Why Don't More People Love Audio?

Branislav, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think what you're saying is that high-end audio systems can never be a status symbol like the other items you mention, primarily due to lack of exposure -- you can't wear it, drive it, etc? In which case I would agree -- to a large extent. But I don't think that's the whole story.

Over the past 40 years, I have (and before that, my father) shared my system(s) with probably a 1000 people (I'm guessing,) I know they were all very impressed -- obviously excited and stimulated, foremost by the realism, and yet only a fraction, I bet 5% or less, were actually moved to put together a system, even a small one. Most of them had the means and the space. Some of that changed when CD's came along; maybe because of the (perceived) convenience? I'm not sure.

I think it may simply be that only a small percentage of people actually receive enough pleasure and stimulation from a (pretty credible) illusion of live performance, right in their home, to own even a modest audio system. And let's remember that for centuries, "music in the home" was a privilege (and a status symbol) only a few could enjoy! So I've always found it ironic that once "performance level" reproduced audio was widely available -- certainly by the beginning of the 60's, a period rich with status symbols -- that more people didn't acquire home audio systems. It certainly wasn't for lack of exposure ;--)
.

high end audio is an example of conspicuous consumption. i have heard of individuals who assemble expensive components to impress their contemporaries, without actually listening to them.

such a "group" is probably very small, in comparison to those who listen to music.

however, if many people view audio not as a vehicle for the enjoyment of music but as an indication that they possess material wealth it would serve as another explanation as to why the hobby is not popoular.

high end audio is an example of conspicuous consumption. i have heard of individuals who assemble expensive components to impress their contemporaries, without actually listening to them. such a "group" is probably very small, in comparison to those who listen to music.

Are you saying that even the (larger) group "who listen to music" own their system for its status value?

Maybe that's not what you meant? As I said earlier, in my view a home audio system is a lousy choice for a status symbol. I mean, who's going to see/hear it except that relatively small group of people who will be invited into your home. . . . . . . so I don't think many people would own them for that purpose.

And for those who covet audio equipment as "bling", well I think it serves their own ego-gratification rather than a need to impress others . . . . . which I think can be a healthy thing if not taken to rediculous extremes (and we've all seen examples of that!)

I think it is because most people do not really LISTEN to music. It is merely a back drop to them.

I like to drive, but I do not love to drive. Hence there is no Porsche in my driveway.

We audiophiles need to own up to the fact that we are a cult. As true believers, we cannot conceive that others fail to understand the redemptive nature of the object of our obsession. Too bad for us.

For most people, a sound system is just another appliance. They want to plug and play. They want to forget about it and to simply exploit what it can do for them. They do not obsess about the vintage, the specs or the pedigree. They upgrade when, and if, it breaks, or when they become convinced of its obsolescence (cassette deck to C.D.)

The rest of this palaver simply betrays our cluelessness.