|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
|
|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
In Reply to: RE: It ain't just a claim. posted by 4everyoung on November 7, 2017 at 20:06:43:
> > That's an old Yamaha CA-1010 integrated amp. Probably the best $400 I've spent in a very long time. Highly recommended if you can find one in decent condition. < <
That is exactly one of the points I have been trying to make. In most areas, "newer" = "better". Would you trade the TV you watch today for a 1952 17" round B&W CRT? Probably not. Would you trade your current kitchen range for a wood-fired stove? Probably not. Would you trade what ever car you are currently driving for a 1910 Oldsmobile? Probably not (except for collector's value!).
But there are other areas where we seem to have gone backwards.
Look at musical instruments - whether it is electric guitar, acoustic guitar, or classical violin, is there any doubt that the older instruments are superior to the new ones?
When it comes to audio reproduction, it seems as if many of the "advances" were actually going backwards with regards to quality. For example, from tubes to transistors. Or from transistors to ICs. Or from analog to digital.
My goal in audio has always been to understand *why* the old was better than the new. Then to use the advantages of both to create something new that is *truly* superior.
So when Sue finds a 40-year old transistor amplifier to be more musically satisfying than the currently available products, it is a stark reminder of how far backwards audio quality has gone, at least in many ways.
My take is that the "good enough" has improved a lot. Look at car stereos. For decades there was an entire industry built around after-market car stereos, as anything that came in a car (where every penny counts) was complete crap. (Think AM-only transistor radio with a single 6"x9" in the dashboard.) The first thing people would do was replace the stock car audio system with the an after-market upgrade. When the car makers finally figured out how much money they were leaving on the table, they started making everything proprietary and impossible to replace.
If you look at Harman (before they were bought by Samsung, just this year), they had over 100 audio brands in every field imaginable, from microphones to speakers/headphones and everything in between. They were doing $6 billion in annual sales - and a full half of that money came from OEM car stereos!
Why?
Because that is where there is a *guaranteed* churn. A car *will* wear out and require replacement. When the customer replaces the car, they automatically replace the sound system.
How many people keep their car for more than 5 or 10 years? Not many, I suspect. How many replace their stereo every 5 or 10 years? Nobody but us audiophiles...
Hence MQA's strategy to conquer the audiophile market first. Then their plan was to become "mainstream" so that everybody could pay royalties to MQA. Sorry, Bob. Too bad, so sad.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Exactly my point - Charles Hansen 11/7/1723:16:55 11/7/17 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]