2. analog
  3. 1359784802

$$$ vs music enjoyment

The January 2013 Stereophile e-mail newsletter featured an interesting reprint of a 1994 article titled "R.I.P. High-End Audio?" The reprint generated interesting discussion, and I found one post in particular raising an interesting point.

"The article suggests there is some public good to spreading the high-end. I'd like it first shown that someone is happier listening to music on $20 speakers than 'mid-end' $2k speakers. I mean empirical evidence - hook up blindfolded listens to brain scanners and measure their neurotransmitter levels. If there were a correlation between musical enjoyment and price beyond a certain point I'd have expected my musician and conductor friends to own better stereos than they do."

A few points raised there. Does a more expensive system (a nicely set up, moderate system vs. a significantly more expensive system) indeed elevate the level of musical enjoyment? It would be very interesting to compare owners of all-out assault systems with average audiophiles who can't wait to fire up their systems on a Friday night to get themselves immersed in music. I believe I myself would in fact enjoy the music more if able to afford a more expensive system, even though my modest system has given me extreme enjoyment. But who knows...

And then, yes, why does the audiophile community feature relatively so few musicians? I must say this argument is actually not very convincing to me. The underlying assumption is that any given trade professional would necessarily strive to replicate or pursue the same standards or level of performance in his private life, which I think is a fallacy. Does a fancy restaurant chef have to always eat gourmet food at his home to enjoy it? Does a fashion designer have to always wear designer clothes lest they show high fashion is a sham?

Comments welcome.
actusreus
orpheus10
8,668 posts
 
Jazz and blues musicians prefer midfi even when they can afford "high end" because it's less complicated, plus the fact they prefer "live" music to recorded music of any kind, and they always want to be on the set. While it seems that classical musicians definitely prefer the high end, and from what I've seen, always tubes; and the older the better. They also like horn speakers.

People who get the most enjoyment out of music, don't even know the high end exists.
orpheus10
8,668 posts
 
Correction, that "S" after friend is a typing error, there was only one lady.
pure_brew
21 posts
 
To the original post I would say follow the dollar on the big picture side of things. Where is the money being spent?
I think of Apple and it ties to content.

Music and content first, systems later. I remember my mom propping up her suit case record player/changer in the kitchen, listening to her favorite music as she cooked. Or, singing along to the music on tape in the car.

She would laugh at me now, fretting over the next big upgrade to my system. I don't think I really enjoy music more then she ever did back then.

Is there a correlation? I don't know 100%. But It might only be valid from a marketing point of view to how much will it cost us to make this "box" and how many can we sell?

I think people would like to listen to music through something that is pleasing to them. But the experience of music means different things to different people, even if it is generally agreed that any decent stereo system will sound better a single speaker radio.

How much money do YOU have to spend to enjoy music? Ask everyone on the planet, or at least people who are adults earning a living with the kind of "problems" we have in a place like the U.S. The answer might just be a question: How much for the newest iPod?
More to discover