Quote:
Originally Posted by turretslug
There's some truly risible stuff out there, frequently associated with price tags that are also risible, too but it's a question of degree, proportion, relative sanity.... Many folk here (including me) will wax lyrical about a well-put together piece of vintage kit, even if it has little material effect on the basic functionality. Those who have worked with professional/military kit probably get quite a liking for aerospace/PTFE-type wiring neatly loomed up, expensive and quality connectors, sturdy machined fittings with stainless fasteners and so on- Argus 25's recent post about a beautifully made monochrome monitor provoked the comment that it would likely have worked as well if it had a single SRBP circuit board and a plastic case. Ampex-Kudelski's VPR-5 was a feast in exotic CNC-ery- but the Japanese outsold and eclipsed it with professional developments of video cassette formats using transports made of folded mild steel rather than expensively machined aviation alloy- but it was very precisely folded mild steel and was good enough nearly all the time for a lot less money. Appreciating quality is a Good Thing, but perfectionism is a slippery slope, as some of the audiophool excess proves.
It's a case of staying grounded (!) and learning to apply appropriate value judgement for return on investment- or creeping madness....
|
There is also the borderland with art.
It's possible to make equipment with all soers of looks and styling, it's also possible to make things working in unusual ways. This can be very satisfying, you can do thiinfgs just for the hell of it. Why not? it's a hobby. Some people get their jollies at a weekend by driving a 1920s Bentley to a meet-up, and everyone around looks at them and smiles and takes photographs. If you look at the materials and workmanship, it's far far nicer than a Focus ST. But don't try saying the Bentley gets more MPG, MPH or G than the focus. Then it gets numerical and superiority/inferiority can be proven objectively.
In the same way, the audiophilia companies produce some nice looking stuff, some of which would be fun to have, just for the looks. The problem comes in that looks aren't performance. Mankind's eyes and sense of what looks right is tuned for moving parts and mechanisms. Things which work electrically can often be highly counter-intuitive.
The audiophile stuff looks like some of it could be great fun, if only they didn't blow it all with attempts at justification and explanation.
It is now sufficiently easy to make a great amplifier, with nothing audible which can be blamed on it, that we can play about a bit, just for the fun of it.
The guy doing those expensive cables David EBT linked to says he spent 4 years at Ear Training School. Was that where I went wrong? I did a 4-year BSc, and that involved many hours staring at equations by the blackboardful. My ears only got a workout in one lab session measuring speaker responses and even then I deferred to the opinion of a half-inch B&K capacitor mike.
It's a bit like a Turing test, If you think more effort and money was spent on a product's name and advertising than was spent on developing the product itself, then run away run away very quickly.
David