Are audiophiles the most gullable of hobbyists

[kenhoeve]

IMO, it would be more apt to say that audiophiles as a rule are more naive of their obsession than most hobbyists. That is not to say we are dumb, it just happens that the field of electrical engineering and acoustical engineering is extreme in it's breadth as it applies to our particular accoutrements, and those technologies have changed rapidly over the years. It is this inability to know all there is to know that marketers prey upon. Couple that with the inability to measure performance on any standardized reference and we are ripe for the picking.

Cars(internal combustion, forced induction, etc), pretty stagnant. Woodworking, photography, cycling, guns, etc, all this stuff is fundamentally the same as it has been for many years.

So technology then. What about computers? Well, pretty much all quantifiable performance there.

 

[highfihoney]

Careful, with all that nice stuff you have you may be confused with an audiophile.

I count on that,sometimes being a wallflower pays divedends

 

[3db]

The digital quantization (turkey time) of Toslink makes is sound softer. The 0s and 1s are fed turkey meat to make them fatter and slower, giving it that classic tube sound.

There ya have it folks!! Its conclusive!!

 

[Joe Schmoe]

The DT BP10s look too good to be true---on paper at least. 20Hz-20kHz +/-5dB is pretty good for $500 retail ($400 street).

Which would you pick: 5 BP10s + 1 SuperCube Trinity = $4,000 or
2 BP7000SCs + 1 CLR3000 + 2 BPVX/Ps = $4,600 ?

Hard to say what I would pick. What I did pick was 2 BP10s, 2 BP8s, no center, and no sub (none needed in my room with the '10s.) Actual cost=$1400ttl, and I have been 100% satisfied with it for 7 years so far. (I reserve my upgradeitis for the 2-channel setup in another room.)

 

[stratman]

I think you're taking things pretty seriously down in Florida. I've never heard anybody be criticized because he bought a Perazzi or Krieghoff or a Browning or any other brand. The Perazzis have nice fit and finish, strong locks, nice wood but, as you say, the pellets exit the muzzle exactly the same way.

I have a grade VI Browning Citori 20 Ga. skeet gun that I actually use for upland game hunting. I always shoot skeet with the tubed Beretta. I've had people worry about my scratching it because it looks so fancy with all the engraving and polished highly grained wood. Actually it cost $1600 at a gun show which isn't that much for an U/O shotgun. I have a Browning Citori 28 ga. sporting clays gun in grade II as well and it is great fun to shoot. It is one of my favorites. I also have a Beretta 2 barrel set for Trap - 34" single and 32" doubles. The last time I won a handicap I won it with the Beretta, not the Perazzi.

Personally, I've never heard a negative word about Brownings or Berettas anywhere. I think most shooters consider them excellent guns. I do. But just like you enjoy listening to music amplified by a Krell, I enjoy the feel and pleasure of shooting the Perazzi guns. You will too when you "pull the trigger."

Don't misunderstand I'm saying that a particular group of people that I've consistently shot with for the past 20 odd years, have the "brand" mentality, "if you're not shooting "a (insert brand here)," it just "isn't right." My hunting buddies are OK, "normal" folks they don't care what you're shooting with, the club guys, we'll that's another story. There is pride of ownership and I'm all for it, hell if you can afford it why not? My point as pertaining to the OP was "some folks believe and cling to ideas that fly in face of empirical evidence against it," I brought up shotguns because where I shoot skeet and trap some are led to believe that owning a certain brand will give you an edge, a notion that any experienced marksman will tell you is ridiculous. I'm not knocking Krieghoff, Perazzi, Browning or any brand, all I'm saying is that brand loyalty stems from pride of ownership, usually connected with an experience or "feeling" brought about by a product's design, exclusivity, performance or cost. BTW I'm also not nocking club shooters, most of my friends are.

 

[Halon451]

I think P.T. Barnum said it best when he said, "There's a sucker born every minute."

Paying that much for speaker cables? I assume that the principle laws of physics and electricity doesn't apply with these cables; those electrons moving along on that stranded wire must really enjoy the ride for that price.

Obviously with everything, there is an upper cap on any piece of gear's level of excellence - I read a post by someone a day or so ago that mentioned the fact that the excellence curve really starts to flatten out at some point - yet the prices continue upwards at an exponential rate far beyond justification as to its amount.

Companies know that certain people in any given hobby/interest/arena will always purchase the "absolute best money can buy" - and send their respective prices straight into the statosphere and wait for the cash to start falling all around them. It's been happening for ages.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Hard to say what I would pick. What I did pick was 2 BP10s, 2 BP8s, no center, and no sub (none needed in my room with the '10s.) Actual cost=$1400ttl, and I have been 100% satisfied with it for 7 years so far. (I reserve my upgradeitis for the 2-channel setup in another room.)

No Center? So when yo configure the speakers in your receiver or processor, you just set the Center Speaker to "None"? And the center channel information is sent to the Main Left & Right?

So you can attest to the frequency response of the BP10s as 20Hz-20kHz +/-6dB?

And what would you get for this 2-Ch setup?

 

[Mudcat]

Photography: "12.1 MP or nothing"
.
.

