Personal vs. Market Values


Take truffle oil. Or truffles. The mushrooms, not the confection.
Honestly I can’t taste it. I’ve ordered all sorts of dishes with "truffle oil" which commanded a premium and if there is any difference at all in the taste I could not tell you even after being told about it.

The point of this is that truffle oil holds no personal value to me. I’m not trading in it or running a restaurant or buying it in bulk. If I did that I’d feel and be willing to spend quite differently than I do now.

The point to this and how this matters in audio is that you should be true to your own ears. Use friends, reviews (cough) and other sources as guides. You may also evaluate a brand based on re-sale value. That’s reasonable as the resale could have a material impact on you in the future.

But if you can’t hear a difference or prefer a speaker/cable/amp no one else does then serve only yourself and your loved ones. Don’t be fooled into thinking that the market value of a particular product has value for you or that it is a display of relative merit. It may not. Our hobby is filled with charlatans selling invisible clothes.

Those who say they can't taste the truffle oil or see invisible clothes spend less and are far happier I think.

Happy listening,

E
erik_squires
Gustatory perception varies as much as aural acuity.   If YOU can't taste or hear it(whatever,"it" may be), there's little doubt, it wouldn't be of value TO YOU.   
Kind of accidentally, I'm reading the book "iconoclast" and in the middle of discussions about how the stock market works and how iconoclasts make money by going against group / market values.

Anyone who wants a deep dive into this should take a look:

https://amzn.to/2RFkihJ
To answer eric_squires concerns,

I guess I'll wait for a reply that was meant for me to come through, because I don't know who this "eric" is.

Erik


I tried cut & pasting erik_squires but this forum doesn't allow that easily & to be placed organically on the page. I then spelt the name incorrectly & if that was interpreted as to be an offence, it was not.  The body of my message answers the question asked as the main one posed - in addition to the follow-up. 
I don't take it that personally, but I also don't understand why so many assume liberties with the spelling of a name that only has 4 letters.