🚀 go-pugleaf

Tony Snyder (snydert@dmapub.dma.org) wrote:
: : I am continually amazed at the witchcraft ethos among high-end audio
: : enthusiasts, who spend thousands of dollars on expensive capacitors, circuit
: : boards, speaker wire, etc., and then rationalize their expenditures by claiming
: : to hear sound improvements which can't be measured or verified by any objective
: : tests. Good design practice stipulates using the cheapest components and
: : simplest circuits that will get the job done.  Oddly, the high-end audio 
: : market seems driven by the reverse notion that one should spend the maximum
: : money possible (e.g., on hundred dollar patch cords), for benefits that exist
: : entirely in the mind of the purchaser. I guess the phenomenon is testimony to
: : the power of advertising and the influence of techno-mumbo jumbo (quartz-locked
: : this and digitally sampled that and linear phase non-inverting blah blah
: : blah)on impressionable minds.
: 
: You evidently are flying pretty high on some sort of an electrical 
: engineering degree or something.  Your educators failed you by not 
: covering such important technological topics such as Bragging Rights
: and Cognitive Dissonance.  Such a shame.

I have to agree with the first message that there is a fair bit of
hype relating to marginal/very marginal improvements in sound quality
due to the difference between good equipment and great equipment.  By
equipment I am refering to $15 patch cords verses $150 patch cords,
$1200 amps vs $6000 amps etc.  Do $5000 dollar tube amps sound that much
better than $1000 dollar bipolar/FET amps? Or is the price being
driven by the 'law of supply and demand' and our famous 'kinked Demand curve'?
Charge what the market will bare??  

Brad Siim

(519) 883-3043