Naim Vertical Form - Active Speakers???

[philipjohnwright]

I'm afraid I'm with the naysayers on this one, based purely on its price. Naim make very good equipment and I'm happy with the concept of premium pricing for a premium product. There is a limit though, and $200,000 is frankly way past it, whether it's Naim or any other manufacturer.

Put it into context, the same money buys you a brand spanking new Bentley. That is a premium product at a premium price but you can at least see where the cost comes from. Significant investment in R&D, a complex supply chain, high material costs, lots (compared to audio) of clever engineering etc etc.

Ultimately if people want to spend that much on hifi (of any flavour) then it's their money. Those defending the ultra high end are often those bemoaning the lack of credibility that hi fi has these days though - it's not cool like it was in the 60's etc. No chance of returning to that position if we keep going in this direction.

All of which is said with a twinge of sadness, not anger. And I'd quite happily live with Naim kit so I'm not bashing them per se. I just wish someone would lead by example. Yes I know, naive!

Edit - add Light Harmonic's new $120,000 DAC to the argument so that it doesn't become an anti-Naim tirade.

 

[spiny norman]

Or, indeed, for about the last three years.

Italian Admiral: But, Señora Perón, it's an easy mistake. I'm still called an admiral, though I gave up the sea long ago.

 

[manicm]

I'm afraid I'm with the naysayers on this one, based purely on its price. Naim make very good equipment and I'm happy with the concept of premium pricing for a premium product. There is a limit though, and $200,000 is frankly way past it, whether it's Naim or any other manufacturer.

Put it into context, the same money buys you a brand spanking new Bentley. That is a premium product at a premium price but you can at least see where the cost comes from. Significant investment in R&D, a complex supply chain, high material costs, lots (compared to audio) of clever engineering etc etc.

Ultimately if people want to spend that much on hifi (of any flavour) then it's their money. Those defending the ultra high end are often those bemoaning the lack of credibility that hi fi has these days though - it's not cool like it was in the 60's etc. No chance of returning to that position if we keep going in this direction.

All of which is said with a twinge of sadness, not anger. And I'd quite happily live with Naim kit so I'm not bashing them per se. I just wish someone would lead by example. Yes I know, naive!

Edit - add Light Harmonic's new $120,000 DAC to the argument so that it doesn't become an anti-Naim tirade.

Cars depreciate, become unreliable, become a maintenance burden - yes such people are insanely wealthy but kudos to them if they see more value in hifi than a modern Bentley. Not saying you have to spend even a fraction of such a ludicrous sum, but a really good hifi can be really inspiring, and such pleasure is very rare indeed, apart from male to female contact of-course

 

[Ajani]

I'm afraid I'm with the naysayers on this one, based purely on its price. Naim make very good equipment and I'm happy with the concept of premium pricing for a premium product. There is a limit though, and $200,000 is frankly way past it, whether it's Naim or any other manufacturer.

Put it into context, the same money buys you a brand spanking new Bentley. That is a premium product at a premium price but you can at least see where the cost comes from. Significant investment in R&D, a complex supply chain, high material costs, lots (compared to audio) of clever engineering etc etc.

Ultimately if people want to spend that much on hifi (of any flavour) then it's their money. Those defending the ultra high end are often those bemoaning the lack of credibility that hi fi has these days though - it's not cool like it was in the 60's etc. No chance of returning to that position if we keep going in this direction.

All of which is said with a twinge of sadness, not anger. And I'd quite happily live with Naim kit so I'm not bashing them per se. I just wish someone would lead by example. Yes I know, naive!

Edit - add Light Harmonic's new $120,000 DAC to the argument so that it doesn't become an anti-Naim tirade.

I respectfully disagree...

I think people blame the general lack of interest in HiFi on all the wrong things... I don't think very expensive statement products have much (if anything) to do with the lowered interest in HiFi compared to the 60s.

What's happened to HiFi is the same thing that happened to radio and newspapers and later watching music videos on TV... Newer technology captures the public's imagination. HiFi will never return to the "Golden Age" simply because there are too many more advanced alternatives for the general public.

Why would young persons get subscriptions to newspapers and magazines when they can read all the same info, at their convenience, online? Why listen to the radio when you could watch a music video on TV? Which evolved to: why wait around in the hopes of seeing a music video you like on TV, when you can instantly stream any video you want on Youtube? Tech changes and so too does the tastes of the general public.

