The Psychology of Constant (Equipment) Change
Anybody have an answer?
I have a decent selection of preamps, amps, integrateds and speakers to choose from and I find myself swapping out gear constantly. And it's not because anything sounds bad. Quite contrary, really.
After most swapping sessions, I'm generally really satisfied and quite enjoy the sound quality. But within a few weeks I'm swapping stuff out again.
What would be the diagnosis for my condition?
| Post removed |
Your distinction is trivial... There is audiophile in a third category who did way more than buying in a race to "know" the most pieces of gear possible... Some experiment with very good product at relatively low cost but learning the basic about mechanical and electrical and acoustical controls and this made the difference ...because the basic knowledge is transformative in a way most ignore... For example learn how to control resonance and vibrations under speakers of any price and call that real audiophile knowledge... Welcome here by the way... My best to you 😊
|
| Post removed |
@audiodwebe great topic for a discussion! Enjoyed reading thru some of the responses. |
Thanks to all for an interesting thread and to the OP especially. I think we have a situation where sound issues become more important than the music itself. As a tendency - an exaggerated attention to sound. Some of this is OK, but when it takes over, not OK. There is a clear commercial input to make music lovers think that way. Get our component and your problems will be solved. But it is more than this. I wonder, is there a psychological component too. A background withdrawal from music. That paradoxically can get larger, the better the system, demanding emotional involvement. There is a 'flee' response. One way to flee is to think about sound. Maybe, often, to avoid the full emotional impact of the music. I am maybe off on a tangent, here.
|
Read my answer to him where i corrected his kind post to me ...Truth matter 😊 And dont be afraid my rate of posting is constant as the fine stucture audiogon constant ... 1 post of mine for 137 posts here in the thread i participated only ...1/137 😁 This rate had nothing to do with any "superior" knowledge especially compared with many members here who achieved degree in acoustics or design or audio engineering from which i learned etc but with retirement isolation and taste for music content and aspects and therapy and meanings and interest in acoustics basic discussion .. my motto is : audiophile experience is possible at relatively low cost because acoustics to begin with and at the end rule design and sound experience not price tags... ..
|
What the?..holy crap!!.... MAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH, you have a fan! Now, the verbosity and repetitive nature of your content should increase 10 fold. ( Brace for impact lads, brace for impact 😂) |
i had known a dude whose thrill was collecting books not even to read selected one , only rare books, the item price was the ultimate criteria he never really read them from beginning to end ... it was as you said :
I was interested by books all my life. Never for their price, rarity,or for a collection of them... I read them that was my thrill ... Any subjects... It resemble audiophilia nervosa when peoploe call you "poor and ignorant" because you learned how to rightfully install a system but this system is low price compared to most and you did not tried 40 amplifiers, 25 dac. 35 turnatables 50 speakers brand ... 😁 I learned basic acoustics that was my fun and my goal was listening music in ectasy ... For me people who had not learned that it is listening experiments with the electrical,mechanical and acoustical working dimensions that give us S.Q. experience when synergy is there as the starting experimental point , people that think that to be experienced we must upgrade to our 5oth speakers the more costly the better who are ignorant or simply reviewers of gear ... Most competent reviewers know what i spoke about and some even say it clearly as Huff who speak about gear to sell it, it is OK , but constantly repeat we can be happy learning what to do with a relatively low cost system .
|
Afterthought, audiodwebe ... I have great respect for you and others with your "condition." You've afforded yourselves the luxury of multiple systems. Kudos! Having the means, three systems would seem probable here. The slammin' horn rig with maybe superspeed new Class D amps and huge horn subs for rock. For large classical and more big pinpoint stuff, maybe some tall stats or planars, big tubes and locked in subs. For the smaller venues in an intimate space...I'm pretty content with cones, speedy beryllium tweets (love ya Jeff Bagby, rest in peace, brother) and a servo subwoofer. Music lovers are terrific. As to over-analyzing, the task put to us was, indeed, a request for a diagnosis. Onwards, Pin |
Well said! And better than me ... In my usual delirium 😉i coined the term "minimal acoustical satisfaction threshold" passed ... It is when we listen music in ectasy forgetting gear...
