Why Our Hobby Won't Grow

[marc mc]

TejasRichard, Correct me if I'm wrong. This is not a discussion about listening to music. But how that music is listened too.

If you read my posts you will see that I am only discussing audio gear, not music. My son and daughter listen to music 24/7 and so do their friends. They have thousands and thousands of songs at their finger tips. they probably listen to more music than many on here do. My son has put 80% of my CD's into his I-Tunes library. That is not what I am saying. What I am saying is they don't care about the sound quality of it or equipment that produces it. And correct me if I'm wrong but is that not what an audiphile is? And is that not what the article in the OP is talking about? The future of a generations concern about sound quality, and the gear that plays it, is all I'm talking about.

"What has happened with the MP3 format and other Good Enough technologies is that the qualities we value have simply changed. And the change is so profound that the old measures have almost lost their meaning. Call it the MP3 effect."

Please keep my comments in the right context.

marc mc

 

[mrt2]

I don't know where the idea that everyone had expensive stereos came from, perhaps it was different in other parts of the country than the Midwest where I grew up.

I also started college in 1983 (Purdue University) and got stuck in the freshman dorm like most other engineering nerds. On our floor was about 40 rooms with 2 people per room so 80 guys. It was an eclectic mix of Indiana farmboys and rich kids from the east coast but my BOTL Pioneer separates was the best stereo on the floor. Most other rooms had a boombox or some form of all-in-one POS in them.

After that year I moved into a frat with about 60 guys and the number of non all-in-one POS stereos increased by exactly one. One other guy had a Technics 1200 with a Kenwood amp. There were quite a few fairly affluent guys around and guess what they were buying? If you said Walkmans and Macs give yourself a prize. We had a lot of music lovers, Deadheads, New Agers, Headbangers and every variation on the theme but a decent stereo was rare and a truly good one non-existent.

It was a lot of work moving the stereo stuff and records during every break. I would have loved having an MP3 player, a high power class D amp, and a decent pair of speakers back then.

I went to school on the east coast (Rutgers) and for the two years I lived in the dorm, my system was among the 3 or 4 better systems on the floor, and my system was nothing special. My experience was the same, most people had either Brown Plastic crap all in one systems or cassette boomboxes, though as best I could recall, everybody had something for music. Freshman year, my roomate and I created a hybrid system consisting of his Technics linear tracking TT, Technics receiver, my Sanyo cassette deck and my EPI 100 speakers. Sophomore year, I used my JVC belt drive TT and Sony 30 wpc integrated and vintage Sherwood tuner.

To be honest, if I were a student these days, I would probably leave my big stereo at home, maybe just bring an ipod, headphone amp, and good headphones to school. It would just be so much more simple than back in the day.

 

[TejasRichard]

You are wrong. The very word audiophile means audio lover. The fact that there are so many different things that lovers of gear want from said gear (and the fact that so many of those things are mutually exclusive) precludes any deffinition of audiophile as someone who wants the most faithful rendition of the recording possible. What, exactly, is the difference in someone who prefers an overly warm tone to their system, with rolled off highs, and someone who prefers a compressed pop recording? Both of them are changing the original signal. There is no difference. There is accurate and there is inaccurate, with degrees of fidelity in between. See the long-as-hell discussion on the meaning of the word "accurate" for an example of how convoluted this hobby can get. (and for God's sake, I AM NOT trying to stir THAT particular pot again!) To you (and to me, for that matter) the highest priority is fidelity. I would rather listen to a system that reveals all the warts of a recording, than one that covers up the flaws at the expense of faithfulness. But for many, this is not their stated goal at all. I tried to show this with my examples earlier. While they may not listen in the same way, this does not make them any less audiophiles or any less a part of "our hobby." They just participate in a different fashion. For you to throw them out because their goals do not match your goals is to say your way is the only right way. I don't believe that is what you mean to do, but it is the sum effect of what you are espousing, all the same.

Edit: FWIW, I always try to take your comments in context. What I'm trying to point out to you is that you make an error when you try to seperate audiophiles from music lovers. They are two different paths to the same end, and two different branches of the same hobby. To my mind it is like trying to separate 9-ball players from 8-ball players. They play different games with different rules, but in the end it's all a game of ballls and sticks called billiards.

