System psychology, or just psyched out?

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

Audio_obsessed_novic, have you thought that perhaps you are predisposed to preferring your system to the mega buck systems just because it is so cheap. Perhaps, the pride of owning something so cheap that out performs mega buck systems has altered your perceptions.

I doubt that music reproduction is quite as subjective as this thread suggests, and that most of us could broadly rank audio systems in ability to recreate something akin to live performances as we remember them. One can argue that is the ultimate goal of an audio system.

Taste is acquired to be sure. An early study by RCA labs, before "HIFI" was introduced to the public at large, found that most of the study group preferred to hear music without extended frequency range, especially high frequencies, rather than a more faithful representation of the origianl. Those preferences may or may not have changed over the years.

Like Chanliz, I read OP with interest until he noted how he preferred the sound of his system to sound of expensive systems he had heard at a dealer, then I dropped out. The word troll came to mind.

db

This is a joke, right? Your simply looking for what, someone to support your own opinion?

Well ha, ha, ha.

OK, now the best I can do is say clearly sound quality is not important to you. That is fine, even great, you have bliss for free! My mom loves he Bose wave radio and car stereo, to her it sounds great and she loves to enjoy her music on it. I do not try and convince her she is right or wrong.

Clearly she has different expectations from a stereo than me. That is fine, but I would not think it makes sense for her to hang out at Audiogon. What is the purpose posting at an audio web site?

Actually I do not even understand why you go into an audio shop with $100,000 systems. What do you get from it? If somehow you interpret this as psychological then you should go to a psychology web site and discuss your theory, you might be on the edge of a major break through.

If you do truly want to find a better system, then you have a very long way to go. If this post is for real, I suggest this is not the level of audio you are looking for, it just doesn't matter to you. That's great

gentlemen:

if you truly enjoy music, you can enjoy it when the source is a personal stereo purchased at circuit city or best buy or when listening to an expensive stereo system. the music is the same, but the sound quality varies.

audio obsessed, do you care about sound quality, or is it the music that counts ?

any stereo system can be evaluated objectively and subjectively. perception and taste matter.

if you have feelings of insecurity about the sound of your stereo system, have an open mind and listen to a variety, from an audio dealer, to friend's and acquaintances. then, decide what is quality and what isn't. at that point, you will be able to make an intelligent decision as to upgrading, or keeping what you have.