The thought of listening in a dimly lit room to the intricate details of the music and imagining the singer is in front of you on a stage is far too old school for many persons... Why not just watch a concert on your 60" HDTV? No need to close your eyes and imagine the singer, since now you can see him/her...

 

[Vladimir]

Here is a tip for everyone looking for VFM in this hugely expensive amp.

They naimed it the S T A T E M E N T.

 

[manicm]

I'm afraid I'm with the naysayers on this one, based purely on its price. Naim make very good equipment and I'm happy with the concept of premium pricing for a premium product. There is a limit though, and $200,000 is frankly way past it, whether it's Naim or any other manufacturer.

Put it into context, the same money buys you a brand spanking new Bentley. That is a premium product at a premium price but you can at least see where the cost comes from. Significant investment in R&D, a complex supply chain, high material costs, lots (compared to audio) of clever engineering etc etc.

Ultimately if people want to spend that much on hifi (of any flavour) then it's their money. Those defending the ultra high end are often those bemoaning the lack of credibility that hi fi has these days though - it's not cool like it was in the 60's etc. No chance of returning to that position if we keep going in this direction.

All of which is said with a twinge of sadness, not anger. And I'd quite happily live with Naim kit so I'm not bashing them per se. I just wish someone would lead by example. Yes I know, naive!

Edit - add Light Harmonic's new $120,000 DAC to the argument so that it doesn't become an anti-Naim tirade.

I respectfully disagree...

I think people blame the general lack of interest in HiFi on all the wrong things... I don't think very expensive statement products have much (if anything) to do with the lowered interest in HiFi compared to the 60s.

What's happened to HiFi is the same thing that happened to radio and newspapers and later watching music videos on TV... Newer technology captures the public's imagination. HiFi will never return to the "Golden Age" simply because there are too many more advanced alternatives for the general public.

Why would young persons get subscriptions to newspapers and magazines when they can read all the same info, at their convenience, online? Why listen to the radio when you could watch a music video on TV? Which evolved to: why wait around in the hopes of seeing a music video you like on TV, when you can instantly stream any video you want on Youtube? Tech changes and so too does the tastes of the general public.

The thought of listening in a dimly lit room to the intricate details of the music and imagining the singer is in front of you on a stage is far too old school for many persons... Why not just watch a concert on your 60" HDTV? No need to close your eyes and imagine the singer, since now you can see him/her...

Old school for who??? And your spotty teenage kid will soon demand a turntable. Some don't want to watch a concert on a TV because it's simply not the same as pure audio listening. And are there video concerts of all your favourite albums?? Yeah, thought not. It's important to seperate the wheat from the chaff, genuine progress from flavour-of-the-hour.

 

[chebby]

What's happened to HiFi is the same thing that happened to radio...

You mean like how you can now listen to it on FM, AM, DAB, Freeview and the Internet? Or how you can stream it to any number of devices including smartphones and tablets? And use iPlayer for catch-up services, listening in real time and podcasts?

Or did you mean it was like radio inasmuch as 47.7 million listen to it every week (90 percent of UK population aged 15+) for an average of 21.7 hours per listener per week. (Source RAJAR Q3 2013.)

Or maybe you meant it was like the way in which tens of thousands of internet radio stations from all over the globe can now be heard clearly even when you are out-and-about and just using a small phone and some earbuds. (Unlike the 'Golden Age' when a receiver the size of a suitcase was required to pull in distant stations with the aid of an antenna twice the height of the average house!)

I think you picked the wrong medium for an example of something that has declined from it's 'Golden Age'.

 

[steve_1979]

You mean like how you can now listen to it on FM, AM, DAB, Freeview and the Internet? Or how you can stream it to any number of devices including smartphones and tablets? And use iPlayer for catch-up services, listening in real time and podcasts?

Or did you mean it was like radio inasmuch as 47.7 million listen to it every week (90 percent of UK population aged 15+) for an average of 21.7 hours per listener per week. (Source RAJAR Q3 2013.)

Or maybe you meant it was like the way in which tens of thousands of internet radio stations from all over the globe can now be heard clearly even when you are out-and-about and just using a small phone and some earbuds. (Unlike the 'Golden Age' when a receiver the size of a suitcase was required to pull in distant stations with the aid of an antenna twice the height of the average house!)