 

[mrt2]

Waterloo records in Austin normally has a full parking lot 30 min. before they open (especially on Thursdays when the new releases come out). I've never-EVER-been the only one in that store. They have a music section full of NEW vinyl that is as large as some stores entire CD inventory, and a CD section that must be browsed through to be believed. It is staffed solely with music lovers, and is one of the most sought-after jobs in the under 30's workforce here....to the point that I've never seen them have a help-wanted sign out. Not in 6 years of frequenting the store. Look at the new users poll. Fully a third of the new users (last I looked) were under 40. Are there less of us than there are of the over 40 crowd? Sure. There are ALSO less of us in general. There's a reason it was called the baby BOOM. But the very fact that folks like myself and vinyldavid and Sir.Byrd and crackerkorean and vintage-yungin are here is proof that the hobby isn't dying but growing. Are we likely to replace all the boomer's? No, but again, there are a LOT more boomer's to start with. That doesn't mean that, statistically speaking, there will be a smaller population of audio enthusiasts with relation to the population at large. As far as I know, no one has actually done a study of this kind. But i know that my friends and I OFTEN sit down and listen to records. Every time someone gets a new one, the first think we do is shoot emails to each other on how it sounds. And it usually comes out at the very next get-together. Do all of my friends obsess over hifi? Nope. But they all LOVE music. And I still maintain that the views one would get from working in a hifi shop during the 70's would skew one's perspective with relationship to the masses view on sound quality. Sure, lots of good gear was sold, but LOTS of crap was sold also. To make any kind of accurate determination, you'd have to look not only at the goods being sold at dedicated electronics shops, but also at the stuff being sold at the low-end, low-rent, craptastic stores also. I'm willing to bet even money that just as much, if not much more, bad gear was sold. As to whether or not today's audiophiles will buy new gear...I think most of us would if it were cost effective enough. And once we have the financial means, I'm sure many of us will. But where I stand right now, I couldn't even come close to the sound I have now if I tried to spend the same dollars and buy new stuff. Hell, speakers alone would MORE than blow the budget. That does NOT mean I won't buy new EVENTUALLY! Not all of us are hung up on nostalgia...some just want the very best sound we can afford, which often means buying used. When I get some of my debt settled and have a little more income/debt ratio, there are SEVERAL upgrades in my future.

here's another question:
have any of you who have talked to these kids with there ipods tried replacing their ear buds with better 'phones and asking them which ones they prefer? Maybe they don't know what is possible in that area with just a small investment, you know? Hifi doesn't always have to be giant speakers and separates, does it? BTW, I know several folks who don't own any stereo at all, but have nice headphone amps attached to their computers.

I just have a couple of points. Your example of the record store in Austin is also anecdotal. It is great, makes me want to visit Austin, but also anecdotal. Also, it does not necessarily prove the audiophile thing is alive and well. It shows that music lovers still purchase from B & M stores, and that in some corners of the world, the lp is still alive.

Which brings me to my next point. You acknowledge that the younger group isn't buying new high end gear because it is too expensive. Fair enough, but also highlights part of the problem. High end gear needs to be carefully selected, ideally in a friendly, low pressure enviornment. The problem is that the kinds of B & M audio shops that provide this service are closing their doors, one of my favorites closed their doors this spring. By the time you and your friends are ready to buy some new gear, the industry may be just about gone.

In response to your final point, yes, I try to encourage others, young and old to invest in good 2 channel systems, or at least to upgrade the cheap earbuds in favor of good headphones. Sadly, it is not a priority for most, but may be at some point in the future.

 

[marc mc]

While they may not listen in the same way, this does not make them any less audiophiles or any less a part of "our hobby." They just participate in a different fashion. For you to throw them out because their goals do not match your goals is to say your way is the only right way. I don't believe that is what you mean to do, but it is the sum effect of what you are espousing, all the same.

