Whatever happened to Hi-Fi?

T

TheStalker

Banned
It became overpriced and the market got flooded with thousands of garage companies and so called phony experts. It's these internet experts who made the general public view Hi-Fi as one big tub of snake oil.
 
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
Way long, and full of BS. These are the good old days for audio. The equipment, especially speakers and subwoofers, are better than ever, awesome electronics are available at very reasonable cost, CD quality or better music is available with point and click ordering or downloading, and the choices in the market for everything are so numerous it can be bewildering.

All of that blather about 4-channel audio is BS too. Quad sucked. Great stereo is where the sweet spot is.
 
ImcLoud

ImcLoud

Audioholic Ninja
I have to agree with Irv... I also think TV plays a huge part and video games {not to mention we have less free time as a whole}... My parents had the old hi fi system in the dining room, and we used to listen during dinner, my dad would put an album on when we had company and when we weren't watching tv {we didn't have many channels}.. Now my kids have 2100 channels at their finger tips, amazon prime, netflix, all the mvie channel on demands, Hulu, plus video games and so many other things to take their attention... They can literally listen to music in every single room of my house, but they listen very little they take their music classes {piano, drums, and guitar, tried trumpet and sax couldn't get either of them interested}.. They listen to their iphones and my oldest has a decent little system in his room and he plays it every day, but my youngest could care less about music...

Me and my wife on the toehr hand, go to concerts, listen to music all the time, we will just cuddle up together on the couch and throw pandora on... I have noticed more of our friends after seeing our systems added music only systems to their homes, and most stuck with spending some time away from the tv and listening to music.. I have gotten a lot of people to go music only, my office manager is addicted, she used to take home work with her and do it while watching tv, she made a few mistakes and admitted it was because she was half paying attention to the tv {she signed a bunch of emails Elen because she was dvr'ing ell en when she was doing the home-work} I told her to try listening to music and she said it worked so much better, she got done much faster, and did a better job...

but anyway, Hi Fi isnt dead and now you can get a great little hifi audiophile system for under $500 that sounds amazing {little tripath amp, ipod, and set of $400 bookshelf speakers}, you can of course go as cheap as a lepai 202 and a set of $40 bookshelfs that would still sound good, there is something pure about a music only system that maks it just a little better than playing through your ht...
 
3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
HiFi just became more affordable IHO. There are still many high priced systems out there but much of the mainstream that gets discussed here at this site approaches the performance envelope to the tune of 90% of the performance of the high dollar stuff. Value is in the depth's of one's pockets I suppose.
 
A

avengineer

Banned
All of that blather about 4-channel audio is BS too. Quad sucked. Great stereo is where the sweet spot is.
Speaking of the "sweet spot", the real failing of stereo is there's on sweet spot exactly between the speakers along a relatively short perpendicular line extending from the speakers to the listener. The same failing is multiplied by 4 in 4 channel quad, and the sweet spot then becomes truly a "spot" dead center between them. It's only at that single location were all 4 phantom images actually work. Move off it, and the phantom images cluster about the nearest speaker.

5.1 (or greater) largely solves the front phantom image problem, and extends the sweet spot all over a much larger area by anchoring the center with a speaker instead of a phantom. The early stereo experiments at Bell Labs concluded that the minimum channel count for "stereo" was three, all in front, with a center channel. Quad broke the rules in 4 directions. 5.1 solves the problem by not only anchoring the center, but re-defining what's happening in "surround". 11.2 fills in the remaining missing phantom locations with height and width channels.

I'd agree that the 4 channel mic captures a 360 degree circle, but it can't be directly reproduced in more than a single seat. The spacing between the mics will enhance the spaciousness of the recording, but make phantom image location completely intensity dependent apart from time delay. There have been other attempts at this, the Soundfield mic comes to mind, which ignored interchannel time differential by making the mic elements virtually coincident, but had the advantage of being controllable in post with a matrix.

I can't get on board with Quad in any form, sorry. Got to be 5.0 or greater.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Hi Fi isnt dead and now you can get a great little hifi audiophile system for under $500 that sounds amazing
Like the NHT Absolute Zero (was on sale for $175 each) that measures +/-0.9dB from 100Hz-10kHz. :D
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
In the 1960s and 1970s, every young person I knew, including myself, craved a stereo. (If I recall, we all called it a stereo and not a HiFi.) In college, and afterwards, as soon as we could afford it, a stereo was among the first things we purchased. It was one of those things that defined the so-called baby boom generation. The very large size of that young generation certainly also helped to fuel the rapid growth of the audio industry.