|
| Post removed |
I think we are over analyzing the whole thing. It’s pretty simple really, there are too many toys to play with! Few sound truly bad, most sound very good to amazing. Price point is somewhat irrelevant, play in the sand that suits you. There are plenty of toys at every budget. I’ve gotten to the point I’m slowing down, if not closing the revolving door. I’ve played with the toys I want to play with and have narrowed down the field to where I am both sonically and budgetary wise. Still, the door isn’t nailed shut! |
You are certainly right... But the hobby to rotate pieces of gear is very different than my own hobby: which is learning how to optimize any system for the sake of music listening. I will not scold anyone if we distinguish the fun of rotating gear for the fun of it and learning how to reach the best with what we have, nevermind the price.It takes a lot of time to optimise a chosen system in a room. If you learn how to do it alone. It takes so much time that rotating gear is not an option. Why ? Because we are able to optimize a system room once the gear synergy choices are done once for all ...The acoustic-psychoacoustics process of experiments begin after that. i want to listen Bach or jazz in the best acoustic condition... Rotating gear is not my hobby... Anyway i dont have this budget... And basic knowledge made this useless for most people because a relatively good system well installed , mechanically, electrically and acoustically give us a relative ectasy... And also give me with what i learned 100,000 bucks and i will create one of the great system easily but with one or two years work and experiment in a dedicated room . Being there at the end, why would i rotate pieces of gear ?😁 Unsatisfaction comes from frustration with an evident acoustic defect or gear synergy defect easy to spot and correct.. Unsatisfaction can come with boring sound room/system when the acoustic balance and the synergy is very wrong and the acoustic defect not evident to identify because there is no dedicated acoustic control anyway .. Part of the solution can be changing the gear synergy if it is not there, but certainly not rotating gear in a race toward a "perfection" which we thank God for his inexistence as an hamster in a wheel happy to go nowhere for the fun of it and thanking God that no end location exist .... Acoustics rule my hobby and fun ...music is the end station for me... |
Thanks for the topic, audiodwebe... I have patiently read a lot of our responses while giving some thought to the question. On the surface, it would appear that some combinations of your gear do indeed satisfy up to a point, when there is restlessness. Thanks for your honesty. My journey has been long learning with a comparatively small budget inside rental apartments. The last 24 years have been much more focused upon improving a difficult, dedicated small studio. If interested, my posts can define much of the trip. The crux of my ambition is pretty much the same as TAS's Harry Pearson all those decades ago...the replication of the live event, preferably unamplified. He and J Gordon Holt broke the ground for subjective evaluation, a nomenclature for the images of sound which set the stage for more rapid progression of the hobby. Progress is the fluid end game for me. As things improve, the target gains distance...often, not realizing something was missing until it appears. The relationship of the loudspeakers to the room, tuning, physical, and yes, digital. Graphs and measurements of your sound are a valid starting point. Subsequently, working to within a 1/100th of a decibel is possible, allowing the fine tuning of your preferred flavors and the exciting discovery of much that has been either blurred, distorted or frequencies hidden entirely from the reality of the capture, till now. Is perfection possible? Let's hope not! I quite enjoy the chase. But that's me. For example, I've savored two years before pulling the trigger on an ethernet cable upgrade, focusing on room tuning as my budget allowed. I'm both excited and nervous since it is, for me, a substantial spend. Thanks LL Bean for yet another bonus year! :) I strongly suspect how we come to our hobby somewhat dictates our goals and pleasures. I have a close friend whose system is constantly in flux. His passion may surpass mine. When he lived close by, he had three system in the mix and enjoyed them all, seeking synergy and fun. Recently, here, there seems to be more lecturing and scolding around how one should approach our hobby...with the zeal of their definitions. Really? More Peace, Pin (bold print for old eyes)
|
