• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

It's not just stereos that the kids don't want.

One thing that hasn't really been touched upon in any depth is the style of said brown furniture. When my grandmother passed, she didn't really have any furniture that was stylish to me, so I really wasn't interested. She had a greenish colored French provincial bedroom set. Another set was a Mediterranean/Moroccan style, again not interested. The couches and chair were a green velour fabric and the cushions we're all stiff and dried out. She did have an interesting art deco bedroom set, but my dad wanted it. The console stereo was a solid state Magnavox in that Mediterranean style too.

Had she and my grandfather been into mid century modern/Scandinavian furniture and tube consoles I would have wanted some of it. It is what it is. I don't expect that my daughter will be into my current style in 30-40 years when I go. If she doesn't want any of my stuff it doesn't really matter because I'll be dead anyway. It will be her choice how to remember me, not mine.
 
Last edited:
bluesky: "Free" is relative - i.e. free to grab doesn't equal free to own, and if one only needs to pay for the storage space. And as long as people tend to move to city areas for the better job situaton and infrastructure, we'll still have a rising number of people with smaller places than the places of their parents (on average, at least). In addition people still tend to live longer, so more and more people already own practically anything they need or would like to have (within their means), before they could inherit anything useful or nice. Hence we can still expect a rising number of people, who might love to grab more of their parents' stuff, if only they had the space for it - and enough money to get sufficient time to at least pick out the goodies.

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini
 
I doubt anyone would care for Moorish furniture, I guess that is why these were donated to the local thrift stores. If my children don't want these what is a parent to do?
Honestly I didn't care for the cabinets that much, they don't go with my American renaissance antiques well, but I was attracted to those green horns.


hqdefault.jpg
 
PAGS said:
Hmm...:idea: I only mentioned that I thought Tom's comment was funny. I too found this thread interesting.

Frankly, I don't take any of this stuff seriously. It's just banter on the internet.
Click to expand...
Proud baboon! He took the time to inbox me and tell me I was getting put on ignore. :blah::blah::blah:
 
I have 2 green leather office chairs, reputedly made in 1926. They belonged to Maj. George Leonard Berry, who was the head knocker in the Printing pressmen's Union, 1907 til he died in 1948. The arms could be re-upholstered, but that's about all they really need. The story has come down thru the years that the Major paid $260 apiece for them. There were 3, but the last one I dunno WHAT became of it. The leather is VERY thick, & if they get halfway decent care, I see no reason they shouldn't still be here in ANOTHER 90-100 years. SOME chilluns pay attention to quality from a different age-That is one of the things I've tried hard to make sure Miss Bethany UNDERSTANDS a little about it.
 
Sandy G said:
I have 2 green leather office chairs, reputedly made in 1926. They belonged to Maj. George Leonard Berry, who was the head knocker in the Printing pressmen's Union, 1907 til he died in 1948. The arms could be re-upholstered, but that's about all they really need. The story has come down thru the years that the Major paid $260 apiece for them. There were 3, but the last one I dunno WHAT became of it. The leather is VERY thick, & if they get halfway decent care, I see no reason they shouldn't still be here in ANOTHER 90-100 years. SOME chilluns pay attention to quality from a different age-That is one of the things I've tried hard to make sure Miss Bethany UNDERSTANDS a little about it.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. I have a leather and wood desk chair from the late 1940s. The chair has nice individually wrapped coil springs in the seat and the leather still does not look worn. I've had numerous office chairs over the years and all have failed within 7-10 years: Girschberger, Herman-Miller Aeron, Steelcase, and Bodybilt are all junk by comparison. I'd hate to see the longevity of inexpensive desk chairs.
 
Alobar said:
Somewhere late in our evolution of the industrial revolution it was determined there is no money in making things that last.
Click to expand...