But IMO, what really drove this was the fascinating developments in new popular music during that same period. Most of that music was produced by small or independent recording companies. The big labels had lost control of new pop music sales, and scrambled to catch up. There was big money at stake. By the mid 1970s, much of the earlier momentum of the small and independent labels had been lost, accompanied by the maturing of the baby boom generation. There was less and less new and interesting music, and many baby boomers, myself included, had other things that occupied their time and money. The arrival of disco music, like a flu epidemic, put an end to the careers of many recording artists. Most of them had passed their prime any way. What remained by the late 1970s or early 1980s, had little resemblance to the 60s and earlier 70s, and the big music labels regained control of music production and sales.

They proceeded to ruin it by killing originality and raising prices. This happened at the same time as CDs and MTV emerged. I know I was interested in what new improvements CDs might bring, but I ignored them until the early 1990s mainly because I wasn’t much interested in new music. The next generation younger than mine, apparently was more interested in music videos than music itself without the video. I found most of that music uninteresting and largely ignored it. I thought I was getting older and my tastes had changed, but looking back, I think it was because the music and artists “manufactured” by the large recording companies was dull stuff.

Around the same time, the Sony Walkman first appeared, creating a new market for personal portable music of fairly good audio quality. The early Walkman played tape cassettes, but soon the Discman appeared. In the 1960s and 70s, audio played back from LPs or tape cassette recordings (after the appearance of Dolby noise reduction) was significantly better sounding than the only portable music of the time, AM (and later FM) radio. With the Walkman and Discman, this gap shrank. The later appearance of the iPod and the iPhone only continued this trend.

By the 1990s the thing most young people craved was not a stereo, but a computer. We are all familiar with how computers and the internet transfer of music files brought about the demise of the music industry. This came at a time when new music was significantly more expensive than in earlier years, but also at a time when new music lacked the widespread interest that had existed earlier. Besides, computers were not only becoming essential for communication, school, and work, but stereos were becoming more and more expensive. This certainly was not helped by the unfortunate trend of the audio industry to promote voodoo and snake oil as a way to increase profits.

Wow, I didn’t know I had this much to say! I guess I can summarize, what killed HiFi wasn’t the lack of quadrophonic sound, snake oil, or greed so much as Madonna and Michael Jackson and the big businesses that promoted them.
 
Last edited:
3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
In the 1960s and 1970s, every young person I knew, including myself, craved a stereo. (If I recall, we all called it a stereo and not a HiFi.) In college, and afterwards, as soon as we could afford it, a stereo was among the first things we purchased. It was one of those things that defined the so-called baby boom generation. The very large size of that young generation certainly also helped to fuel the rapid growth of the audio industry.

But IMO, what really drove this was the fascinating developments in new popular music during that same period. Most of that music was produced by small or independent recording companies. The big labels had lost control of new pop music sales, and scrambled to catch up. There was big money at stake. By the mid 1970s, much of the earlier momentum of the small and independent labels had been lost, accompanied by the maturing of the baby boom generation. There was less and less new and interesting music, and many baby boomers, myself included, had other things that occupied their time and money. The arrival of disco music, like a flu epidemic, put an end to the careers of many recording artists. Most of them had passed their prime any way. What remained by the late 1970s or early 1980s, had little resemblance to the 60s and earlier 70s, and the big music labels regained control of music production and sales.

They proceeded to ruin it by killing originality and raising prices. This happened at the same time as CDs and MTV emerged. I know I was interested in what new improvements CDs might bring, but I ignored them until the early 1990s mainly because I wasn’t much interested in new music. The next generation younger than mine, apparently was more interested in music videos than music itself without the video. I found most of that music uninteresting and largely ignored it. I thought I was getting older and my tastes had changed, but looking back, I think it was because the music and artists “manufactured” by the large recording companies was dull stuff.

Around the same time, the Sony Walkman first appeared, creating a new market for personal portable music of fairly good audio quality. The early Walkman played tape cassettes, but soon the Discman appeared. In the 1960s and 70s, audio played back from LPs or tape cassette recordings (after the appearance of Dolby noise reduction) was significantly better sounding than the only portable music of the time, AM (and later FM) radio. With the Walkman and Discman, this gap shrank. The later appearance of the iPod and the iPhone only continued this trend.

By the 1990s the thing most young people craved was not a stereo, but a computer. We are all familiar with how computers and the internet transfer of music files brought about the demise of the music industry. This came at a time when new music was significantly more expensive than in earlier years, but also at a time when new music lacked the widespread interest that had existed earlier. Besides, computers were not only becoming essential for communication, school, and work, but stereos were becoming more and more expensive. This certainly was not helped by the unfortunate trend of the audio industry to promote voodoo and snake oil as a way to increase profits.