Careful here. A regular 35mm negative contains the equivelent of up to 24 mp (based on my experience of scanning negs on an Imacon drum scanner). But there are "experts with various other claims ranging from 10 mp to 25 mp. Now, if you shoot medium format (I also shoot with a Mamiya RB67 - 6cm x 7cm negs), the digital equivelent would probably approach 70 to 100 mp.

So, even if you only want to print a 4x6 that 12.1 mp would be vastly superior to most things less - when printed on the same printer and paper of course. Now, that a topic for discussion - what's the best printer for pictures, or what's the best paper ( I use Staples glossy and matte).

 

[WmAx]

Careful here. A regular 35mm negative contains the equivelent of up to 24 mp (based on my experience of scanning negs on an Imacon drum scanner).

After my examination of numerous analytical articles and posts by careful experimenters, using the best drum scanning equipment, a typical 35mm color negative of ISO 50-100 range, typically resolves equivalent detail, as compared between 6-10MP Bayer type sensor DSLR, using the same FOV(distance adjusted for different crop factors of 35mm vs. standard DSLR), lenses and controlled subject. I have seen no properly controlled comparisons that resulted in demonstrating typical color 35mm could resolve beyond the resolving limit of roughly a 10MP Bayer sensor for any practical photographic application. If you can reference me to a credible, properly controlled comparison test, I'll be more than happy to review it.

A low ISO 35mm B&W negative can resolve considerably more information as compared to color negative.

It should be noted that in order to get a high quality film photograph developed, or to get a high quality scan of 35mm as compared in such articles, a high quality professional lab or skilled person at home with very high quality(beyond the cost considered practical by most non-professionals) scanning equipment is required. But it's easy to achieve the resolution for anyone, using an all-digital high quality camera system.

-Chris

 

[Joe Schmoe]

No Center? So when yo configure the speakers in your receiver or processor, you just set the Center Speaker to "None"? And the center channel information is sent to the Main Left & Right?

So you can attest to the frequency response of the BP10s as 20Hz-20kHz +/-6dB?

And what would you get for this 2-Ch setup?

Yes, that is called phantom center. It sounds better than a real center to me, but I almost always watch movies alone. If I had guests for movies, I would probably want a real center.
The BP10s have enough bass for my tastes in my 10' sq. room. Whether or not they are within +/-6db to 20Hz, however, I cannot say as I don't own an SPL meter.
I have changed speakers often in my 2-channel setup. Most recently, I was using KRK ST6 monitors. Now I am using the BP8s while the KRKs serve surround duty (an arrangement that sounds good.) Eventually, I may buy another pair of Def Techs (not sure which model.) If money were no object, I would buy Shahinians.

 

[fmw]

Don't misunderstand I'm saying that a particular group of people that I've consistently shot with for the past 20 odd years, have the "brand" mentality, "if you're not shooting "a (insert brand here)," it just "isn't right." My hunting buddies are OK, "normal" folks they don't care what you're shooting with, the club guys, we'll that's another story. There is pride of ownership and I'm all for it, hell if you can afford it why not? My point as pertaining to the OP was "some folks believe and cling to ideas that fly in face of empirical evidence against it," I brought up shotguns because where I shoot skeet and trap some are led to believe that owning a certain brand will give you an edge, a notion that any experienced marksman will tell you is ridiculous. I'm not knocking Krieghoff, Perazzi, Browning or any brand, all I'm saying is that brand loyalty stems from pride of ownership, usually connected with an experience or "feeling" brought about by a product's design, exclusivity, performance or cost. BTW I'm also not nocking club shooters, most of my friends are.

I agree with you completely. I'm a lousy golfer. I have a couple of friends who are pros. It always devastates me when they take one of my clubs and make a wonderful shot with it. It really drives home the fact that it's skill and not equipment that makes the difference. I'm not a great clay shooter but, at least, I'm better at it than I am at golf.

Based on your handle I guess you probably play a Stratocaster?

 

[fmw]

After my examination of numerous analytical articles and posts by careful experimenters, using the best drum scanning equipment, a typical 35mm color negative of ISO 50-100 range, typically resolves equivalent detail, as compared between 6-10MP Bayer type sensor DSLR, using the same FOV(distance adjusted for different crop factors of 35mm vs. standard DSLR), lenses and controlled subject. I have seen no properly controlled comparisons that resulted in demonstrating typical color 35mm could resolve beyond the resolving limit of roughly a 10MP Bayer sensor for any practical photographic application. If you can reference me to a credible, properly controlled comparison test, I'll be more than happy to review it.

A low ISO 35mm B&W negative can resolve considerably more information as compared to color negative.

It should be noted that in order to get a high quality film photograph developed, or to get a high quality scan of 35mm as compared in such articles, a high quality professional lab or skilled person at home with very high quality(beyond the cost considered practical by most non-professionals) scanning equipment is required. But it's easy to achieve the resolution for anyone, using an all-digital high quality camera system.

