System psychology, or just psyched out?

My 2 cents -
1.It's about the music. Everything else is secondary.
2. Enjoying music isn't dependent on the technical/sonic attributes of the hardware (but I'm not saying great sounding equipment doesn't improve the experience).
3. In terms of sonic returns per $ invested, there is without doubt a point of diminishing returns (but where is that point and how does it vary for inividuals with widely different economic means?)
4. I suppose it is possible that $1500 well spent might sound better than $20K or more poorly spent - but I think you would have to work real hard to fritter away tens of thousands to make that system sound worse than a $1500 system (point taken about supporting room acoustics).
5. Listening is a skill and hearing ability varies amongst individuals. How many of us have perfect pitch? How many people are tone deaf and can't "carry a tune in a bucket"? How many can pick out a very subtle accidental mic hit in a studio demo tape? I witnessed this in a recording studio. No one heard it until the guy making the music pointed it out and edited it out of the tape. I've used the term "golden ears" in a somewhat derogatory fashion myself. On the other hand, listening to stuff I could never afford did help train my ear (an ongoing process) and help inform my purchases of lower cost equipment.

Now my question would be is this for psychological reasons, or purely objective?

Purely objective. If you look at my system then you will see that I use some very cheap stuff (similar to your pawn shop quality) alongside some not so cheap gear and without any dubious tweaks (for example, a number of acoustic panels make an easily audible difference - same for a PEQ - unlike many other tweaks that are not so obviously audible. The ultra expensive stuff is only purchased because it is necessary and does make a significant difference; and believe me, there is no short cut or cheap way to skin some cats. I would upgrade my cheaper stuff too if I could hear a significant improvement by going higher end, however, objectively I see no point. (by objective I mean blind tests - switching back and forth countless times between items to compare - easy to do these days with a remote.)

Thanks guys for your responses, they are all very thoughtful, but I think that maybe you are somewhat missing my point.

I will try to clarify.

Chadnliz said: "The Blindfold wont fly around here, many buy with their eyes and will never allow themselves to be taken in by anything cheap or mass market, mentally they are hung up on what they feel hi-end should be..."

That is my point: that other factors(cost, brand name, marketing, reputation, status appeal, ownership, comfort and familiarity with the product, etc.) besides the actual, physical, objective sound influences our PERCEPTION of the musical performance. And, if it was purely about the sound, then the blindfold(a blind listening test of comparable systems) should fly...I don't know, I am losing my train of thought here and am having a difficult time trying to say what I am thinking, but, I just do not think that it does as most people are enamored by the sound and equipment they own and have in their homes. By this I mean they are subjectively skewed and biased, prejudiced toward their own systems. And I believe this is only human nature. Just as we seek new adventures, experiences and discovery, as Markphd said, we also enjoy, prize and value, for lack of better terms, the things which we own. And this inevitably, inherently and indubitably affects, influences our judgement, IMHO. That is all I am saying.

I don't mean to be argumentative or anything, but I just wanted to clarify my point as I believe most of you were going a bit astray... so to speak. And of course there's nothing wrong with that, that's what we're all here for :-O LOL!, I only wanted to communicate myself and my thoughts better, clearer, more precisely, that is all.

Again, thanks for all your comments, it has been an interesting discussion which I do appreciate, thanks.

"I just want to know how many times one needs to watch those Bose commercials (and read the Bose advertising literature) before he can become convinced that an inexpensive Bose system can compete with and possibly beat a $100k audio system."

"Audio_obsessed_novic, do you really believe your Bose system is that good or have you simply been romanced/brainwashed by the ads and have rationalized that the Bose is that good so that you won't need to spend any more money?"

