Stereophile Article - Holt telling it like it is.

the industry has alienated 'the everyman'. the expensive esoterica that is sold today,(for the most part),does not capture the imaginations of most people who still find music important. it is 'preaching to the choir' and the audience grows smaller each day.

Danlib1, you are obviously a scholar and a gentleman.

Otherwise, JGH poses an important issue in front of us. I admire what he did and what he stood for. However, not all of us have to have the same priorities or opinions. I spend my money and pursue my hobby the way I want to...
1) not so that I can listen to all the warts on my most unplayable CDs but hearr them better than on my neighbors' systems,
2) not so that I can listen to the utmost in fidelity in music RE-production where I do not necessarily appreciate the original,
3) not so that I can get satisfaction that out of all my records, this particular iteration does the best in RE-producing what the recording engineer heard with his own ears as he was testing mike placement.

I do spend my time and money on music and system so that i can enjoy the REcordings I have and I discover. If I wanted to enjoy ONLY live music, I would not even have a transistor radio. As it is, I don't, but I have an iPod, and a stereo, and I am willing to listen to clips of music shared off one earpod on someone else's MP3 player in order to listen to something new. Stanislav Richter, Glenn Gould, Janos Starker (to me) are worth listening to, and I can't do that live. And if I choose to listen to music at 3am, because it soothes me, I can. And if I want to spend my Saturday listening to 5 different conductors leading 5 different orchestras playing 5 different version of Holst's Planets, then by heaven, I can. So sue me.

Aren't hobbies supposed to be fun?

The man is absolutely right, but audiophiles are elsewhere, out on a limb.

Since the only measure of sound quality is that the listener likes it, that has pretty well put an end to audio advancement, because different people rarely agree about sound quality. Abandoning the acoustical-instrument standard, and the mindless acceptance of voodoo science, were not parts of my original vision.

What a wise words! Sadly audio is one scientific application where the scientific method has lost the battle in the hands of ignorance and charlatanry.

Cheers,

Amem, Jaybo. The carrot is too far away now to entice us as it once did. In the early 80s I had modified Hafler DH 200 amps which set me back some $400 plus each. Naturally I dreamed of the several thousand dollar Levinson or Threshhold or Rowland amps and could imagine somehow owning them. Today's youngster is using an Ipod and keeping a vast store of music on his (or her)computer, never even thinking about multi-thousand dollar component audio systems. The cost of assembling something better than their computer and Ipod is well beyond imagining, especially since they are living in a bedroom in their parents' house.
We have ever more manufacturers vying for a piece of an ever diminishing pie. It's sort of a metaphor for our world of depleting assets and burgeoning population. Everything has a breaking point.