It's a good way to put yourself out of business, if your products are too durable. I used to know a long-time sewing machine sales and repair guy. He said that back in the early-mid 1960s, when Singer almost went bankrupt, that they sent a memo around trying to push salesmen to get people to trade in their old, all-steel machines for new ones with more built-in features but a lot of plastic internal gears. When the stores got the old, indestructible machines, they were to take them out back and smash them with a sledgehammer for a credit from Singer. The company was going bankrupt because it's hard to sell many new sewing machines when Grandma's 100 year old machine, even after seeing near-daily use, still worked just fine.
 
Question also always is to whose standards something should be built to last - and how much maintenance it's allowed to require to actually last as well as how much abuse the particular consumer expects it to stand. So "built to last" can be pretty relative - also regarding the span of time one might have in mind. I.e., for example, for one consumer a computer might only need to last a few years at best, before he'll exchange it anyway, for the next one, who doesn't always need the most recent and fastest hardware and is more of an average user, the computer should already last a few years longer - and the next one might be into vintage computing and hence wish his computers to last at least until he someday might completely lose his interest in these...

Or one could also look at it that way: If I only had the choice of products that are built to last to the toughest standards I could imagine, there'd be quite a lot of stuff I could have never afforded.

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini
 
There are a few different ways products are not made to last. Of course there is furniture etc, and how stuff made from press board etc these days in place of clear fir or better. . Looks fine in the furniture store but it is widely known it will not last a quarter as long.

Then there are digital products. Companies like Nikon were on the ropes because their film cameras would go on forever. New Nikons are amazingly technical, but likely won't be worth very much in just a few years due to the next better models. .these products depreciate something terrible but camera makers have a new lease on life thanks to the digital age.
 
Some of it is innocuous and not nefarious. Most computer components aren't made to last for decades because changing technology makes things obsolete so quickly. Likewise, most stuff made to a price point or a warranty term is manufactured so that a certain percentage of components will survive to whatever amount of use the manufacturer deems appropriate. Modern computer modeling makes it much easier to compute the strength of components for such purposes, where in the past a certain degree of overconstruction is necessary - which also caused higher costs. I have a fan that's almost 110 years old and the motor works fine, even if the whole thing looks like it sat in a swamp for half of that time. But in equivalent purchasing dollars, that fan cost about as much as the outdoor unit on my whole-house air conditioner (which is almost 40 years old and still works, after a good repair guy figured out why the wiring kept lunching my compressor motors).
 
Alobar said:
Somewhere late in our evolution of the industrial revolution it was determined there is no money in making things that last.
Click to expand...
Ummm well obviously you forgot the days of Vacuum Tube Televisions , Cars that required tune ups every 5,000 miles and other things that back in the golden days were repair man money sinks.

Frannie
 
buglegirl said:
Ummm well obviously you forgot the days of Vacuum Tube Televisions , Cars that required tune ups every 5,000 miles and other things that back in the golden days were repair man money sinks.

Frannie
Click to expand...
No, not at all. I own a 1965 Chevy truck and I am able to keep it running indefinitely. I also own a 2006 Chevy pickup and there could be a time when its more complex components will be difficult or impossible to find anymore. Of course the 06 will outlast the 65 in highway miles between rebuilds, but will it be on the road in 50 years?
My 65:
Capture.JPG
 
Alobar said:
No, not at all. I own a 1965 Chevy truck and I am able to keep it running indefinitely. I also own a 2006 Chevy pickup and there could be a time when its more complex components will be difficult or impossible to find anymore. Of course the 06 will outlast the 65 in highway miles between rebuilds, but will it be on the road in 50 years?
My 65:
View attachment 948701
Click to expand...
And how many 65 Chevy Pickups still exist that rolled off the assembly line in 1964/1965 ??

And how many that still exist would you drive coast to coast in ??

Heck to be fair don't find a niche vehicle. How many automobiles in total from 1965 are still in regular use. And further how many of those cars would be running still without skills to maintain them. You know us mere mortals who can't rebuild a carburetor or adjust points etc ??

The main point is I could buy a 2017 Chevy pickup and other than changing oil drive it 60,000 miles before needing anything. Was that true with that 1965 pickup back in the day ?? And the fact that you can work on something or not is missing the point. Things are more reliable now in terms of not needing maintenance.

