If there was a very suttle difference I might go for the better looking item but most of the time sound is more important. However I would have a hard time buying tube mono blocks that I didn't see the tubes love the orange glow and the attention they get when friends walk in. I will also listen to stuff in a shop if it looks cool but I would rarely aske to listen to that black box amp.
How important is the Look in audiophile gear?
I saw a post today about B&O. Some were dissing this gear as just made to look good. I was about to do some dissing myself and then I wondered how much of the cost of other high end audio gear might be down to the "Look"? (Impressive looking rather than boringly functional.)
Is the "Look" closer to 20% or 80% of the cost on ultra high end gear? How much are you willing to spend on "Look" relative to cost that goes into purely audible qualities? Does the "Look" give you a feeling of how amazingly good it should sound? Does "Look" enhance the listening experience in the same way a well presented meal is more enjoyable to eat?
Examples of "Look": large silvery tube amps openly exposed on a silvery mount, massive turntables with visible big wheels/levers/belts, shiny imposing isolation feet, exotic spikes and stands, ultra thick cables made from exotic materials, futuristic speaker shapes (other than a plain mdf box).
Is the "Look" closer to 20% or 80% of the cost on ultra high end gear? How much are you willing to spend on "Look" relative to cost that goes into purely audible qualities? Does the "Look" give you a feeling of how amazingly good it should sound? Does "Look" enhance the listening experience in the same way a well presented meal is more enjoyable to eat?
Examples of "Look": large silvery tube amps openly exposed on a silvery mount, massive turntables with visible big wheels/levers/belts, shiny imposing isolation feet, exotic spikes and stands, ultra thick cables made from exotic materials, futuristic speaker shapes (other than a plain mdf box).