This thread contains a couple different sub-themes.
There is a debate over the facts which OCD guy uses to justify his claim that some streaming devices are overpriced. This debate hinges on what is involved, mechanically or in R&D, with these devices.
Then there is another debate over how much a manufacturer is justified in charging for a product. Some argue that they can charge whatever they want if customers will pay that. Some see this as fine because of the psychological satisfaction some people get from just buying things they feel good about, even if they don’t really know why they should feel good about it. Others disagree and see this as problematic because customers are being fooled by marketing claims or techno mumbo jumbo. They not getting what they expect (sonic excellence) by paying what they pay.
I suppose there’s no single right way to look at it. For my own part, I see every audio purchase as part of the larger audio budget that I feel contained by. If I spend unnecessarily on a product (e.g. because I’ve become convinced by the marketing even though the technology doesn’t make a significant sonic difference), then those are $$s I do not have to spend in another area. Many on this forum has advocated for cables or vibration controls or room treatments that I have not yet acquired. If I spend too much of my budget on a streamer that is overpriced, ultimately that subtracts from what I can spend on other elements of the system which could make a bigger difference. And that reduces *my* overall satisfaction more than the bling factor of a $20k streamer. Just how I see it.
There is a debate over the facts which OCD guy uses to justify his claim that some streaming devices are overpriced. This debate hinges on what is involved, mechanically or in R&D, with these devices.
Then there is another debate over how much a manufacturer is justified in charging for a product. Some argue that they can charge whatever they want if customers will pay that. Some see this as fine because of the psychological satisfaction some people get from just buying things they feel good about, even if they don’t really know why they should feel good about it. Others disagree and see this as problematic because customers are being fooled by marketing claims or techno mumbo jumbo. They not getting what they expect (sonic excellence) by paying what they pay.
I suppose there’s no single right way to look at it. For my own part, I see every audio purchase as part of the larger audio budget that I feel contained by. If I spend unnecessarily on a product (e.g. because I’ve become convinced by the marketing even though the technology doesn’t make a significant sonic difference), then those are $$s I do not have to spend in another area. Many on this forum has advocated for cables or vibration controls or room treatments that I have not yet acquired. If I spend too much of my budget on a streamer that is overpriced, ultimately that subtracts from what I can spend on other elements of the system which could make a bigger difference. And that reduces *my* overall satisfaction more than the bling factor of a $20k streamer. Just how I see it.