In article , Rob
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Keith G
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
[snip]
Yes - if the innocent or gullable are mislead into thinking you
*have* to pay for the above to obtain good quality results for the
sound.

snip

The problem being that this [supply of 'high end' hifi] relies on
exploiting the ignorance of the purchaser and misleading them into
sending money, thinking they are getting something for the extra cash
which they may not.


But they *are* getting something extra for the cash?! They're getting
status, myth-worship, and the aesthetic.

But is this what "they" actually wanted/expected for the money? And
by "they" do you mean everyone?

More tangibly they could well be getting higher quality components (from
case to switches to electronics) and

Question as above.


controversially (but don't discount it) better sound.

s/controversially/allegedly/ :-)

But are they? It would often be difficult for anyone to know on the
basis of the magazine 'reviews', the sale methods in the shops, and the
decisions they make on that basis.

It's just a product of marketing followed by competitive materialism
with a whiff of tangible benefit. 'Ignorant' is a bit strong IMO.

'Ignorant' means that one doesn't have the necessary/relevant information.
This is either the case, or it is not. It seems to me blatently obvious
that this is likely to be the case in the situations being discussed.

I do believe that people, on the whole, *know* this is going on.

I have serious doubts about that "on the whole". If so, why would so
much unsubstantated/incorrect/vacuous nonsense appear in the magazines,
and some people then keep saying things which show they take it seriously?

The concern here is that having read such material, they may assume the
'information' gives them a well-informed basis for decisions, when it
reality it does nothing of the kind.

Why would people take seriously 'comparisons' in a shop that may well
be meaningless, and purchase on that basis? The problem here is the
same as the above.

I agree that many people who go into a audio shop are aware they don't know
much about how the items work. They may also suspect that the salepeople
are ignorant or biassed. But on what basis do they then decide? Amd how do
they spot when the salespeople are using methods which would easily
mislead? They may or may not be aware of their ignorance, but the basis may
still be that ignorance - exploited by the methods used in the magazines
and shops.

I would argue that many buy magazines, or consult a dealer, with the wish
to get reliable information and advice. OK, some people will also buy mags
as 'jewellery catalogues' and just to see pictures of wildly expensive
items they will never own, see, or hear. But is this the reason people buy
such magazines, or consult a dealer, before choosing what they actually buy
and take home?

I wish I had your/Keith's blythe confidence that this didn't matter.
However my own experience over the years does not lead me to share your
views, I'm afraid.

This does not mean that the equipment they all take home is 'bad' or
sounds awful. Just that they can be easily mislead or exploited, and
might well have got something they'd have preferred if given more
reliable information and advice - possibly at a lower cost, or
possibly more capable for what they paid, according to their own
preferences.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html