I am not saying that and I would think anyone that did was a prick. I have no standard for anyone elses enjoyment of music at all. As for me having a right way? I don't even have a way. the four systems I run don't go about anything the same way and I use an Ipod on my mountain bike and actually think UFO's "Strangers In The Night" sounds the best on it. :thmbsp:

If you met me you would understand that my comments on the condition of our hobby are in relation to audio stores, new gear sales, afforable giant killers and sound quality. Which got us to the point we are now and which are of no interest to future generations. Thats all I'm saying. Some think this trend can change. And I say that is one debate that will be settled right before our eyes.


marc mc

 

[mrt2]

You are wrong. The very word audiophile means audio lover. The fact that there are so many different things that lovers of gear want from said gear (and the fact that so many of those things are mutually exclusive) precludes any deffinition of audiophile as someone who wants the most faithful rendition of the recording possible. What, exactly, is the difference in someone who prefers an overly warm tone to their system, with rolled off highs, and someone who prefers a compressed pop recording? Both of them are changing the original signal. There is no difference. There is accurate and there is inaccurate, with degrees of fidelity in between. See the long-as-hell discussion on the meaning of the word "accurate" for an example of how convoluted this hobby can get. (and for God's sake, I AM NOT trying to stir THAT particular pot again!) To you (and to me, for that matter) the highest priority is fidelity. I would rather listen to a system that reveals all the warts of a recording, than one that covers up the flaws at the expense of faithfulness. But for many, this is not their stated goal at all. I tried to show this with my examples earlier. While they may not listen in the same way, this does not make them any less audiophiles or any less a part of "our hobby." They just participate in a different fashion. For you to throw them out because their goals do not match your goals is to say your way is the only right way. I don't believe that is what you mean to do, but it is the sum effect of what you are espousing, all the same.

Edit: FWIW, I always try to take your comments in context. What I'm trying to point out to you is that you make an error when you try to seperate audiophiles from music lovers. They are two different paths to the same end, and two different branches of the same hobby. To my mind it is like trying to separate 9-ball players from 8-ball players. They play different games with different rules, but in the end it's all a game of ballls and sticks called billiards.

We can argue about the precise definition of an audiohile but, as Justice Stewart once said, I know it when I see it. It is all a question of priorities. Audiophiles are willing to spend time and/or money to get what they perceive as better sound out of their recordings. Non audiophiles don't care.

The person who runs single ended triodes for that smooth tube sound is an audiophile. The person who trades down from their old floorstanding speakers to bookshelf speakers because they sound better in his listening room is an audiophile. The person who spends big bucks on that mc cart for their SOTA TT is an audiophile. The person who insists on lossless downloads running into a dedicated DAC is an audiophile. The person who buy vintage gear at thrifts and spends many hours restoring electronics and speakers to their former glory is an audiophile.

On the other hand, the person who can't be bothered to find a way to properly set up 2 speakers in a room, and instead stacks one on top of another, or behind the couch is not an audiophile. The person who can otherwise afford it but chooses a cheap, tabletop radio or ipod dock instead of a dedicated stereo is not an audiophile.

 

[merrylander]

Interesting thought for y'all, Yamaha recently came out with a new line of top end stereo equipment - are their marketing people out to lunch?

MP3 compression as I noted earlier was designed to be used with digital TV (mostly based on the MPEG2 standard) - how many TV sets today come with anything resembling high fidelity sound?

Not certain but I believe another manufacturer is coming out with a new stereo line and McIntosh never really quit the scene.

 

[andy]

I'm 31, and 5 years ago, while I was doing my EE thesis on a Tripath digital amplifier, my professor had several undergrads building stereo amplifiers as an independent study project. I think some other students were building speakers. They would be about 25 now, and clearly had an interest in audio.

It may be true that a good stereo is no longer the status symbol is was in the 70's, but I doubt most people back then really cared about it for what we would call the "right" reasons. If they were really audiophiles, then why did so many of them take their systems to Goodwill and replace them with an iPod dock?

 

[mrt2]

It may be true that a good stereo is no longer the status symbol is was in the 70's, but I doubt most people back then really cared about it for what we would call the "right" reasons. If they were really audiophiles, then why did so many of them take their systems to Goodwill and replace them with an iPod dock?

Good question. Whether people bought stereos for the right or wrong reasons, it was, like a color TV, and a refrigerator, a household item just about everybody owned. From the perspective of the enthusiast, it really doesn't matter why people bought, only that the sale of millions of entry level TTs/receivers supported an electronics industry that also made some really fine gear. A good system (at least for the time) was something most middle class people could afford. And with such a large market, the big electronics giants could offer somewhat upscale products for just a little more than the mid line products. These days, the market for decent new audio gear is tiny, so the per unit cost is much higher as boutique brands have taken the place of the big electronic giants.