I think you picked the wrong medium for an example of something that has declined from it's 'Golden Age'.

Very interesting post Chebby. It really puts into perspective how far modern radio technology has come.

Many people here seem to think that the 'Golden Age' of hifi has passed because few people buy record players any more and plug them into of big square ugly hifi boxes which sit on a hifi rack. Hifi is still alive and kicking though but it's just evolved into new (and IMO) much better forms such as the one described above.

 

[manicm]

Not really, it puts in perspective how far the humble cellphone has come - it can do all of the above and fits (mostly) in the palm of your hand. The cellphone is the new hifi, and it makes phone calls too.

And for that you can thank Apple, loathe or love them - and this is straight from the horses mouth - Google's Eric Schmidt recently admitted that 6 years ago he started his mobile hardware design from scratch when the iPhone was revealed.

 

[manicm]

Very interesting post Chebby. It really puts into perspective how far modern radio technology has come.

Many people here seem to think that the 'Golden Age' of hifi has passed because few people buy record players any more and plug them into of big square ugly hifi boxes which sit on a hifi rack. Hifi is still alive and kicking though but it's just evolved into new (and IMO) much better forms such as the one described above.

Not so fast, althought WHF revealed declining figures, CD sales are still extremely strong. So traditional hifi lives on in rude health.

 

[Richard Allen]

Not really, it puts in perspective how far the humble cellphone has come - it can do all of the above and fits (mostly) in the palm of your hand. The cellphone is the new hifi, and it makes phone calls too.

Mine does all that. Plays up when I want to make a phone call tho. Spose I'll have to download an app to be able to do that. :rofl:

 

[chebby]

Not so fast, althought WHF revealed declining figures, CD sales are still extremely strong. So traditional hifi lives on in rude health.

CD sales are very strong in my house too. I just don't play them.

My purchase of CDs has gone up dramatically since I stopped playing them. (About 3 years ago.)

So you can't directly link sales of the disks to the use of CD players.

 

[Alec]

Not really, it puts in perspective how far the humble cellphone has come - it can do all of the above and fits (mostly) in the palm of your hand. The cellphone is the new hifi, and it makes phone calls too.

Mine does all that. Plays up when I want to make a phone call tho. Spose I'll have to download an app to be able to do that. :rofl:

My mobile actually has a phone app. I was beside myself upon making this discovery.

And no, Manic, there's much more to the progress of radio then MP3 players and, if you don't think so, you need to read Chebby's post again.

On th eother hand, I would like them to stop messing with certain programmes, and would like DAB to actually live up to its reputation a little better (I can't actually get some stations I should be able to), and I can't get all the stations on Freesat that I can on my DAB radio which is a shame.

But then 90% or more of my listening is 5 Live (which I was on recently. I don't feel I've milked that enough in these parts...).

 

[John Duncan]

But then 90% or more of my listening is 5 Live (which I was on recently. I don't feel I've milked that enough in these parts...).

oooookkkkkaaaaayyyyyyy. Why were you on Five Live recently?

 

[Alec]

Talking about the first episode of the new series of Sherlock. I said very little in the event; they should just have read my texts.

 

[John Duncan]

Talking about the first episode of the new series of Sherlock. I said very little in the event; they should just have read my texts.

Were they funnier?

 

[Alec]

Alas, no, I don't think so. Just more expansive.

 

[JMacMan]

Well hey, if they trickle down the technology to the lesser amps then I'm all for it. At least, unlike the Linn DS at the start, this isn't an incomplete experiment they're charging customers for.

Well this is it. Firstly, it might be absolutely stunning, maybe even a gamechanger as far as accurate reproduction is concerned - we don't know, we've not heard it!

Secondly, most people forget that much of the technology and design aspects of their existing system came from high end products.

It's a standard thing though nowadays though isn't it - keyboard warriors at the ready to slag off anything new (despite not having, and probably never going to have, first hand experience of).

Good luck to Naim in their latest commercial enterprise, and I'm sure they'll have done their market research and identified a niche where they want a slice of the action.

However, on sonic grounds/claims....

Once you've made an amp transparent to the source - i.e. residual noise and distortion is below the level of audibility, and it provides sufficient current to driver the electric motor that is the voice coil of your loudspeaker, how do you improve it to make it a 'gamechanger' in terms of 'accurate' reproduction?

