"Luxury" Oct. 2016 HFN&RR

stonedeaf

AK Subscriber
Subscriber
First - to be clear this is not a knock on Paul Miller - who IMO edits the best Hi-Fi mag today. P17 has his editors column -what i found interesting was this :"The UK's premier luxury hi-fi event,......". Mr. Miller gets a lot of credit for calling a spade a spade - h$end audio equipment are luxury goods - not music playing tools. I 'm interested in the best music playing tools I can afford -don't want to pay for luxury audio simply because it means some portion of the price goes to bling - not sound quality. My goal -find some great sounding Semi Anonymous Black Boxes (sorta the flip side of BPC!) where what I'm paying for its what's inside.
 
I serviced audio equipment for decades -some stuff impressed the heck out of me (Threshold and Audio Research come to mind) and some stuff is just expensive.
 
I serviced audio equipment for decades -some stuff impressed the heck out of me (Threshold and Audio Research come to mind) and some stuff is just expensive.
And some stuff is just cheap and doesn't sound good.

So in all these decades servicing equipment, forming your own opinion why the thread. It only invites generalizing and baseless opinions that will start fights right?
 
Simply put - because "Luxury" goods pretty much by definition involve design elements that increase the cost of the product without positively effecting the products performance. Lots of h$end audio looks like luxury goods to me ? For instance - from a tech bench grunts point of view - highly polished surfaces are scary - you sure as heck don't want to leave a scratch or mark on it while disassembling / reassembling to service it . The question really is - how much does cosmetic design increase the cost of the product ?Again - personally - I'm attracted to companies who spend it inside the chassis.
 
Back
Top Bottom