Takedown of pricey servers, streamers OCD HiFi guy

A consultant walks into a factory full of complicated machinery. He is told that one of the machines has stopped working and is impacting the production schedule that could result in hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost revenue. He walks up to the machine, spends about 10 minutes inspecting the innards, and finds and replaces the faulty part -- a screw. He later sends an invoice for $1000. The company accountant balks at the bill and asks, "really! $1000 for replacing a $5 screw?" The consultant replies, "yes, $5 for the screw and $995 for my knowledge and the cost of acquiring it."

I pretty much agree with the ocd video. A music streamer/server are computers: period. Most run proprietary operating systems but that doesn’t make them better, and personally, I wouldn’t want a 1 off operating system. These server vendors have some people convinced that you need a lot of hardware to perform a simple, or basic task, like reading a file. Is running a proprietary Linux OS better than running OS X for a simple task for a music server/streamer, I’d say no.

It’s not just about reading a file, or a ’lot of hardware’. There’s a lot of processing that goes on in the CPU to play and process hi-res audio files. There’s a reason that companies use different types of computers with varying degrees of chip design, compute, memory, and networking to perform tasks like processing audio and video files and conversions, run machine learning algorithms, do high performance computing in areas such as genomics, weather prediction, etc. Each application requires a different configuration of hardware, software, and operating system. I’m not saying that playing DSD files for example is as complex as running extremely complex algorithms, but the choice of the right architecture and optimized usage is just as important to achieve maximum audio fidelity. Companies that are investing time and resources to optimize sound reproduction deserve to be paid more. Boiling the entire equation down to merely the cost of individual parts shows how ignorant this OCD Hifi guy is.

These companies are charging for their research and know-how. You don’t have to buy their products, and it might not be worth to you, but let’s stop with the snake oil accusations.

The point is you’re paying for someone’s time, research, knowledge and know-how. Not to forget the opportunity cost as well as the cost of running a business. Actual cost of parts is a small part of the equation.

And this sort of thing is not just limited to the audio business. Early adopters are willing to pay more for products that are sold in a niche or emerging market segment. Most audiophiles understand that they are paying a lot for what others might conceive as incremental improvements, or even no improvement if your system is not capable.

If you cannot afford it, or don’t see the value, that’s fine. Save your money. But, let’s not disparage innovators and risk takers who are trying to move the needle. And be open to the fact that there’s a lot of experimentation going on in the digital audio world. Some might not bear any fruit, and that’s to be expected. Doesn’t necessarily mean these companies are fleecing unsuspecting customers. That’s the price we pay for progress.

I'm an average guy just like you, just happen to own a $100k system.
I'm not a computer guy, but I can build a kickass server.
I'm an honest, straightforward guy who just happens to be in sales.

You gotta love the subtle art of humblebragging :)