From a purely engineering POV, It's just doing it's job the same as any other competent amplifier - that straight wire with gain thing - nothing added, nothing taken away.

All else is individual subjective perception and marketing hyperbole.

It might(?) sound slightly, and I do mean slightly, as in the most subtle nuance, different to other equally competent solid state amps, but if you feel it is likely to be audibly different, let alone whether one could determine it to be better or worse in comparison to other equally competent amps, and in the context of a blind AB matched level test, or even better, blind, matched level ABX test, I await the results....

Of course, one could always avoid all of that and simply submit it to Richard Clarks amp test challenge, and see if you can win the $10,000.00 prize...

http://www.tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

This is but one example where necessary marketing hype and subjective claims, meet objective reality.

Kind Regards

JMac...

 

[Ajani]

I'm afraid I'm with the naysayers on this one, based purely on its price. Naim make very good equipment and I'm happy with the concept of premium pricing for a premium product. There is a limit though, and $200,000 is frankly way past it, whether it's Naim or any other manufacturer.

Put it into context, the same money buys you a brand spanking new Bentley. That is a premium product at a premium price but you can at least see where the cost comes from. Significant investment in R&D, a complex supply chain, high material costs, lots (compared to audio) of clever engineering etc etc.

Ultimately if people want to spend that much on hifi (of any flavour) then it's their money. Those defending the ultra high end are often those bemoaning the lack of credibility that hi fi has these days though - it's not cool like it was in the 60's etc. No chance of returning to that position if we keep going in this direction.

All of which is said with a twinge of sadness, not anger. And I'd quite happily live with Naim kit so I'm not bashing them per se. I just wish someone would lead by example. Yes I know, naive!

Edit - add Light Harmonic's new $120,000 DAC to the argument so that it doesn't become an anti-Naim tirade.

I respectfully disagree...

I think people blame the general lack of interest in HiFi on all the wrong things... I don't think very expensive statement products have much (if anything) to do with the lowered interest in HiFi compared to the 60s.

What's happened to HiFi is the same thing that happened to radio and newspapers and later watching music videos on TV... Newer technology captures the public's imagination. HiFi will never return to the "Golden Age" simply because there are too many more advanced alternatives for the general public.

Why would young persons get subscriptions to newspapers and magazines when they can read all the same info, at their convenience, online? Why listen to the radio when you could watch a music video on TV? Which evolved to: why wait around in the hopes of seeing a music video you like on TV, when you can instantly stream any video you want on Youtube? Tech changes and so too does the tastes of the general public.

The thought of listening in a dimly lit room to the intricate details of the music and imagining the singer is in front of you on a stage is far too old school for many persons... Why not just watch a concert on your 60" HDTV? No need to close your eyes and imagine the singer, since now you can see him/her...

Old school for who??? And your spotty teenage kid will soon demand a turntable. Some don't want to watch a concert on a TV because it's simply not the same as pure audio listening. And are there video concerts of all your favourite albums?? Yeah, thought not. It's important to seperate the wheat from the chaff, genuine progress from flavour-of-the-hour.

No you won't find concerts of every album, but you can generally find videos on Youtube (at least for more popular music).

Also, only audiophiles think turntables are in anyway a significant share of the market or seeing a comeback.... It's a niche market and will remain that way.

Problem also is that other persons would refer to the Golden Age of HiFi as an example of "flavor-of-the-hour".

As much as I enjoy my HiFi, I accept that it will never be as popular as it once was (at least not in the traditional sense). I'm sure more persons listen to music now than ever before, just not in the manner that audiophiles generally approve of...

 

[Ajani]

What's happened to HiFi is the same thing that happened to radio...

You mean like how you can now listen to it on FM, AM, DAB, Freeview and the Internet? Or how you can stream it to any number of devices including smartphones and tablets? And use iPlayer for catch-up services, listening in real time and podcasts?

Or did you mean it was like radio inasmuch as 47.7 million listen to it every week (90 percent of UK population aged 15+) for an average of 21.7 hours per listener per week. (Source RAJAR Q3 2013.)