Wow, I didn’t know I had this much to say! I guess I can summarize, what killed HiFi wasn’t the lack of quadrophonic sound, snake oil, or greed so much as Madonna and Michael Jackson and the big businesses that promoted them.
I agree partially with your assessment of the music. However, I didn't give up and instead of looking at mainstream, I went back to independent labels. There was still a lot of good music put out in the 70s and 80s. It just wasn't as promoted as the top 40 sh?t and commerical pop crap.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
I agree partially with your assessment of the music. However, I didn't give up and instead of looking at mainstream, I went back to independent labels. There was still a lot of good music put out in the 70s and 80s. It just wasn't as promoted as the top 40 sh?t and commerical pop crap.
I'm glad you understood my point, long and rambling as it was.

But I don't mean to imply that the music industry has failed because of matters of musical taste. Just because I preferred the Beatles and Rolling Stones to Frank Sinatra and Elvis doesn't mean that I can gripe about the tastes of generations younger than me. After all, my generation also had Barry Manilow :rolleyes:. So I don't mean to complain about the music of Madonna or Michael Jackson, even though I really didn't like it.

What I really mean is that the recording industry of the 80s and 90s did itself in by trying to control and limit the production of new music too much, all while significantly raising the prices of CDs. They lost a lot of business by doing that at a time when new technology was appearing that would upset the assumptions behind their business model.
 
3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
I'm glad you understood my point, long and rambling as it was.

But I don't mean to imply that the music industry has failed because of matters of musical taste. Just because I preferred the Beatles and Rolling Stones to Frank Sinatra and Elvis doesn't mean that I can gripe about the tastes of generations younger than me. After all, my generation also had Barry Manilow :rolleyes:. So I don't mean to complain about the music of Madonna or Michael Jackson, even though I really didn't like it.

What I really mean is that the recording industry of the 80s and 90s did itself in by trying to control and limit the production of new music too much, all while significantly raising the prices of CDs. They lost a lot of business by doing that at a time when new technology was appearing that would upset the assumptions behind their business model.
From a manufacturing point of view, its been my opinion all along that manufacturing CDs is far cheaper than that of vinyl and I was always put off by the asking prices of CDs. These absurd prices were partially to blame for Napster and other file sharing to proliferate the internet.
 
ski2xblack

ski2xblack

Audioholic Samurai
Thanks, Swerd, that's just the sort of discussion I was hoping to generate. Love your perspective on the history. The music industry is rough, and the good stuff is often from the periphery/independents. I have many rather hungry musician friends, so you can imagine what side of that I come down on.

I always found the Hafler Dynaquad approach to be very organic and natural sounding. It's quite different from quadrophonic sound. It does expand the stereo sweet spot and help the image dissociate from the exact location of the fronts. The fact that you could accomplish it so simply was kind of cool (you don't need a Hafler Quadapter to do it).

And I agree with Irv, this is the golden age when it comes to the technology. Speakers, subs, fancy processing capabilities, the tools currently available to the DIY community, all are simply astounding compared to years past. The business side, as always, seems questionable, from planned obsolescence from the big guys, to the woo wire vendors, to the predatory, exclusionary music biz (independents excepted). And culturally, it does seem that structured teaching in music is trending down, and we end up with a bunch nincompoops with auto-tune vocals who cannot sing or play an instrument to save their lives. Is that true, or just me getting old and grouchy?

Random question regarding independant music. I've been trying to identify some awesome jammin' groove-rock from the late '80's I heard on the radio recently. I did not catch the artist name, and can only recall part of the song title, which I may have wrong. I think it was something like Rough Town, Bridges Out or something very similar. Super hot music. Does this ring a bell for anyone? I want to add it to my collection if I can figure out what it is.
 
Last edited:
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
From a manufacturing point of view, its been my opinion all along that manufacturing CDs is far cheaper than that of vinyl and I was always put off by the asking prices of CDs. These absurd prices were partially to blame for Napster and other file sharing to proliferate the internet.
This wasn't true when CDs first appeared, the process required cleanroom conditions and substantial capital investment. That isn't true any longer, but it was in the early 1980s.