-Chris

But the difference is that photographers are abandoning analog photography in droves. Nikon, as an example, stopped making film cameras at the beginning of this year due to a lack of demand. I would bet Canon won't be far behind. I have a friend and former partner who teaches photography at a large community college and he has abandoned analog photography even as a teaching tool. He says there is no point in it any longer. I don't know a single pro photographer that uses film any longer as a commercial medium and I know a lot of them since I was one myself for many years. The change to digital is truly a revolution in progress.

High end audio is another matter entirely. I don't think the industry grows or declines. A few join in. A few drop out. The beliefs don't change and the technology doesn't even change much unless something as revolutioary as the CD comes around. Even with new technologies, there is a hankering to cling to the technologies of the past. High end audio just goes on and on an on like the Eveready rabbit.

 

[Sheep]

Yes, that is called phantom center. It sounds better than a real center to me, but I almost always watch movies alone. If I had guests for movies, I would probably want a real center.
The BP10s have enough bass for my tastes in my 10' sq. room. Whether or not they are within +/-6db to 20Hz, however, I cannot say as I don't own an SPL meter.
I have changed speakers often in my 2-channel setup. Most recently, I was using KRK ST6 monitors. Now I am using the BP8s while the KRKs serve surround duty (an arrangement that sounds good.) Eventually, I may buy another pair of Def Techs (not sure which model.) If money were no object, I would buy Shahinians.

Not to crap on the DT guys, but Tom Nousiane has tested some DT subs, and they fell short of their specs. Very short. These were in room measurements too.

I'll see if I can find the link.

Found it!

http://home.comcast.net/~frank_carter/Nousaine.htm

SheepStar

 

[stratman]

I agree with you completely. I'm a lousy golfer. I have a couple of friends who are pros. It always devastates me when they take one of my clubs and make a wonderful shot with it. It really drives home the fact that it's skill and not equipment that makes the difference. I'm not a great clay shooter but, at least, I'm better at it than I am at golf.

Based on your handle I guess you probably play a Stratocaster?

Yes sir, 1994 American Strat Plus, and a '94 Les Paul goldtop 1960 re-issue, Marshall amplification.

Golf, ouch!! I can't seem to get it! I have a friend (well to do) that a few years back decides he wants to golf, well, he goes out spends a small fortune on a Ping set with bag, Titleist putter, the whole enchilada, he thought he was going to be the next Tiger, of course it helped that the salesman at the pro shop convinced him that a Ping club set would do just that! Of course he gave up, after 4 months. He's never played again.

 

[WmAx]

Yes sir, 1994 American Strat Plus, and a '94 Les Paul goldtop 1960 re-issue, Marshall amplification.

Golf, ouch!! I can't seem to get it! I have a friend (well to do) that a few years back decides he wants to golf, well, he goes out spends a small fortune on a Ping set with bag, Titleist putter, the whole enchilada, he thought he was going to be the next Tiger, of course it helped that the salesman at the pro shop convinced him that a Ping club set would do just that! Of course he gave up, after 4 months. He's never played again.

Did you ever find one of those Bluridge BR-180 guitars to try out that I referenced a while back?

-Chris

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Not to crap on the DT guys, but Tom Nousiane has tested some DT subs, and they fell short of their specs. Very short. These were in room measurements too.

I'll see if I can find the link.

Found it!

http://home.comcast.net/~frank_carter/Nousaine.htm

SheepStar

So did Tom Nousaine turned the Subwoofer volume on the DTs to 25% while turning his NOUSAINE's IB Design to 100%?

The SuperCube III ( 82dB/25Hz) has more output than the SuperCube I (78dB/25Hz)? Makes absolutely no sense.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

So did Tom Nousaine turned the Subwoofer volume on the DTs to 25% while turning his NOUSAINE's IB Design to 100%?

The SuperCube III ( 82dB/25Hz) has more output than the SuperCube I (78dB/25Hz)? Makes absolutely no sense.

The guy who did the test builds/sells subwoofers? No bias there, obviuosly!

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The guy who did the test builds/sells subwoofers? No bias there, obviuosly!

Really.

The DT ProSub800 is $350 & the SuperCube I is $1,000. But the ProSub800 is 76dB/25Hz & the SuperCube I is only 78dB/25Hz?

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

In answer to the original post: Yes, Audiophiliacs are, by far, the most insane tweek oriented hobbyists. Everyone else has posted under the name brand/consumerist angle, and its true that seemingly every major hobby has its 'elite' products. But I think this was more about the gimmicks.

Does trap shooting have people who think that placing boxes of shells inside $500 crystal pyramids enhance their trajectory after they get around to using them? No.

Has any oenophile ever used an electron microscope's $100,000 antivibration platform to try and decant their bottle of red without the byproducts of Earth's rotation effecting the bouquet? No.

Ever meet a stamp collector that uses a "demagnetizing" plastic gun (which goes 'click'). No.

Book collector that colors the page edges with a green marker? No.

Does the De Tomaso Pantera owners club of America have a select group of members that keep shakti stones in their gloveboxes? No.

Is the brand of scissor the tailor uses to fit your Armani wool suit worth the price of a second Armani wool suit? No.

Ever hear of a chef that replaced his Viking range's bakelite knobs with mpongi wood? No.

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

PS: I couldn't think of any other passtimes that might benefit from having a mason jar of magic pebbles placed atop it.