As for why these folks sold or gave away their old gear, I say this. In 1977, a fortyish middle class person, say a mid level executive or accountant, is looking to replace his aging 60s era console that has died, reads the magazines, asks his friends, and walks into an moderate to upscale audio store, where he probably has a choice of mid level Japanese electronics, Sony, Technics, Pioneer, Kenwood, or maybe something more upscale like Marantz or Harmon Kardon. He is not an audiophile, or he would be looking for Macintosh Separates, just wants decent sound. Settles on a mid/upper level receiver, say Sansui 7070 or 8080 with matching TT and some American made speakers, maybe some Advent, EPI, JBL or Polk. This sets him back maybe 1,200, a decent chunk of change for back then. And this his his stereo for the next 15 -20 years. Maybe he buys a cd player, but that is it. Somewhere around the early/mid 90s, things start to sound a bit scratchy, maybe the woofers on the speakers are deteriorating, and the guy's wife gets on his case. One of those cube systems really would look much nicer and take up a lot less room. So the Sansui goes in the garage/basement for when our hero is working in his workshop, and he doesn't listen much these days anyway, after all, no good music has come out since 1973 anyhow. Now fast forward to 2009. Our hero is now 70 years old and has decided to sell his house and move to a condo. Time to clear out the basement/garage. Haven't listened to that old stereo in over a decade anyway.

 

[marc mc]

Good question. Whether people bought stereos for the right or wrong reasons, it was, like a color TV, and a refrigerator, a household item just about everybody owned. From the perspective of the enthusiast, it really doesn't matter why people bought, only that the sale of millions of entry level TTs/receivers supported an electronics industry that also made some really fine gear. A good system (at least for the time) was something most middle class people could afford. And with such a large market, the big electronics giants could offer somewhat upscale products for just a little more than the mid line products. These days, the market for decent new audio gear is tiny, so the per unit cost is much higher as boutique brands have taken the place of the big electronic giants.

As for why these folks sold or gave away their old gear, I say this. In 1977, a fortyish middle class person, say a mid level executive or accountant, is looking to replace his aging 60s era console that has died, reads the magazines, asks his friends, and walks into an moderate to upscale audio store, where he probably has a choice of mid level Japanese electronics, Sony, Technics, Pioneer, Kenwood, or maybe something more upscale like Marantz or Harmon Kardon. He is not an audiophile, or he would be looking for Macintosh Separates, just wants decent sound. Settles on a mid/upper level receiver, say Sansui 7070 or 8080 with matching TT and some American made speakers, maybe some Advent, EPI, JBL or Polk. This sets him back maybe 1,200, a decent chunk of change for back then. And this his his stereo for the next 15 -20 years. Maybe he buys a cd player, but that is it. Somewhere around the early/mid 90s, things start to sound a bit scratchy, maybe the woofers on the speakers are deteriorating, and the guy's wife gets on his case. One of those cube systems really would look much nicer and take up a lot less room. So the Sansui goes in the garage/basement for when our hero is working in his workshop, and he doesn't listen much these days anyway, after all, no good music has come out since 1973 anyhow. Now fast forward to 2009. Our hero is now 70 years old and has decided to sell his house and move to a condo. Time to clear out the basement/garage. Haven't listened to that old stereo in over a decade anyway.

:thmbsp:

I grabbed a Mac C28/MC 2105 and Thorens 125 MkII off that guy. He had it since new it worked perfectly but had spent the last 2 years in the basement because they had a new HT system. This fella bought that system in the 70's the way a person would buy a couch. The Tannoy 15" Golds in Chestfield cabs did not even get to the basement. He took them straight to the Goodwill.

To this day I swear the reason this 70 year old guy insisted he carry the mint 9090 to my trunk was he thought if I saw how heavy the "damn" thing was, I would want my $5 back. I also imagine his wife looking for it after his garage sale ended, and him saying "don't worry, it's gone"

marc mc

 

[TejasRichard]

mrt2, in my original post i pointed out that all the stories (including my own) were anecdotal evidence. My entire point was that they are both anecdotal, and completely contrasting. The gist one could have drawn from this was that anecdotal evidence is not something to base an entire argument upon.