And I am sure you have a 1965 Television as well ?? Wanna maintain a 50 year old TV over buying a new one every 5 years or so. Do you want to go back to pulling all the tubes and going to local drug store every time the picture started going weird ??

Frannie
 
Last edited:
buglegirl said:
Heck to be fair don't find a niche vehicle. How many automobiles in total from 1965 are still in regular use. And further how many of those cars would be running still without skills to maintain them. You know us mere mortals who can't rebuild a carburetor or adjust points etc ??

The main point is I could buy a 2017 Chevy pickup and other than changing oil drive it 60,000 miles before needing anything. Was that true with that 1965 pickup back in the day ?? And the fact that you can work on something or not is missing the point. Things are more reliable now in terms of not needing maintenance.
Click to expand...

There are valid points to the argument for "it needs more regular maintenance, but said maintenance is easier and cheaper" and for "it doesn't need as much maintenance, but some parts may become obsolete more quickly, rendering the whole vehicle useless."
 
Sam Cogley said:
There are valid points to the argument for "it needs more regular maintenance, but said maintenance is easier and cheaper" and for "it doesn't need as much maintenance, but some parts may become obsolete more quickly, rendering the whole vehicle useless."
Click to expand...
No doubt about that. But do we want to maintain more or less ?? Most of us would rather not be fixing stuff all the time as we have other annoyances enough in life.

And I love vacuum tube equipment myself , vinyl records and what not. But I am not going to brow beat some kid listening on a Ipod about how his device is crap because he needs to change it every couple years. Tell him my 50 year old Turntable and 50 year old Fisher Receiver is better made than his throw away crap. The kid will fire back at me well in the time it takes you to clean and cue a record I am a few songs ahead of you.

Frannie
 
buglegirl said:
And how many 65 Chevy Pickups still exist that rolled off the assembly line in 1964/1965 ??

And how many that still exist would you drive coast to coast in ??

Heck to be fair don't find a niche vehicle. How many automobiles in total from 1965 are still in regular use. And further how many of those cars would be running still without skills to maintain them. You know us mere mortals who can't rebuild a carburetor or adjust points etc ??

The main point is I could buy a 2017 Chevy pickup and other than changing oil drive it 60,000 miles before needing anything. Was that true with that 1965 pickup back in the day ?? And the fact that you can work on something or not is missing the point. Things are more reliable now in terms of not needing maintenance.

And I am sure you have a 1965 Television as well ?? Wanna maintain a 50 year old TV over buying a new one every 5 years or so. Do you want to go back to pulling all the tubes and going to local drug store every time the picture started going weird ??

Frannie
Click to expand...
Well sure, people don't want to still drive around in a 63 Plymouth Valiant, but have you seen the pictures from Cuba and how those old cars from the 50's are still on the road? If they had to deal with todays hi tech I doubt Castro could have held out so long!

I get your point. I barely use my 65 anymore except to launch the boat at the landing about a quarter mile drive away. It drives more like a piece of farm machinery than a truck. My 06, has a camper on it, and we take it camping to very remote spots often well over 1000 miles away, with complete confidence. However my point is a bit different and I don't think I made it well to begin with. There are parts on the new vehicles (black boxes for one example) that when they fail could be very difficult to track down and replace. Very little mechanical on my 65 that I can't go to Napa and get and bolt on today. Newer vehicles are better no doubt, but not in some ways when talking longevity. As they age they are meant by design to be replaced, melted down to make new vehicles or whatever. Their complexity alone at some point precludes them from being worth fixing. This will become especially true as the newest crop of cars and trucks, bristling with todays technology and umpteen millions of lines of code will start to fail and be simply too complex and expensive to fix.

Nope, 50 years in the future there wont be nearly so many cars (IMO) made today on the road as there are 50 year old cars now. It is the built in obsolescence factor that causes that, that saved companies like Nikon, and possibly Detroit's big 3 to a lesser extent. Even the car dealerships know this, positioning the new car salesmen between the front door and the parts and service departments.!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom