This has been a nice thread. Thanks everyone for the air in which the discussion has been conducted.
This is not the easiest question to answer, because I think there are many conflicting criteria that I have. Sound quality? Of course. But having stuff fit in with space the family uses is important. My wife and I are negotiating that right now after some work done in the listening room.
I like beautiful design, and at the same time I don’t want to have a system that screams excess. So I have sometimes chosen the best sounding equipment at a price that also has some visual subtlety to it. For example, I appreciate that my Totem speakers have no branding on the front. I think Parasound’s Halo line is fantastic quality for the dollar and am pleased with my JC designed phono stage. It is also completely nondescript visually and sometimes unattractive to my eye. No money spent on industrial design there.
At the same time, I chose the Naim Uniti Atom both for its sound and its industrial design. I was comparing it directly with another brand which had maybe a 1% better SQ (yes, a ridiculous statement) and I went with the Atom because it was more beautiful and had a smaller foot print.
One of my turntables, the Bryston BLP-1, is matte black. Very low key. On the other hand, my Thorens TD124 has a beautiful wood plinth which says “look at me.” I think because it is vintage, and because the aesthetics are wood based and thus timeless, that is ok despite my other visual concerns to not telegraph cost. And I have that table not purely for SQ—though it is heavily modded and sounds great—but also to have a piece of vintage reference sound and to own a piece of audio history. So that is an audio factor but not a pure SQ factor. Now that I am in the market for an amp, many of these issues are rising up for me again.
Also, build quality matters. If something sounds a cut above, I might hold on to it for a very long time.
In conclusion, I am a bundle of impulses and my stereo shows that.
This is not the easiest question to answer, because I think there are many conflicting criteria that I have. Sound quality? Of course. But having stuff fit in with space the family uses is important. My wife and I are negotiating that right now after some work done in the listening room.
I like beautiful design, and at the same time I don’t want to have a system that screams excess. So I have sometimes chosen the best sounding equipment at a price that also has some visual subtlety to it. For example, I appreciate that my Totem speakers have no branding on the front. I think Parasound’s Halo line is fantastic quality for the dollar and am pleased with my JC designed phono stage. It is also completely nondescript visually and sometimes unattractive to my eye. No money spent on industrial design there.
At the same time, I chose the Naim Uniti Atom both for its sound and its industrial design. I was comparing it directly with another brand which had maybe a 1% better SQ (yes, a ridiculous statement) and I went with the Atom because it was more beautiful and had a smaller foot print.
One of my turntables, the Bryston BLP-1, is matte black. Very low key. On the other hand, my Thorens TD124 has a beautiful wood plinth which says “look at me.” I think because it is vintage, and because the aesthetics are wood based and thus timeless, that is ok despite my other visual concerns to not telegraph cost. And I have that table not purely for SQ—though it is heavily modded and sounds great—but also to have a piece of vintage reference sound and to own a piece of audio history. So that is an audio factor but not a pure SQ factor. Now that I am in the market for an amp, many of these issues are rising up for me again.
Also, build quality matters. If something sounds a cut above, I might hold on to it for a very long time.
In conclusion, I am a bundle of impulses and my stereo shows that.