To those who think the hobby is dying, I again ask:

what is the difference between someone who puts together a system that satisfies their needs and pleases their ears, but is blatantly inaccurate (meaning intentionally less than faithful to the recording, such as speakers which intentionally roll off the highs) and someone who listens to lossy digital transfers? I'm not asking whether or not any of you would like them, or what you think sounds good...i'm asking you to define what the difference is. Because, if one is to take the article as gospel, kids aren't just ambivalent about this, they PREFER the digital sound. In which case this becomes a matter of what sounds better to who. To them, your system and mine, may sound like utter crap.

Andy, I asked the same thing earlier. Apperently, they all developed other priorities and shiftless children.

And, as Rob pointed out, many companies ARE brining out new 2-channel gear. And lots more never really stopped in the first place. Combine this with all of the companies that offer inhome trials with 30 day no obligations test periods, and I begin to see a way around all the worry over the disappearance of B&M stores. Haven't I heard time and again that listening to gear in stores is almost useless? Haven't i been told that the only real way to know if it works for you is to get it into your home and use it with your gear? Well, isn't that what a 30 day trial affords you the opportunity to do? Yes, I am being a bit facetious here, but what I'm really pointing out is that the game is just changing, not going away. Evolution, baby!

And as far as trends are concerned, the young have ALWAYS listened to crap, with a few notable exceptions. Some of the most famous and popular bands in history have put out utter crap on albums (with reguard to recording quality, not content), an example of this is Led Zepplin. Fantastic music....not always the best sound quality, and then took it home and played it on their bsr changer, or panasonic all-in-one combo with am/fm/8track/turntable and optional foot massager. How is that different than buying an mp3 download of a band today? As long as bands care enough to make music and put it out there, people will need equipment to play it on. As long as people are buying equipment, manufacturers are going to produce it. As long as manufacturers are making a product, there will be a group of people who will want the absolute best they can get for their money, and some of them who are willing to spend quite a bit of that money to get it. As far as the current "trends," this is almost blantant sensationalism. Didn't most of your tastes mature and refine as you got older? Hell, i'm only 29 and my tastes have changed substantially since I was 20. The current gen will grow up, and their tastes will mature just like ours did (the oddballs not withstanding). but there's another point right there. There are tons of us youngins right here in this very thread fighting tooth and nail to get you to hear us. We are here! We are the future of this hobby, and I for one, am alive and well. If you want, you may continue to ignore us, but that doesn't change the fact that we are here and there are lots of us.

Lastly, Marc, you said : "I have no standard for anyone elses enjoyment of music at all. As for me having a right way? I don't even have a way." and I believe you mean this. At the same time, in almost every thread I've read that you comment on, you talk about the "way" you were taught about hifi. You have brought it up in the source first vs speaker first thread, this thread, and others. And in all of them, there was a definite indication that you believed there was a right and wrong way to go about things. Once you even said that some people here seemed to have a music hobby not an audio hobby ( I believe this was in the sorce first/speaker first debate) because of their choices they made and the opinions the held with respect to gear. That definetely indicates some kind of hierarchy. I bring this up, not to try to throw anything in your face, but to show you why and where I had come to the conclusions I had, re: your views about audio and audiophiles. Again, not trying to be a prick, or get your goat or anything. Were I ever in canada, and were the offer extended, I would love to have a sitdown over a beer or two and listen to some good music. And that holds true for everyone I've talked to on the forums so far. We all have our differences, but I think we have just as many similarities. It's just that, in this case, we, the younger AK members, ARE the evidence that you are wrong. Will it ever be mainstream again? Probably. These things are cyclical. But more likely is that the hobby will change all together. Holograms aren't too far off, and mutichannel is getting better all the time. It may not be too far in the future that we won't need to close out eyes to see into the soundstage, cause a 3-d image will be there in the room with us. How many during the great depression predicted the rapid growth in consumerism that happened post WWII? We don't know exactly WHAT will happen next, but it is the nature of some humans to always strive for the best. And we take the rest kicking and screaming with us. That is why I say this hobby won't die: because WE won't LET it.

