Philosophical question: When does hi-fi investment give you diminishing returns?

[PJPro]

Eddie Pound:I can't believe you chaps were unaware of Sir Alan. He's a HiFi god. I like him as one of the more forward-thinking reviewers around.

Never heard of him. But then again, why would I?

 

[Anonymous]

I agree that its around the £500 per component that the diminishing returns set in. Thats what I spent on my system and being a regular attender of classical music concerts/jazz performances my system reproduces what I hear there very well.

I dont understand the perfect system idea. When does live music actually sound this good, what original idea is it meant to be replicating. There are hundreds of variables mediating how you hear live music - where you stand, size and shape of room, background noise, amps musician is using etc etc. Whats this idea that the best music system approaches some Platonic ideal ordained by the hi fi mystics?

Its the same with this over-used phrase "transparency". Transparent to what? There would have to exist some original ideal that it could then be measured against. Think about it, musicians use different instruments/amps/recording studios/producers to attain a certain sound, its mediated by variables all along the way. Lots of music, like reggae for instance is almost designed to be played on a system that classical music would sound terrible through.

The hi fi argument and what to spend on it mirrors the philosophical debate between Plato and Derrida. Derrida shows that the idea of 'presence' which motivated western philosophy for so long is always, under the terms of its own production, 'mediated'. Its a false ideal that can never be attained.

Spend what your happy spending and spend the rest on something else.

 

[JoelSim]

Alan Sircom:JoelSim:
I hope one of the first jobs you do Mr Sircom will be to fix the website of your new magazine as it's rubbish and often the links published in the mag aren't even there on the website.

ÿ

This is seriously not the place to discuss the nature of a 'rival' publication... but it's on the map.

I shall look forward to it. Hifi mags aren't mutually exclusive and I suspect there are a number of people who read many every month.

ÿ

 

[JoelSim]

PJPro:Eddie Pound:I can't believe you chaps were unaware of Sir Alan. He's a HiFi god. I like him as one of the more forward-thinking reviewers around.
Never heard of him. But then again, why would I?

lol, he's the new Editor of...

ÿ

 

[JoelSim]

idc:
Alan Sircom:I would go further, and say there might not be diminishing returns at all. Just a series of different set of priorities that you either like or dislike. Thing is, if you don't like the sound of the £1,000 version, chances are you'll like the £2,000 version even less and the £10,000 model even less, but put this dislike down to this so-called law of diminishing returns. On the other hand, if you like the sound of - say - a Creek Evo CD player and amp with a pair of Shahinian Super Elf (about £2,000 worth of equipment, I believe), you will love the sound of a Plinus CD-101, 9200 integrated amp and a pair of Diapasons (which costs more than ten times as much)... and you will get considerably more out of it too, if the room is big and good enough. I could apply the same upgrade path to dozens of different system solutions.

Now I know that Alan is a professional Hifi Choice writer/reviewer/editor that explains the very knowledgeable responses. I agree with the OP and others that the 'so called law of diminishing returns' ÿis very real and applies to hifi. I disagree with your example of if you don't like the £1000 version that you will like the more expensive versions even less. I have bought a more expensive 4 star rated amp over its little brother, the less expensive 5 star rated one. OK soÿif you like the Creek/Shahinian you will love the Plinus/Diapasons but ten times more so, that appears as a further example of diminishing returns.

I still think that diminishing returns will start to kick in around the £500 with the rate of incline decreasing and even more so after £1000. But hopefully, especially for those of you who have spent £10,000 plus, that rateÿof incline only ever continues to decrease, rather than turn back on itself.ÿI think the law of diminishing returns applies to hifi like it applies to cars and many other consumer goods. I am also averaging out all hifi kit and thinking of a graph like this; (imagine armour as cost and damage as improved sound!)...............

ÿÿÿÿÿÿ ÿ

I can't agree with that. For instance, if Tiger Woods was to purchase a new club that added 5% to his game, but cost 100% more than his old club, then you could hardly call that diminishing returns. He would win everything.

Likewise with hifi. It all depends on where your parameters and desires lie. To me, a 10% improvement in sound quality would be well worth paying double for. And it will happen when I feel I can get it past the missus. She wants to move house, so I may need a better hifi to fill a bigger roomÿ

ÿ

ÿ

 

[floyd droid]

JoelSim:Alan Sircom:JoelSim:
I hope one of the first jobs you do Mr Sircom will be to fix the website of your new magazine as it's rubbish and often the links published in the mag aren't even there on the website.

This is seriously not the place to discuss the nature of a 'rival' publication... but it's on the map.

I shall look forward to it. Hifi mags aren't mutually exclusive and I suspect there are a number of people who read many every month.

Yup,all of em and the Bi-monthly too.