|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
|
|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
In Reply to: RE: FWIW - I was banned from two forums posted by chocolate_lover9999@yahoo.com on December 19, 2020 at 09:17:25:
Yes, I had a huge passion for Audio Note because I had been auditioning gear from the age of 16 through 26 and when I first auditioned( well second time cause I hated the first time) it basically blew everything away for all those 10 years I was auditioning. So on forums, I basically said that. "I was ready to upgrade my B&W speakers to new B&W speakers and along comes the no-name brand at that time and it blew the B&W's away etc. That blunt talk didn't go over too well with forum posters, especially if they owned gear I was saying stunk in comparison. I lacked tact! I needed to say what I was saying in "reviewer speak" of trying to say what I wanted to say without saying it directly.
So yes they would call me names and send threats because I liked my gear a little too much for them to accept. Plus back then they were a relatively tiny brand and so my mindset was to shout about it a bit more. Prior to that, I was shouting about Reference 3a and Sugden because they too were tiny brands that few people heard about in the late 1990s.
One thing about marketing and self-proclaimed objectivist is that marketing goes in a number of directions.
You have the bias of looks, money, name-brand recognition, and science. Audio makers want to sell a product whether it be a cable maker or Harman Loudspeakers. They are all looking for an angle.
People can be seduced by the cool look and conversation piece of an ESL panel or a tube amplifier. People come to your house and say "wow" is that really a speaker it has no woofer - wow that's so cool. Then the owner gets the joy out of talking about why they're special and better than the boring old box speakers. Is it better? Or is it just some cool technology to take about?
Tube are the same - wow 1930s technology and it sounds good - the owner gets to talk about the superiority of the old and that they don't build em like this anymore.
Then there is the science - my speaker was tested at the NRC and has flat frequency response within 1db and the blind test showed that it beat a 5 times the price Martin Logan so science says this is better. I am smart because my choice cost $800 and everyone who spent $1 more is a fool with more money than brains. Hahaha - I am smart. Self-deluding bias where we have a desire to be smarter than everyone else.
The me-too bias - I buy B&W or ATC because it is used in famous recording studios therefore it must be better.
There is also a non-advertising advertising bias. Rolls Royce, I believe utilized this where they did not need to advertise because "if you want the best you will come to us" so why sully our reputation with the idea of advertising (a kind of begging) for your attention. No, we make the best - you will come to us. If you want second rate junk - buy a Cadilac.
And that is powerful in the sense that it created huge prestige for the brand. For a long time they were seen as the highest-end and highest quality car manufacturer - car guys knew better perhaps - but the general populace held Rolls as the car for the elites.
In the end, it comes down to just trying stuff, and doing a blind level matched listening session won't kill people. When you get these oddball products like AN or other tube makers or funky looking panel speakers, or corporation owned speakers it is actually a good idea to test these products blind and level matched to be sure you're not buying based on their "science" or their "name brand badge" or their "cool looks" or assuming because it's expensive it must be better - or the opposite that it is too expensive so the company must be crooked" - price bias goes both ways.
Lastly, your point about perceived value is another bias. I own the Audio Note AX Two loudspeaker. I also owned the KEF LS-50 and I had both of them for 4 years - I owned the AX Two first and still one them (8 years).
The KEF LS-50 was $1499 and the AX Two was $1,000 and you sit them side by side and the KEF for aesthetics walks all over the AX Two which looks - err - cheap - nice cheap but cheap. The KEF is heavier and uses cool drivers and there are white papers and reviews out the ying-yang for them. I reviewed them and I liked them too! The AX Two is the better sounding speaker - and not just me - but everyone who ever came over to my place - They all liked the KEF at first and they all liked the AX Two when music was played. The KEF has more tech and fancier drivers and materials. It probably measures better too. So it goes.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: FWIW - I was banned from two forums - RGA 12/19/2020:00:08 12/19/20 (1)
- RE: FWIW - I was banned from two forums - audioasylumman 11:46:59 12/20/20 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
