The term "High End" needs to die. Long live Hi-Fidelity!

O-10,
Good to see you also.   These always put a smile on my face.    Hope they work for you.   Be sure and give a listen to the Jon Batiste CD, 'Hollywood Africans'.  Great from start to finish.
Heir Apparent at Lincoln Center?   You heard it here first.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCC1EEmJlo4   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sOygJsLDc4   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfNIVdnz1FQ

Cheers

geoffkait

That’s a Strawman argument that human hearing differences are greater than differences in specifications. First and foremost is humans can often agree on what differences between components or cables or speakers are, so their hearing must be fairly similar.

There was a time I would have been inclined to agree with this, but that was before the Yanni/Laurel illusion.

That’s a Strawman argument that human hearing differences are greater than differences in specifications.

A strawman argument is a little different. It is more like : "I like baseball" to which the strawman goes "but what about whales?"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
I'd put this more in the category of "not universally accepted truth."

I argue that the reverse is true. First, you'd have to list out all the specifications you are talking about. Next, you would have to show that they and only they are responsible for what we hear. Lastly, the quality of desirability would have to be ascribed to each.


In addition, the amplifier/dynamic speaker interaction is complex. You'd have to not only gather these specifications for the amp and speaker, but for the total system.


Don't get me wrong, specifications and measurements are important, but science stagnates and becomes something else when we assume we've measured all relevant parameters. Over and over in the course of science, and especially medicine, this has proven to be hubris.

Whatever.

Rok, I liked all your submissions; Gene Harris the best, but I don't want to change the subject of this thread.

Your comment in regard to Stereophile and Stereo Review tracks with the subject of this thread. There was also the magazine "Audio"; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_(magazine), it quit in the year 2000.

Stereo Review; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_%26_Vision_(magazine) For all practical purposes "Stereo Review" quit at about the same time but maybe a little later.

Neither of those magazines was strictly "High End" as are Stereophile and TAS. but both "high end" magazines are still around; I wonder why?


I subscribed to "Stereo Review" for decades; so long that I felt as though Julian Hirsch was a member of my family.

"Audio" was the most informative; I designed the crossover for my custom speakers (with the help of an engineer) based on information from "Audio".

At that time my rig consisted of components Julian Hirsch had reviewed. It wasn't until about 1990 that I got into the Hi-end; that was when brick and mortar high end emporiums still existed, they opened up a new world for me. Although quite expensive, it was a leap above what I already owned.

My thesis is that this is all related to the incomes of the people who subscribed to these magazines. Believe it or not, while some in the high end are very well off, the bulk of the people I saw frequenting those emporiums were people with good solid jobs who budgeted more than most on audio equipment.

Since those high end emporiums are no more, I relate that to so many of those good solid jobs being no more, which leaves those who are truly well off left for the high end.



Maybe others can run with what I've given.