Or maybe you meant it was like the way in which tens of thousands of internet radio stations from all over the globe can now be heard clearly even when you are out-and-about and just using a small phone and some earbuds. (Unlike the 'Golden Age' when a receiver the size of a suitcase was required to pull in distant stations with the aid of an antenna twice the height of the average house!)

I think you picked the wrong medium for an example of something that has declined from it's 'Golden Age'.

NO. I didn't pick the wrong medium. Internet Radio is not based on radio waves. It's a different tech all together, just with a cute name... It shows that times have evolved. That's the point I was making....

If we limit HiFi to some audiophile approved home stereo system, then it's all doom and gloom and decline... if we actually look at how people consume music, we see that it is more popular than ever.

So my point remains that it is NOT statement products that have resulted in the end of the "golden age of HiFi" but changes in technology and consumer preferences...

 

[Anonymous]

Well hey, if they trickle down the technology to the lesser amps then I'm all for it. At least, unlike the Linn DS at the start, this isn't an incomplete experiment they're charging customers for.

Well this is it. Firstly, it might be absolutely stunning, maybe even a gamechanger as far as accurate reproduction is concerned - we don't know, we've not heard it!

Secondly, most people forget that much of the technology and design aspects of their existing system came from high end products.

It's a standard thing though nowadays though isn't it - keyboard warriors at the ready to slag off anything new (despite not having, and probably never going to have, first hand experience of).

Good luck to Naim in their latest commercial enterprise, and I'm sure they'll have done their market research and identified a niche where they want a slice of the action.

However, on sonic grounds/claims....

Once you've made an amp transparent to the source - i.e. residual noise and distortion is below the level of audibility, and it provides sufficient current to driver the electric motor that is the voice coil of your loudspeaker, how do you improve it to make it a 'gamechanger' in terms of 'accurate' reproduction?

From a purely engineering POV, It's just doing it's job the same as any other competent amplifier - that straight wire with gain thing - nothing added, nothing taken away.

All else is individual subjective perception and marketing hyperbole.

It might(?) sound slightly, and I do mean slightly, as in the most subtle nuance, different to other equally competent solid state amps, but if you feel it is likely to be audibly different, let alone whether one could determine it to be better or worse in comparison to other equally competent amps, and in the context of a blind AB matched level test, or even better, blind, matched level ABX test, I await the results....

Of course, one could always avoid all of that and simply submit it to Richard Clarks amp test challenge, and see if you can win the $10,000.00 prize...

http://www.tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

This is but one example where necessary marketing hype and subjective claims, meet objective reality.

Kind Regards

JMac...

Good post.

 

[manicm]

I'm afraid I'm with the naysayers on this one, based purely on its price. Naim make very good equipment and I'm happy with the concept of premium pricing for a premium product. There is a limit though, and $200,000 is frankly way past it, whether it's Naim or any other manufacturer.

Put it into context, the same money buys you a brand spanking new Bentley. That is a premium product at a premium price but you can at least see where the cost comes from. Significant investment in R&D, a complex supply chain, high material costs, lots (compared to audio) of clever engineering etc etc.

Ultimately if people want to spend that much on hifi (of any flavour) then it's their money. Those defending the ultra high end are often those bemoaning the lack of credibility that hi fi has these days though - it's not cool like it was in the 60's etc. No chance of returning to that position if we keep going in this direction.

All of which is said with a twinge of sadness, not anger. And I'd quite happily live with Naim kit so I'm not bashing them per se. I just wish someone would lead by example. Yes I know, naive!

Edit - add Light Harmonic's new $120,000 DAC to the argument so that it doesn't become an anti-Naim tirade.

I respectfully disagree...

I think people blame the general lack of interest in HiFi on all the wrong things... I don't think very expensive statement products have much (if anything) to do with the lowered interest in HiFi compared to the 60s.

What's happened to HiFi is the same thing that happened to radio and newspapers and later watching music videos on TV... Newer technology captures the public's imagination. HiFi will never return to the "Golden Age" simply because there are too many more advanced alternatives for the general public.

Why would young persons get subscriptions to newspapers and magazines when they can read all the same info, at their convenience, online? Why listen to the radio when you could watch a music video on TV? Which evolved to: why wait around in the hopes of seeing a music video you like on TV, when you can instantly stream any video you want on Youtube? Tech changes and so too does the tastes of the general public.