i am very happy for your praise but,.... I must correct it for the sake of truth : Many here as atmasphere, erik_squires, rodman9999, GHprentice, mikelavigne and many others had more knowledge than me on many aspects of audio if not all... I know almost nothing but i learned the basic ... By experiments from complete ignorance... The little i know is well grounded in acoustics ... Thats all ... I only know basic... Not refined audio knowledge as the Atmasphere by his job as engineer and mike lavigne by his complete audiophile journey... Thank you for your gentle post for me... |
@mahgister You continue to demonstrate that your knowledge is unlimited regarding audio (amongst other things). Each time I read your posts, I am so glad that you choose to share your wisdom with us. Thank you. |
In your post or book it lack a neutral spin not centered on gear acquisition variety seeking behaviour nor on the addictive increasing habit of buying gear... NEUTRAL SPIN : trying to look for the best balance ratio between all acoustics factors and parameters of the relation between psychoacoustics principle and any system at any cost in a specific room ... The neutral spin is grounded in acoustic not on piece of gear obsession.. So many audiophiles are rational in their behavior , i am one ... 😊 i apologize for my self promoting... 😁 There is an audiophile hobby centered on buying the most possible of gear pieces possible, a common traits of reviewers , sellers and gear obsessed people often correlated with acoustics ignorance which they confuse with few panels on a wall..... No acoustician suffer generally from these positive and negative spin habits, neither any rational audiophile... Music then stay for them first and last as giving dopamine not the gear possible and often frustrating race toward upgrades ... i am in ectasy right now without need of gear piece because my system is balanced acoustically... The possible gear upgrade exist but not so strongly attractive... Any obsession is born from or/and reflect an unbalanced mode of attention.
|
Thank you for the insight you provided which intelligently makes total sense, at least to me. Taking the time to interject such worthwhile, edifying comments can only benefit those who are open to what you are saying. The comparisons, notably the wine analogy, are right on! Nice job, well presented, and thank you! |
To quote Bill Murray in STRIPES..."There is something wrong with you. Something very, very wrong with you!" I just picked up a D'Agostino amp from a gentleman who had a gorgeous system -VAC tube set up, Von Schweikert reference speakers. It sounded even better than it looked. He had bought the Momentum for a back-up amp. We chatted about all of the excess equipment we had and how we'd like to get rid of some of it. I still have my gear from college in my basement - adcom, NAD, Magnepan. And it all works great. The only item that died after 30 yrs was my Velodyne subwoofer. I had four hours to drive home and started thinking "What is the deal ? Why do we do it ? Is it OCD - striving for perfection ? It is clear I'm not the only one. There is a fine line between being an audiophile (or any type of collector) and being completely nuts and I'm teetering that line. |
I research this topic. I'm a consumer psychologist and marketing professor at the University of Michigan. In the consumer psychology literature, there are two main explanations for this behavior -- one more positive and the other more negative. But they overlap and both have elements of truth to them. The positive spin: variety-seeking behavior and intrinsic needs. Variety seeking behavior is a fancy way of saying people like to try new stuff. In one study, wine lovers were interviewed as they were buying wine. They were often buying new wines they hadn't tried before. They usually believed that they would enjoy the taste of the new wine less than their favorite wine at the same price. So why buy it instead of their favorite? The best explanation is that they got two different forms of enjoyment from the wine: one from the taste, and a second from the adventure of learning about new wines. So their favorite wine might be (taste = 9 pleasure units; new experience = 0 pleasure units for a total of 9) but the new wine might be (taste = 7 pleasure units, new experience = 3 pleasure units; for a total of 10). So even though they expected to get less taste pleasure from the new wine, their total enjoyment would be higher than if they bought their favorite wine. The analogy is pretty clear. This also ties into the psychology literature on Self-determination Theory, AKA intrinsic vs extrinsic needs. The relevant point here is that people have an intrinsic need to learn and grow. Trying new things helps us do this. So in this light, swaping out your