 

[marc mc]

Lastly, Marc, you said : "I have no standard for anyone elses enjoyment of music at all. As for me having a right way? I don't even have a way." and I believe you mean this. At the same time, in almost every thread I've read that you comment on, you talk about the "way" you were taught about hifi. You have brought it up in the source first vs speaker first thread, this thread, and others. And in all of them, there was a definite indication that you believed there was a right and wrong way to go about things. Once you even said that some people here seemed to have a music hobby not an audio hobby ( I believe this was in the sorce first/speaker first debate) because of their choices they made and the opinions the held with respect to gear. That definetely indicates some kind of hierarchy. I bring this up, not to try to throw anything in your face, but to show you why and where I had come to the conclusions I had, re: your views about audio and audiophiles. Again, not trying to be a prick, or get your goat or anything.

My statement about my not having a way was in relationship to enjoyment of music. I mean that in the ways people or myself can enjoy music the options are infinite. I do and will make a distinction when a person is discussing the "way" to the state of the art, or the best way for an "audiophile" to spend their money. The difference is huge. I set my sons system up for him and think it sounds ok, but it is unacceptable to me because the source is sub par. But I didn't say that to him because he's happy, likes it and makes no claims about it. But on an audio site if some guy says that CDP's all sound the same or cartridges are all that matter on a tt. Then yes I have a very different point of view. And have been known to be very passionate about it. And though my systems follow my ideas they all express it in different ways. Not one way and like all things audio they all have advantages and disadvantages, my Ipod included.

marc mc

 

[mrt2]

To those who think the hobby is dying, I again ask:

what is the difference between someone who puts together a system that satisfies their needs and pleases their ears, but is blatantly inaccurate (meaning intentionally less than faithful to the recording, such as speakers which intentionally roll off the highs) and someone who listens to lossy digital transfers? I'm not asking whether or not any of you would like them, or what you think sounds good...i'm asking you to define what the difference is. Because, if one is to take the article as gospel, kids aren't just ambivalent about this, they PREFER the digital sound. In which case this becomes a matter of what sounds better to who. To them, your system and mine, may sound like utter crap.

Personally, I think accuracy is the goal to strive for, and I do not intentionally seek out colored sounding components, though I think there is sometimes a place for it, particularly as pertains speaker/room interactions and overall system synergy.

But that being said, the distinction I would make between those who might seek out colored sounding tube gear and those who listen to lossy mp3s is the former have heard the alternatives and are seeking out their preferred sound, the latter are, mostly indifferent to the sound, taking what is cheapest, even free, or most convenient. Now, if indeed, the mp3 listener has heard all the alternatives and after hearing lossless downloads, cds, sacds, vinyl, and concludes lossy mp3s are either more accurate OR more enjoyable, than I guess there is no distinction.

 

[andy]

It's worth noting that every home theater receiver I've ever seen has a two channel mode. I would put any name brand surround receiver up against a mid level 70's receiver for two channel performance. Most of them are capable of an honest 50-100 WPC in 2 channel mode.

Now, HT in a box is another story, but those are the people who would have has a suitcase stereo in the 70's.

 

[marc mc]

On a lighter note. I have been laughing my ass off for the last bunch of years. there has never been a better time to be an audiophile than right now. If you know what your doing and have a good relationship with a couple of dealers then cripes, it's like fish in a barrel. My main gear from a few years ago is in my garage system
:thmbsp:

marc mc

 

[onepixel]

The sky is falling, the sky is falling...

 

[TejasRichard]

mrt2, But that is exactly what was stated in the article. Those kids, when shown "proper" hifi sound, still preferred the lossy compression. I'm willing to bet that this is similar to the old east-coast/west-coast speaker routine. In the end, it's just what you are used to that you tend to like..until you really start to listen, then you find out what you REALLY like. Some folks just never start to really listen, otherwise everyone would be running their TV's through an amp and speakers. Even cheap bookshelf units would sound better than what comes installed in those flat panel sets :yes: But this has been going on the whole time. I maintain it was happening during the 60's and 70's just as much as today. Nobody has brought forth evidence showing that more folks bought nice stereos than bought crap, which is what would have had to happen for one to say the hobby was healthy then but is dying now: you'd have to prove that the ratio of good stereos to bad was higher then than it is now. very difficult to do, since all the data would have to be extrapolated to account for changes in population demographics...plus it is made even more difficult because so many people ARE buying used. Makes it that much harder to keep up with the data. FWIW, the average car in 1970 was just under 3500 dollars.