The thought of listening in a dimly lit room to the intricate details of the music and imagining the singer is in front of you on a stage is far too old school for many persons... Why not just watch a concert on your 60" HDTV? No need to close your eyes and imagine the singer, since now you can see him/her...

Old school for who??? And your spotty teenage kid will soon demand a turntable. Some don't want to watch a concert on a TV because it's simply not the same as pure audio listening. And are there video concerts of all your favourite albums?? Yeah, thought not. It's important to seperate the wheat from the chaff, genuine progress from flavour-of-the-hour.

No you won't find concerts of every album, but you can generally find videos on Youtube (at least for more popular music).

Also, only audiophiles think turntables are in anyway a significant share of the market or seeing a comeback.... It's a niche market and will remain that way.

Problem also is that other persons would refer to the Golden Age of HiFi as an example of "flavor-of-the-hour".

As much as I enjoy my HiFi, I accept that it will never be as popular as it once was (at least not in the traditional sense). I'm sure more persons listen to music now than ever before, just not in the manner that audiophiles generally approve of...

The Golden Age of HiFi was never flavour of the hour - you had the graphic equaliser phase, you had the turntable on the wall phase etc etc, but good amplification and source principles have remained the same for decades.

Currently I see Airplay and Bluetooth as flavour of the month.

 

[manicm]

Well hey, if they trickle down the technology to the lesser amps then I'm all for it. At least, unlike the Linn DS at the start, this isn't an incomplete experiment they're charging customers for.

Well this is it. Firstly, it might be absolutely stunning, maybe even a gamechanger as far as accurate reproduction is concerned - we don't know, we've not heard it!

Secondly, most people forget that much of the technology and design aspects of their existing system came from high end products.

It's a standard thing though nowadays though isn't it - keyboard warriors at the ready to slag off anything new (despite not having, and probably never going to have, first hand experience of).

Good luck to Naim in their latest commercial enterprise, and I'm sure they'll have done their market research and identified a niche where they want a slice of the action.

However, on sonic grounds/claims....

Once you've made an amp transparent to the source - i.e. residual noise and distortion is below the level of audibility, and it provides sufficient current to driver the electric motor that is the voice coil of your loudspeaker, how do you improve it to make it a 'gamechanger' in terms of 'accurate' reproduction?

From a purely engineering POV, It's just doing it's job the same as any other competent amplifier - that straight wire with gain thing - nothing added, nothing taken away.

All else is individual subjective perception and marketing hyperbole.

It might(?) sound slightly, and I do mean slightly, as in the most subtle nuance, different to other equally competent solid state amps, but if you feel it is likely to be audibly different, let alone whether one could determine it to be better or worse in comparison to other equally competent amps, and in the context of a blind AB matched level test, or even better, blind, matched level ABX test, I await the results....

Of course, one could always avoid all of that and simply submit it to Richard Clarks amp test challenge, and see if you can win the $10,000.00 prize...

http://www.tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

This is but one example where necessary marketing hype and subjective claims, meet objective reality.

Kind Regards

JMac...

There's a law of diminishing returns in everything. Some may have never heard a Linn Sondek, let alone driven a F40. But why single out Naim's ambitions? Krell have always gone over the top. Naim want to push the envelope so what?? You do realise this is a hifi forum right? And thus you would take a technical interest right? You have the right to be cynical but do not pass judgement on what you do not know or haven't heard yet - didn't ABX testing teach you that?

One can question Naim and their customer's motives, but there's a natural fascination with technology and you'd be lying through your ears to deny that.

For me Naim's whole ludicrous exercise is fascinating if only to know which speakers they'd pair the Statement up with. And anyway, as insanely priced as it is, it's still not the most expensive audio kit on earth.

 

[chebby]

Currently I see Airplay and Bluetooth as flavour of the month.

AirPlay launched 2004.

Bluetooth since 1998.

I have been using AirPlay every day for about 33 months.

Here is something for you to enjoy whilst you fulminate about these young flibbertigibbets with their 'new fangled' gewgaws...

 

[NHL]

Currently I see Airplay and Bluetooth as flavour of the month.

AirPlay launched 2004.

Bluetooth since 1998.

I have been using AirPlay every day for about 33 months.

Here is something for you to enjoy whilst you fulminate about these young flibbertigibbets with their 'new fangled' gewgaws...

For houses without electricity, will not benefit to trickle down.