Is better always better?

[marl]

I've spent a small fortune over the years upgrading my Hi-Fi system. I've made a few changes lately and when playing old recordings i'm hearing things i hadn't heard before and the system is without doubt performing to a higher level. e.g. its more dynamic, better soundstaging, better detail retrieval etc, etc.

However, despite the improvements i wouldn't say i actually enjoy the music more than i did before.

hence the post is better always better?

 

[tom_e]

depends what you class as better i suppose like you said you can hear more and if thats what you wanted then yes its better but if that doesnt make a huge difference to you then its no better than what you had, its all down to personal preference

 

[9designs2]

Well this is a point many fall out over, but what you have raised here is actually the point most people completely miss when "upgrading" ... the Hi Fi forums around the net are full of the same questions and people searching for that elusive improvement....

The problem comes down to not the equipment, but how people listen or judge a system. People try and "compare" Hi-Fi equipment, big mistake, you should judge musical performance, and which one is better.

What you are suffering from is try to judge a system by "how much" of this or that it does, more bass, wider soundstage, better projection, all meaningless Hi-Fi BS....

Start listening to the musicians, what are they doing, can you follow what they playing, can you sing along in your head, keeping time, and reproduce what's played....

Start judging systems and components in this manner, ignoring the traditional HiFi attributes, they will take care of themselves, when the "Tune" is correct.


Now the old hacks about here will have know where this posting was going ..... But this has all been the corner stone of Linn’s marketing and development methods for over 30 years, some support it, others stick to fingers up at it..... But your question asked in all innocents seems to suggest they have a point !.....


For the full story
Tunedem

 

[<F0rb>]

Personally, for audio i think there is a limit to what actually makes a difference. For most people, you can find a limit ad a fairly low price, with just a few separates. After this point tere really is no noticable difference, and only enthusiasts will upgrade beyond this.

Music/audio is a strange old thing...

 

[squiffy]

Personally, for audio i think there is a limit to what actually makes a difference. For most people, you can find a limit ad a fairly low price, with just a few separates. After this point tere really is no noticable difference, and only enthusiasts will upgrade beyond this.

Music/audio is a strange old thing...

I agree, considering the "quality" of the source material (which for most people will be CD's, FLAC server) I think there is a cut off. I've heard top-end systems, they sound better yes but not £30,000 better.

 

[9designs2]

Personally, for audio i think there is a limit to what actually makes a difference. For most people, you can find a limit ad a fairly low price, with just a few separates. After this point tere really is no noticable difference, and only enthusiasts will upgrade beyond this.

Music/audio is a strange old thing...

Do you speak from first hand experience, or hear say ?

 

[a1ex2001]

An interesting question and dificult one to answer, the problem with Hi Fi upgrades is that once you've gone to a reasonable sepaerates system from a cheap integrated midi type box you will never get the massive increase again from there on in it's endlessly diminishing returns.

I'm all in favour of only upgrading if you enjoy the sound of the new kit more, as obviously enjoyment is what it's all about. personally I'm happy with my mid range separates kit I've listened to more expensive gear and yes there were some changes to the sound but none that I would class as worth the money from an enjoyment perspective.

The biggest difficulty like any hobby is to avoid upgrading for the sake of it we've all done it with Hi Fi and computers and the more I read the photography forum the less I ever want to buy a DSLR!

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

hence the post is better always better?

Interesting question. Here's a couple of thoughts:
- An opinion is that dissatisfaction with a system is directly proportional to the funds available for an upgrade. So when a person is skint, kit that sounds better are "too expensive", "not value for money", "have such dimishing returns that they don't make sense", "have been reported by others as not that great", "suffer from imperfect specifications, despite never hearing them", "can't possibly make a difference" etc etc. Right now, my system sounds ace. Make what you want of that.
- Kit all sounds different in their sonic presentations. Kit that sounds more open, lively and forward, can with the right music come across brilliantly (e.g. Jazz). Stuff that album on you've not listened to in a while that has higher levels of say compression will sound harsh and unrelenting with the new kit.
So whilst you seem to be getting a better sound, it's simply a different style of presentation, and people need to be very careful about those choices.

 

[fini]

...Linn...

Flat earther!

More expensive certainly doesn't = better. It is possible also to have a truer sound without it being a more enjoyable sound. High end kit varies quiet substantially stylistically, but is still very good technically. If you go from Krell to mcintosh you're going to feel like the sound is (comparatively) baseless - but that doesn't mean it's 'worse'.

 

[marl]

Some interesting thoughts. As i said, by any criteria i can think of my system is better than ever, its definately more 'musical' etc, etc, Its just that i don't think i enjoy the music any more than i did when i had a cheapo music centre!

 

[9designs2]

Flat earther!

More expensive certainly doesn't = better. It is possible also to have a truer sound without it being a more enjoyable sound. High end kit varies quiet substantially stylistically, but is still very good technically. If you go from Krell to mcintosh you're going to feel like the sound is (comparatively) baseless - but that doesn't mean it's 'worse'.

Not necessarily flat earther, just a point of recognising what matters and what doesn't...

I don't think anyone said better because it's expensive.... to quote another Linn statement, "if both items sound as tuneful, buy the cheaper one, what ever brand it is"........ seems fair.

Once again Marl, the open poster, has proved my point..

Quote,
"i can think of my system is better than ever, its definitely more 'musical' etc, etc, Its just that i don't think i enjoy the music any more than i did when i had a cheapo music centre!"

So it's NOT more musical, it's the same, it just technically performs better, and you have chosen the wrong upgrades, because you used the wrong selection method.
"Technical" upgrades wear off very quickly because you soon get use to them, and then go looking for the next upgrade, and repeat the process.... sound familiar ?!??!........... the content of most Hi Fi forum posts around the net maybe.

Strange how I managed to keep using the same CD for about 14 years ! and it still sounds good. So does that justify its initial "high" purchase price.

 

[FrankJH]

Maybe this is more psychological- but how about this:

Like everyone, I have a few tunes that I really cant live without, no matter what mood Im in they make me smile or laugh or whatever, and I am completely familiar with how they sound

Im also a firm believer that after the running in period from new of hifi seperates (it has seemed more critically different with seperates but Im sure it also happens with systems also) the sound stays at a "constant" for quite some time, it doesnt change its tone or musicality for years, but eventually it does and the sound produced is different again.......but my question is do the owners because they are so familiar they think they hear it in their head as it should be, rather than how it is.

Remember with new equipment you listen to it ultra carefully and its quite easy to hear it getting warmer sounding or whatever over the first 20 -100 hours or whatever , but when you are really familiar with the whole kit and its wearing out I think its more likely that a guest listening to something would notice it sounding off before you do (unless something is truelly wrong)

Like a clock losing time, it starts losing it ever so gradually and unnoticable, but once the cogs/battery whatever are really wearing out you suddenly notice minutes being lost.......

Just a thought

I have had really cheap sony amp, speakers and cd player (I think they were about £400 all told ) since about 2000/2001 and they sound fantastic, completely worthless now of course and for the same sum now you would struggle to get a significantly better sound, but it is doable its all a question of whether its worth the £400 now or its better spent on something else