Some things to think about:

1970:
average wage= $9400 averagecar= $3450 average house= $23,450

2008:
average wage= $40,423 average car=$27,958 average house= $238,880

this means we make roughly 4 times more per year on average, but must spend 7 times more for the car and 10 times more for the house...again, on average. Gives you a clue as to where some of that discretionary spending money went, eh? BTW all of those numbers are from

http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/70yearsofpricechange.html

to break it down even further...a new car used to cost about 1/3 of your salary. Now it costs more than 2/3s. A house used to cost a little over twice what a person made in a year, now it costs almost 6 times what the average earner makes. What does all that mean? Well, basically, you could buy a middle of the line Marants for $300 dollars in 1970 (model 27). Not many people I know have $2400 to drop on a middle of the line receiver. The money just doesn't stretch that way because our incomes haven't increased at the same rate that prices have. Most of the inflation stats you read about are BS because they don't take into account volatile commodities, like fuel and groceries. I know i rambled a bit, but all i was trying to say was that there are many reasons people spend the way they do. I don't believe for a second it is because they all cared about audio quality in the 70's and suddenly just stopped caring. I don't think there has been any evidence presented to show that our hobby is dying. There has been at least some evidence that newcomers are showing up all the time. I'd say the growing ranks of AK, and the proliferation of audio sites all over the web are evidence of a healthy population of audio enthusiasts. And with all the fresh-faced newbies this site has been attracting lately, it seems like a trend that is likely to continue if you cantankerous old farts don't scare them all away! (KIDDING! I'm sure you all smell fresh as daisies!)

 

[Scuzzer]

Yabbutt, the average car and house of today are not equivalent to the average car and house of the 70's. Inflation stats do take into account fuel and groceries and by and large just about every commodity is cheaper now than 40 years ago. You also do not have to spend $2400 to get the same performance as a model 27 Marantz today.

 

[TejasRichard]

Scuzzer, a quick search revealed this:


"Usual exclusions are food and energy (F&E) argued on the basis of their undue volatility."

from a white paper by Mick Silver on core inflation.

his creds:

"Mick Silver is Professor of Business Statistics and Head of the Quantitative Methods Group at Cardiff University. He has recently returned from a sabbatical as a Senior Research Fellow at the US Bureau of Labor Statistics and consultant at the International Monetary Fund, Washington DC. He has published extensively in the academic literature on issues relating to price level measurement, including recent papers in the Economic Journal and the Journal of Political Economy. He is also responsible for a text on Business Statistics (McGraw-Hill, 1999). He works closely with governmental statistical agencies including the UK Office for National Statistics and intergovernmental agencies such as the IMF, UN, ILO and World Bank in developing methodologies for better price statistics."

And while it can definetely be argued that the quality of the bottom level of electronics has come up considerably in the last 30 years, I would disagree with you about the quality of the average home. Having worked closely with the housing sector for over 10 years now (land surveyor), i have seen a fair number of houses in a broad range of neighborhoods and from a broad age range. Housing quality in general seems to have been in decline since the late 80's, and with in the last 10 years I have seen a marked and rapid loss in quality of both materials and construction. The only area I will grant superiority in would be energy efficiency.
Many of the cheaper commodities you speak of are also cheaply made, and aren't likely to have the lifespan of their pre-planned obsolescense counterparts. To get the same value in build quality as well as performance, how much do you have to spend?

 

[merrylander]

My first system was mono, a David Bogen DB-10 amplifier, a Rek-O-Kut KH-33 TT with a Livingstone transcription arm, GE Variable reluctance cartridge and a 12" wide range corner bass reflex. I knew it was not great but it was all I could afford.

Over the years various bits got upgraded, at one point I even designed and built my own FM tuner and UltraLinear PP amp, the pre was an Eico kit.

Now pretty near everything is TOTL vintage Yamaha except that I do run a couple of Pioneer TTs, the PL88FS and the PL44FS simply because there is no room for the ordinary type of TT.

Almost all of it was non-working equipment brought back from the grave just for the hell of it - and to keep it out of the landfill.