No Plato, I have not been brainwashed by the Bose ads(I cannot stand them and won't watch them anymore), but I do believe that with the exception of maybe one or two in-store setups, my cheap and modest home system really does sounds better than what I have heard. And that is the crux of my problem. I know better sound is available out there (I have heard it a couple of times), but otherwise, I just have not been generally able to find it. I do not want to sound crazy, contradicting myself in every other sentence, but... You see, I am very frustrated: While I do enjoy and like the sound of my home system, I am not entirely satisfied as I do know that better stuff/sound exists out there, but I have been unable to find it, despite my best efforts. Everything I listen to seems to sound worse than my own stuff, at least at the store anyway, and my question of "System psychology, or just psyched out" is simply trying to understand why this is.

"Another simple thing to realize is that because expensive systems typically have greater extension at the frequency extremes and are more dynamic, they excite room acoustics problems to a much higher degree than a more frequency-limited and compressed system would. And matching components for proper system synergy becomes increasingly important with higher-resolution rigs. In other words, it's very easy to screw up the sound of any expensive system if you don't pay careful attention to system set-up details... If you think it must be set up correctly because it's in an audio store... well, I urge you to reconsider that notion."

I am very glad you mention this, as I was thinking that this may be a very significant factor. I am not sure if my audio store has the best acoustic environment in which to showcase audio products. The room is mostly rectangular, has a level ceiling and is usually overly crammed with stuff, inventory, which probably diffises the sound a bit. While I know that given my equipment and setup, my room is probably pretty good acoustically, given the modest size, offset demsensions and slanted roof,(both of which help to reduce modal reflections I believe), along with the mixture of surface types, reflecting and absorbing. Now I certainly do not have a world class listening room or anything, just a shabby studio apartment, but still... it's probably better than the Audio Lab. Well, at least in my mind, ears and everywhere in between. ;-)

Thanks,
BFN.

P.S. Oh, and by the way, I have been to a Bose outlet shop and auditioned the new 201, 301 version 5, along with the 901s. And being thin and waify, strident on top, undefined in the lower base and weak in the upper, they all sounded horrible to me. So I do try to be consistent and objective, definitely impartial, to say the least.

I don't think I missed your point at all, as far as your further clarification of it has illuminated. What I am missing, and perhaps you can help me here, is your motivation for asking the question of a bunch of folks who most likely have entirely different perceptions. I'm just speculating there, because, as far as I know, no one else here has heard both your own system in your own room, and those in your dealer's room. I'd still hazard a guess that the majority of others hear may disagree, certainly on only a verbal description of the components involved (and certainly psychology has everything to do with that since we're all humans). My point is that this stuff is all entirely subjective (psychological, if you want to call it that) and it really is only you that should matter to you in the end. You have nailed the mechanism at play. Bravo. What is so difficult to grasp there? You do seem to be argumentative to me, or at least looking for an argument, because you seem to belabor the same point (beating a dead horse, if you will). You'll get no argument from me that psychology is strongly at play here, and I'd ad that it is far more complex than we can begin to say and as different as our fingerprints in each of us. I can't tell you what your opinions should be, nor can anyone else here; you form them on your own, and for infinitely complex reasons.

So I do try to be consistent and objective, definitely impartial, to say the least.

Where you will get an argument from me is applying the term "objective" to any of your personal observations, no matter how hard you "try". It is not possible. If it is filtered through you, IMO, it becomes a subjective observation. You can use the term "objective" when you start talking about numbers and curves and graphs spit out by machines. As far as I'm concerned, those "objective observations" (by machines) of this gear are only a point of departure, and I would choose to depart and move a vast distance away from them as they've never proven to mean much where real-world (subjective) listening comes into play. In fact, some of the components I like best, SET amps for instance, don't look that great on paper in "objective" terms, but they sure sound great to me when set up well with synergistic components.

For what little it may be worth, I've never been really wowed by impressions at a dealer showroom, either. I've been to some pretty high-end showrooms too. I have been very impressed by other's systems in their homes, most of which were thoughtfully and carefully assembled over many years from some of the very same components I've heard in some of those showrooms. But again, that's all subjective. Your "good, bad, better, best" is entirely different from my "good, bad, better, best." Neither are right or wrong, they're just opinions. Of course psychology is involved, we are humans and not machines. Really, what is your point?

Marco