equipment is part of the virtuous endeavor of learning and growing as a person ;-). in this type of explanation, listening to music is only part of the pleasure we get from our hobby. Contrary to the slogan that "it is all about the music," this theory suggests that it's partly about the music and partly about the pleasure we take in learning about and using the equipment itself. In this way we are a little bit like watch collectors for whom it's really not "all about just keeping accurate time." It's mostly about how cool and interesting the watches are. Some audiophiles don't like to hear this because it sounds crass and materialistic compared to the elevated pursuit of music as art. But we don't need to see it in a negative light. And we'll be happier if we are honest with ourselves about how and why we enjoy our hobby (and why we are reading this listserve right now instead of a listserve on music). Negative spin: it's addictive behavior. To make a long story really short, this point of view says that evolution set up our brain to reward us with dopamine when we acquire a new useful resource. As we get into our hobby, our brain gets accustomed to these dopamine hits. Eventually, they become a motivation on their own in ways that aren't beneficial to us. We see this in all sorts of areas of life including shopping for all sorts of different products. ***** Finally, please forgive my ending this post with a shameless plug. But if you're interested in these issues you might enjoy my book The Things We Love: How Our Passions Connect Us and Make Us Who We Are. It's widely available. It covers the psychology of why people love all sorts of things. But being a bit of an audiophile, I focus on music-related topics fairly often. |
Just illustrates different personality types. Some folks want to hone one system to its max -- perfectionists -- while others want to see what different combinations create -- explorers. Neither is "right." My system is set up with swap bays so that I can use a bunch of different sources with 3 different preamps, 5 different amps, and 3 different sets of speakers (plus other speakers I can pull out). Of course there's some calibration required depending on what I've just swapped in. It's all good fun. It may also match a certain mood or genre of music. Some combos better with electronica, others with classic rock. And some also better with some sources than others. Phono preamp isn't a good mix with my Levinson pre but works well with my BAT pre. To each his own on this front. Don't forget about the music! |
I hadn't touched my system for almost 10 years, but a bad decision led to blowing one of my tweeters. Rather than have it rebuilt I decided to upgrade the speakers to 1978 Altec Model 19s. Granted these were much better speakers than the Polk LSi I was using, but I didn't realize how much better the sound quality could be. This led me on a journey over the next few years of swapping out every piece of gear in my system, some pieces several times. Now I have several amps from Decware on order (two year waiting list) because I want to hear even more out of my system. I got the bug :-( |
Condition sufficiently summarized here: https://www.hifivision.com/threads/are-you-suffering-from-this-disease.95463/ |
| Post removed |
At one point I had three separate systems set up in my house (well, yes, obviously I am single). I got rid of most of that gear about 7 years ago as I started having back issues and I couldn't sit comfortably. I could stand and move without any issues but to actually sit back in a chair was painful. One day, I realized that I had sat in the sweet spot for less than an hour a month for about three months. So I dumped most of it. Regret? Not for a while, but once my back improved and I got back into audio a few years later...yes. Yes, I did regret getting rid of all the stuff. I ended up buying a lot of the same (or improved gear back) and then some. So I now have lots of gear and only one small room to play with (13x14). Surprisingly, the room, as it's treated with quite a bit of acoustic treatment, makes most of my speakers, whether small monitors or large floor standers, sound pretty darn good. And I think most of my electronics are pretty decent, which helps in the sound department. But one day I got to thinking: Maybe it's not so much the "quality" of my gear but more so the "not demanding" music I listen to. Maybe Fourplay, Yellowjackets, Joe Sample and gang don't require high end gear to sound good. I don't know...it was just a thought. I'm also not too sure about not buying stuff. I mean, really, who doesn't need another better, bestest version of KOB, ever? Over and over and over. And over. Cheers, all. |
