Audiophiles vs DIY-o-philes

Mrtennis,

Expressed in terms of economic principles, the problem is that rapid price inflation at the high end has transformed audio into just another luxury goods market. A luxury goods market (e.g. yachts, exotic cars, art, and high-end real estate in NYC) is typically price inelastic. The higher the price the more sells. Valuation is set by intangible factors such as prestige associated with membership in an exclusive community. Luxury goods manufacturers maximize their profit margin at low volumes of production. So the more money chasing high end audio, the more the market fragments into niche suppliers. Currently it's starting to look like a mere reflection of the gilded age.

It's comforting to believe that valuation is a deeply personal matter, but the subjectivist notion of valuation carries the audio hobby further away from its moorings in performance and musical enjoyment as selection criteria. DIY helps to refocus the hobby on its original value proposition.

i would conjecture that many hands-on hobbyists prefer that route because they believe they can achieve "better" sound by selecting the parts themselves, rather than relying upon the designer's choices. i don't think it's purely an effort to save money.

the subjectivist notion applies also to other collectibles.

there are fads in all hobbys and although most audio components are depreciating assets, in contrast to paintings, and sculpture, for example, some components actually increase in value.

you are accurate in your analysis that most expensive audio components are price inelastic.

where the elasticity increases may be in the lower priced items, say in the $2000 to $5000 range, where the overall demand may be higher. it is in perhaps this range, or some other range where sales of products may be more price sensitive, than products say, in the range $10000 and up.

you are also accurate in your assessment that "expensive" audio gear is just another collectible for many who can afford it.

note, it is possible to design and build your own amplifier and spend thousands of dollars aon parts and labor, which could exceed the cost of another amplifier which may be suitable for one's needs.

the point is do it yourself may be motivated by quality of sound rather than economics, and that the diy hobbyist may be no different than the non diy audiophile.

Components in the "bread basket" of the marketplace(say up to $10K) are good for modifiers, insofar as they can be well engineered while compromised in the parts bin. Sometimes fairly simple parts upgrades can take them to a much higher level.

This is not to say that components above $10K are not compromised. It's just that in the view of most owners, modifying them is tanamount to drawing a moustache on the Mona Lisa.

DIY'ers always say their stuff is superior to the stuff from the mainstream manufacturers. This is very annoying!

Chris

Chris, I distinguish modifiers from general DIYers in this regard. A modifier has the opportunity to start with a stock component & control variables by making small incremental changes. After 10 or so such changes to a component the ear has received an education as a test instrument. The non-DIYer audiophile has only the opportunity to swap whole components. This brings in a wider range of variables between models & manufacturers to complicate comparisons. It is more difficult to evaluate component A relative to component B, than it is to evaluate component A relative to component A with mod B. The modifier is simply extending the R&D of the original designer, freed from the constraints of development cycles & costs.