As for pricing being to blame for illegal file sharing, I suppose that's fundamentally correct, but file sharing to avoid paying royalties is nothing but theft. I don't care what the intellectual property is, music, software, documents, whatever. There's no obligation to for anyone to sell something at what a buyer considers a reasonable price or license conditions, like the ability to produce and distribute copies. I suppose I'm out of touch with the prevailing opinion that consumers somehow have rights to the work of producers, but I consider sites like Napster and the people who use them to avoid paying for content or software just disgusting thieves. There are no reasonable excuses either, he says, stepping down from his soapbox. :)
 
3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
This wasn't true when CDs first appeared, the process required cleanroom conditions and substantial capital investment. That isn't true any longer, but it was in the early 1980s.

As for pricing being to blame for illegal file sharing, I suppose that's fundamentally correct, but file sharing to avoid paying royalties is nothing but theft. I don't care what the intellectual property is, music, software, documents, whatever. There's no obligation to for anyone to sell something at what a buyer considers a reasonable price or license conditions, like the ability to produce and distribute copies. I suppose I'm out of touch with the prevailing opinion that consumers somehow have rights to the work of producers, but I consider sites like Napster and the people who use them to avoid paying for content or software just disgusting thieves. There are no reasonable excuses either, he says, stepping down from his soapbox. :)
Slow down Irv. I did not in anyway justify file sharing. I just said absurd prices is what caused the birth of file sharing.
 
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
Slow down Irv. I did not in anyway justify file sharing. I just said absurd prices is what caused the birth of file sharing.
I know, illegal file sharing just pisses me off. :)
 
ImcLoud

ImcLoud

Audioholic Ninja
I have no problem paying for music, itunes is what seems to get the bulk of my money since I don't really use cds anymore... I'm not sure how the entire illegal download thing works {I thought napster was gone} but I would imagine that its mostly kids using it that don't have the funds to buy music... I can't picture any working adults "bootlegging" music, lol... Im sure they have it figured in the business, just like when people steal cd's or they get destroyed, that is built in the industry pricing...
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
I think there are a multitude of problems.

For the non technical music lover nothing is user friendly anymore.

I think people do want an AV experience now, and with good reason. Locating two speakers either side of a TV in a lot of rooms is problematic, let alone five or seven.

In the old days, you had simple connections, switched it on and selected the source.

I note a lot of users do not get the hang of GUI interfaces and are often defeated by things like speaker set up and assigning inputs.

Speakers in the main these days really do require a sub. Setting that up and finding room for a sub puts a lot of people off.

Then the choices of where to spend money on home and personal electronics is wide. Mobile devices are often required for a job and take priority.

Finding and getting CDs, DVD, and BD requires Internet order pretty much. Storage or transferring to hard disc is hard for the nontechnical. Streaming is handy, but getting good results is not easy or straightforward. Streaming in dreadful quality is easy, but finding and getting quality is hard.

Finding good speakers is a hassle, with the decline of the specialist dealer. Most speakers are of the small cone narrow front variety, and the drivers actually not very good at handling power even with multiple drivers. Classical music in particular has a lot of power below 400 Hz, and even at those frequencies x-max can get exceeded.

There is virtually no such thing as a good 2.1 or 3.1 receiver with good bass management, and slim profile.

The hassle factor for the average person is now off the clock.
 
jinjuku

jinjuku

Moderator
Slow down Irv. I did not in anyway justify file sharing. I just said absurd prices is what caused the birth of file sharing.
Any pricing is going to be a crutch for piracy....
 
jinjuku

jinjuku

Moderator
I note a lot of users do not get the hang of GUI interfaces and are often defeated by things like speaker set up and assigning inputs.
That's because receiver designers aren't UI people. While the interface may be a GUI on an AVR it's hardly intuitive. I like the guy that wrote a manual for the Denon Manual.

Yamaha isn't any better.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Slumlord
I barely see the need or purpose of "pirating" music with so many easy and convenient streaming choices. In fact it was services like Spotify and Pandora which mostly killed music piracy, not MPAA efforts - that has been proven again and again - give the people paying choices and will pay, not pirate

TV/Movie industry is in same process not, but much easy earlier in the process and less choices.

Keep in mind - Pirates are not freeloaders, but pay money for storage, premium services like VPN etc.. Also many studies shown that "pirates" are often best customers as well.

On the general subject of HiFi "demise" - lets just say its overblown. Good music is alive and prospers. The ones who die are large studio for their greed and inability to transform.

Yes, dedicated music listening time is virtually non-existing now-a-day (commuting and waiting doesn't count)
I listed to a lot of good music which I rarely if ever at all could hear on modern radio stations and I am lucky enough to have decent radio stations selection, yet they play same songs over and over again - whom ever came out with this model needs to be executed.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top