Why Don't More People Love Audio?

hi cruz123:

you make a good point. if most people can enjoy music in the car or by listening to a boom box, why spend more ?

enjoyment of music is not dependent upon sound quality.

the purpose of trying to attain excellence of reproduction is to appreciate the beauty of the human voice and the timbre of instruments.

thus there is a dichotomy--sound quality and music appreciation. sound quality is not a necessary condition for enjoying music.

i see three types of audiophiles, gear fanatics, compulsive chasers of accuracy and aesthetic appreciators of the sound of instruments.

I think that most everybody has a driving passion that they sink their time and money into. Some, like golf, are realy mainstream. Others, like sailing are even more niched than audio. Asking why more people don't get into audio is sort of like asking why more people don't get into model trains: it's either in your blood or it's not.

Regarding audio as a status symbol, having a six or seven figure cinema room in your house is a pretty mainstream status symbol for people with high net worth. I know that's somewhat different from the original point about two-channel as a combination of hobby and status symbol, but I thought it fair to bring it up.

On the other hand, plenty of people as well off as those who spend six figures for their cinema opt to spend less than twenty thousand on their A/V rooms. It all comes down to individual priorities. I've met people who didn't even blink at spending fifty thousand on a waterfall in their foyer, but getting ten thousand out of them for a distributed audio system was like pulling teeth.

Wine is another one of those hobby/status things. While I adore expensive beer and spirits, I'm a total savage when it comes to wine. Anything over ten bucks a bottle is wasted on me. And yet, my stock single malts are all $100+, which some think is outrageous, but still isn't even the deep end of that hobby...

Different strokes, ultimately.

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.