Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.opinion (
More info?)
"paul packer" <packer@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:43170abe.9600772@news.iprimus.com.au
> On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 08:42:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:
>
>> "paul packer" <packer@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:4316efbd.2687310@news.iprimus.com.au
>>
>>> Very good. But I wonder if you object as strongly to the
>>> claims made by mini and micro systems manufacturers and
>>> retailers that these systems are true hi-fi, sound
>>> brilliant and will fulfil all your expectations about
>>> sound reproduction forever.
>>
>> These claims are probably relevant for certain people.
>
> Certain people? Most people seeking a "hi-fi system"
> who don't bother to acquaint themselves with what hi-fi
> means. And that means nearly everybody.
OK, those claims are relevant for lots of people.
>>> Surely if you're looking for
>>> charlatans in the audio industry this where most of them
>>> hang out.
>
>> I don't know if that is a slam dunk.
> Explanation?
I don't think that it is necessarily true that people
selling $100, $200, $300 mini-systems are charlatans.
>>> Personally I don't believe that expensive
>>> cables make much if any difference,
>>
>> Notice the hedge, apparently faith springs eternal.
> I fear this says something important about you, Arnie.
> Most people like to leave room for a doubt. Remember what
> I said (or rather, Mr. Ustinov said) about the inability
> to have a doubt?
Believe it or not Paul, you may not always find the best
information about technology in the popular media.
Its not about an inability to have a doubt about
*everything*, its about knowing what can and cannot be done.
Expensive cable *can't* make a difference because commodity
cables are already do such a complete job of meeting the
need. The essence of believing in the possible need for
expensive cable is ignorance about the goodness of comodity
cables.
>>> but they do after all
>>> appeal to the well heeled afficianado, not the first
>>> time buyer unable to make an informed decision.
>>
>> I don't know about your neck of the woods, but high
>> priced cables can be found in just about every audio
>> retail store in the US, including electronics stores and
>> appliance stores.
> Are you suggesting that the average buyer of a mini
> system is likely to purchase Monster cable to go with it?
Mini systems are generally self-contained. They are not
likely to purchase any cable to go with it. But, if you go
to Best Buy or Circuit City and pick up a receiver, a DVD
player, and some speakers you are likely to get a pitch for
upscale cables from Monster or a competitor.
>>> What galls me
>>> about the marketing of micros, midis & minis is that it
>>> effectively syphons off all the potential customers for
>>> real hi-fi
>> People who buy this stuff are looking for a packaged
>> solution. Where they fade out, HTIB systems pick up.
> They're looking for a packaged solution because they've
> been convinced the package will supply their need. This
> is called marketing.
It may also be a reasonble offering.
>>> (or at least it did, until HT began to do that even
>>> more effectively).
>> Higher-end HT seems to be shaping up as being like a
>> better set of speakers for that shiney new HDTV.
> HT is swallowing hi-fi whole.
Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of guys, but you're wrong.
HT + portable A/V + HTPC are swallowing hi-fi.
For example, I think there were at least three major HTPC or
HTPC-related exhibits (not hotel rooms but large exhibit
halls) at HE2005. Given the size of the market, it was
amazing to me how little portable A/V was in evidence. I can
only think of a small booth by Shure that was getting pretty
heavy traffic.
>Few people care to have two
> systems, one for HT and one for audio. Ergo, the HT has
> to do for both. And in the minds of most punters, why
> should it not?
I'm not sure they are punters.
You're way behind, Paul. Many people don't have any serious
HT at all. Instead, they put their time and money into
portable A/V. Some of the most serious HT advocates I know
are actually doing HTPC.
>>> I wonder how many innocents have
>>> listened to their first mini system plastered with the
>>> word "Hi-Fi" and thought, "Well if that's hi-fi it's
>>> waaaay overrated. I thought it was s'posed to sound like
>>> a real band."
>> Probably not many at all. Who would be that naive?
> Get into the real world, Arnie.
I suspect that the US is a little more mainstream than
Aussie-land.
>As I said before, you've been slaving over that hot test
>bench too long.
The fact is Paul, you simply don't know me. I don't even
have a audio-related test bench right now due to home
(re)construction. I spend most of my audio prime time doing
live sound and recording. About 8 hours a week. I do almost
all my listening with portable systems or a production
system.
My major project at this time has almost nothing to do with
audio test bench work. The little technical testing I do is
almost all in-situ and on-site, and in support of system
construction and reconstruction. My major project for the
last 3 years has been:
(1) Learn and provide live sound, both leadership of the
service team, and hands-on.
(2) Catch up with live recording technology and do it
weekly.
(3) Help revitalize the worship music program at my church
which implies revitalizing a 100 year old church in a 50
year old building. This will hopefully provide quality
acoustic input for (1) and (2).
(4) Dramatically modernize the acoustics and lighting
(architectural and theatrical) of the two largest
performance spaces in said church. The larger room has about
113,000 cubic feet. This is a major component of (3)
At the same time I've been supervising the refurbishment of
my 70-year old house - a project that is already way into
the six figures. About a year ago I demolished my test bench
to make way for the refurbishment project. It had become
pretty idle for several years due to the above-mentioned
activities.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram