Why Don't More People Love Audio?


Can anyone explain why high end audio seems to be forever stuck as a cottage industry? Why do my rich friends who absolutely have to have the BEST of everything and wouldn't be caught dead without expensive clothes, watch, car, home, furniture etc. settle for cheap mass produced components stuck away in a closet somewhere? I can hardly afford to go out to dinner, but I wouldn't dream of spending any less on audio or music.
tuckermorleyfca6
Enjoyed your post, Leedistad, but I don't agree with your point about asking this question being akin to asking why more people aren't into model trains. Playing back / listening to music is an almost universal experience, and the fact that such a vast percentage of the people who experience this never move beyond the cheap stereo / boombox / iPod playback approach is a bit bewildering to me.

I think this post has lived so long because you can look at the question so many different ways, but one version, and the one I'm using, is to question why, when almost every other pursuit (you mention several) has luxury versions that people pursue. So, I'm not wondering why more people don't pursue $10K preamps and the like, but a $1K-2K system built around Creek gear, or the Arcam Solo, or any of a number of other nice, lower-cost manufacturers, should have more market penetration than it does.

To put it another way, off the top of my head, I could name several acquaintances who are "into" wine, several who are into bikes, motorcycles, power boats, some who are into art, some who are into watches, many many who have invested in expensive video, and probably even a couple who are into model trains. But I almost fall off my chair when I come across somebody who has invested past the bare minimum on audio playback.

As you say, different strokes, but I still find it odd that so many people listen to music, but the acquisition of decent playback gear is just absent from most peoples' world.
hi kthomas:

you make some good points. let me add one.

certain expensive consumer goods are accepted as status symbols. cars, boats, jewelery, watches, paintings and antiques are some examples. while expensive audio gear has some appeal to wealthy persons, it does not compete with some of the aforementioned items. i guess, there is a popularity or collectible value associated with works of art, wine, watches and cars. audio equipment is a depreciating asset in comparison to others which increase in value.

to summarize, audio equipment is not a collectible item and the enjoyment of music can be attained from listening to $300 personal stereos. where is the incentive to spend more than $300, for most people ? by the way, i wouldn't lose sleep over the general lack of interest in the hobby.
there is a certain satisfaction associated with being a contrarian, as far as taste is concerned.
That's a good point - many of the other pursuits carry the notion that the thing being purchased will appreciate in value. I think we're all subject to justifying to ourselves our purchases, and the notion that one is buying something that will appreciate in value reinforces the rightness of said purchase.

For myself, my rationalization is along the lines of that I use audio gear daily, extensively, and year-round. You either drink a bottle of wine and then it's gone, or you store it indefinitely - you don't use it over and over. In any case, it's funny how we can all come up with things to reinforce our own desired behavior.
Why is it a surprise that few people appreciate audio when so few have a deep appreciation, aesthetic gratification or understanding of music? It may be true that listening to music is a universal activity, but the vast majority of people do not listen to music as a primary activity...it is an accompaniment to dinner, conversation, an elevator ride or hurried walk through an airport terminal.

Second, most people have a musical attention span of about three minutes, thanks to radio and busy lives filled with careers, families and other activities. It is a foreign notion to many people to actually sit down and do nothing but concentrate on the composition, sound or content of a musical piece, especially one that lasts longer than a few minutes, much less to give thought to the structure, performance, production, etc of music. I recall, when I was younger, listening intently to music in my bedroom and my mother (a music teacher!) urging me to go outside and "do something with the day".
77jovian, you hit it, in a nice way as well.
I would like to see some exposure to classical music, ballet & opera starting with the earliest grades.
My first Opera exposure was Orpheus & the Underworld with my grade 5 class and it made a great impression with all of us as I remember.
Action, danger, dynamic music; kids can dig that.
Just one experience a year from ~ grade 5 on would enhance music appreciation considerably-and help save our orchestras as well,imho.