I had an interesting chat yesterday with my local high end dealer. He has a store in town called Soundstage that specializes in really esoteric high end stuff. His store carries names like Conrad Johnson, Martin Logan, Arcam and a whack of others I've never heard of. Among the listening rooms are severely exotic kits with tube amps and alien looking speakers. Total cost for some of these systems rival a modest home.

I've always had mixed feelings about this price point. I can put my finger on a dollar value of diminishing returns way way below this price point to be sure. But at the same time I highly respect the stuff, it's just cool. But, I hold proudly to my entry level cut-above-the-stuff-from-the-big-box-stores level.

We spoke about the kinds of customers he gets that buys high end. I know he must see all kinds and can accurately profile most people who walk in.

According to him the kind of people who spend $10,000 on a single component are mostly doctors. We live in a high tech area. The small city where I live is stinking rich with software, Blackberry, search, database and Internet money. Not surprisingly it seems that technology and engineering types aren't as taken by the seriously high end audio. He's had one of the RIM's CEOs in his store (there are two of them and I didn't ask which one). Apparently he has some high priced audio gear in his home but strings it all together with low end wires and cables. Apparently he refuses to believe there are any gains to be made from higher end cables. It's a contention with which I would agree in an empirical sense.

However - if I had a $5K DVD player hooked up to my $10K surround processor / pre-amp… something just doesn't feel right sticking Radio Shack cables between them. I know that blind A/B/X testing demonstrates people just can't tell the difference. Maybe that makes me a sucker, but I think I'd buy at least slightly more expensive interconnects and speaker wire anyway, even if it were simply an esthetic.

Psychoacoustics

I know I've heard the term before in talks of objective vs subjective hi-fi. Perhaps some would say it's just another name for psychological, similar to psychosomatic illness suffered by children who don't want to go to school on Monday morning. But in our conversation he made valid points about what makes us like one sound over another. What makes us prefer a given sound quality may have nothing to do with the audible frequency ranges or other quantifiable criteria. I suppose it's the classic subjectivist argument of perception being reality, something I reject philosophically. But I remain open minded enough to take a listen.

And that's what it comes down, something the local hi-fi guy (a subjectivist) and I (a self-styled hi-fi objectivist) unquestionably agree upon. It's all about listening and only your ears should decide what you really like.

Comment On This Post Here