opposed the the pricing structure, but I don't bitch about it.

As for skipping the thread, what evidence have you to conclude I don't wish to participate?  Does the fact that I've posted in the thread not contradict your conclusion?

Further, what makes you think it bothers me?

You're making a lot of assumptions, Rob, and I'm not sure why or where this is going.  Feel free to PM or take it to the "Hall" if you like.

[Bigfish]

My dog has a girl friend..she's part pit bull and a real bitch, but mostly his dog and mine play together well if not a bit rough.

Her owner is a broker for Merrill Lynch..he keeps his coat on and his tie tight all day long.  He's about 60 years old and pretty tight with a buck on most things.

He bought a BMW M5 though.

I commented on his watch a few weeks ago.  I thought it was a fake Rolex.  Turns out he  paid $17K for it.

I told him it looks nice.  I thought Holy Shit that's a lot for something that's all around us.  I just stopped wearing a watch because time is on my phone, computer, cell phone and in my car.  I can't get away from a clock.

Anyway, I wouldn't think to tell him how to spend his money, even if I wouldn't spend it that way.  His purchase made him happy.  He will wear that watch until he dies, then wear it forever after that I bet.

I'm sure people thought the same thing with my Longines Watches and my stereo equipment  Oh well.

Marbles:

I get your message and it was stated very well!

Ken

[JohnR]

For the record, posting on AudioCircle is a privilege, not a right.

And privileges can be removed.

[Edit: Sorry to take this further off track, but there is a misconception floating around here that I felt needs correcting. I think this thread is probably done, anyway...]

[Rob Babcock]

You're making a lot of assumptions, Rob, and I'm not sure why or where this is going.  Feel free to PM or take it to the "Hall" if you like.

I think you misunderstand, DU.  I have no problem at all with anything you've said...but I don't understand the desire to eliminate these types of discussions.  Sure, the old "cable debates", vinyl vs digital, etc- some of us may hate them, but when they generate 20 pages of dialog you have to wonder if projecting your ideals into the debate is the solution.  I mean, participate in the debate, but why try to stop it?  Obviously it interests people for there wouldn't be twenty pages of responses! You may be sick of hearing it for the umpteenth time, but for the younger guys it may be new. 

Moreover, so long as the discussion is civil why would we want to curtail it?  These types of philosophical issues define what we're about in this hobby!  Please, don't feel like I'm trying to take you to task over this- my comments are intellectual, conceptual & philosophical, not emotional.  I'm just trying to elucidate my view of the way a discussion forum should we.  Yeah, we have ground rules- and some are very sensible.  "No politics, no religion" is wise for a couple reasons; those issues are lightning rods for trouble, but more importantly they have nothing to do with audio.  So while I think it's good to have off-limits topics for non-audio discussion, I see no problem with controversy, provided it's topical.  What point is there to only reading stuff you already agree with? 

We're not trying to cure cancer or usher in an era of world peace...it's just audio, guys.  I think so long as a discussion is cordial and respectful we should encourage dialog, even on subjects that you or I may not find particularly compelling.  I don't like the sound of vinyl, but I'm often fascinated with the fetish & ritual of the medium (it reminds me of my Catholic upbringing- kneel here, chant there, etc).  Diversity is good for the discussion, IMOHO.  For my own part, if I'm to err I'd rather err on the side of unrestrained expression.  It makes more sense to me to prune the bad branches than to uproot and kill the tree.  You know, babies & bathwater and all.

[JohnR]

I think so long as a discussion is cordial and respectful

Well, it hasn't been, and DU's been the one dealing with it.

[Rob Babcock]

For the record, posting on AudioCircle is a privilege, not a right.

And privileges can be removed.

[Edit: Sorry to take this further off track, but there is a misconception floating around here that I felt needs correcting. I think this thread is probably done, anyway...]

I understand and completely agree.  I don't dispute your right to make policy- I'm just offering my opinion as to whether a given stance is good for AC in the long run.  It's easy to be misunderstood in print, so I'll try to be clear:  I don't want disruption at AudioCircle either.  But you yourself have mentioned to me privately that you'd like me to make my opinions known (be careful what you wish for! ) so I am.  One can be within one's "rights" yet still be harming one's interests (ie cutting off the nose to spite the face).  AC is a very fair and liberal site, yet we must be vigilant to avoid becoming an AudioAsylum.   Sure, there are jackasses who just use AC's bandwidth to get on a soapbox and bullshit, and we shouldn't tolerate that.  But a respectful & courteous exchange, no matter if it personally interests us or not, should be permitted IMOHO.

Just to clarify, I am not criticizing the anyone for their opinion here.  For the record, no mod has locked this thread, and just a few dead branches have been culled.  I think this is a good thing.  If it goes seriously off the rails I would agree it should be closed.

My litmus test it this:  at the end of the day, is it good for AC?  Does it foster the type of community we want to have?  That's my ultimate concern.

[Rob Babcock]

I think so long as a discussion is cordial and respectful

Well, it hasn't been, and DU's been the one dealing with it.

Oops, cross posted.   I didn't see the bad ones, just the cleaned-up version.  And I'd say all 20 pages were pretty interesting.  I'm all for keeping things in line, JR.

[Double Ugly]

I agree with almost everything you said, Rob.  The exception would be the implication - or outright assertion - that I or anyone else is trying to kill the thread.

My question was honest: aside from jealousy, why would anyone bitch about how someone else spends their money?  It is not - nor was it intended to be - a thread-killing question.  I asked because I'm genuinely interested in trying to understand those who exercise the aforementioned right. 

Nothing nefarious was involved or intended, no subliminal "stop it!" thoughts or other extrasensory powers were employed.  I just wanted to know why. 

Do you think you have reason to believe my question was anything other than what I've described? 

I wonder if perhaps you give me too much credit, or if maybe you're mistaking my words and/or actions for something they aren't.

[Marbles]

Hypothetical:

Rob "I think that amp X is way too expensive"

Marbles "I bought it and love it and think it money well spent.  Rob, if you think it's too expensive, don't buy it."


What's left to say?

[Rob Babcock]

Hypothetical:

Rob "I think that amp X is way too expensive"

Marbles "I bought it and love it and think it money well spent.  Rob, if you think it's too expensive, don't buy it."


What's left to say?

Obviously enough to fill 20 pages!