The argument against upgrading


I’ve always assumed upgrading hifi can be worthwhile provided there is some audible improvement in sound quality. Maybe, this assumption should be challenged.

Let’s suppose I make some change to my system. I make a meaningful comparison that proves it sounds better in some way.

Before making the change, I was already able to get into and enjoy certain recordings. Surely, I can’t get into these recordings any more than that. It’s an either or thing not a matter of degree.

So what does the upgrade actually do for me in practice? I fear that more often than not it may be absolutely nothing.

I am not arguing that there is no better. Just that incrementally better may not necessarily always translate into more musical enjoyment.

I suppose this all begs the question what I actually mean by better.

What’s your view on the benefits of upgrading? How can we reliably assess whether it is effective?

newton_john

Upgrade Definition:

1, I really like the different way I perceive how the End Sound is being delivered, even though the other design being used was capable of doing quite a good job also.

2, I am quite impressed with how this new design is able to influence the created End Sound. Only a few hours of the new experience is enough to convince me, I am not interesting to returning to what was previously being experienced as the design.

3, I am now very confident the design selected is a substantial change and one that has shown me much more of what is to be extracted from the recording. The entirety of the listening experience, creates the perception that the recordings embedded data has been revealed in the End Sound, in a way better than any other heard before.

A Home Audio System and the Environment being used in. Especially the Space  selected as dedicated to having the experience of produced End Sound is part of the Holistic Approach to Upgrading the Audio Experience.

The Electronics in use are one area to concern oneself about, but certainly not the sole concern.

There are other concerns to consider, in what measure will only be revealed when more is learnt about the influences present.

Mechanical Interfaces and energy control of released mechanical energies must be considered.

Creating a Space that is optimised to manage the End Sound produced along with other noise created through sound energy being present is another that must be under consideration.

In differing proportions both are upgradable and will have a significant influence on how both Sound and Noise are created and perceived when heard ad the End Sound.

Electronic Devices are only an End Sound when the electrical energy they are responsible for transferring is converted by the Transducer (Speaker). All what is before this transducer conversion of energy. Is source created energy, converted to electrical energy, with the source conversion produced electrical energy undergoing stages of adding gain across electronic devices (at this stage it is not Sound in any manifestation). 

How sound is assessed has a lot more to do with the environment it is being generated in and how the individual responds to that sound. There is very very little, if nothing to do with how Sound Assessment, using added gain to a electrical energy as the basis for the assessment.

Most wish for sound and they get it, where in nearly all cases that is satisfactory and classed as the enjoyment on offer.

There is much more available from engineered designs than mere production of a sound.

There are on offer End Sound perceptions that can be attained, that will become a stimulus quite unusual but extremely attractive to know it has been encountered. Using Words are weak as the method to describe such an experience, it is just that something needed to be experienced to be understood.

 

,  

.      

It makes absolutely no sense to most people that audiophiles put so much effort into fancy systems when it is perfectly possible to enjoy music on a humble bluetooth speaker. Yet clearly we enjoy listening to better quality sound. This is the contradiction at the heart of my worry that we are not achieving anything with our upgrades. I don’t necessarily think we are wasting our time. It’s more I think we should be cautious, especially as the upgrades become more expensive.

@newton_john - high-end audio is simply a hobby, and like all hobbies it’s goal is “Personal Enjoyment” (which can be the process) and not achievement   If you are trying to establish some sort of “value”, you’ll never get there

My hobby is not about buying...

It is about learning and keeping low cost to reach the best S.Q./price ratio...

Optimizing must be learned... Nobody sell this process ...

Those who think their hobby is purchasing are not in the same hobby than me.

 

@kennyc 

high-end audio is simply a hobby, and like all hobbies it’s goal is “Personal Enjoyment” (which can be the process) and not achievement  

I thought I’d already made that goal clear in my earlier posts.

If you are trying to establish some sort of “value”, you’ll never get there

No, you’re barking up the wrong tree here. Value is not an issue. I have always argued that it is meaningless to talk about diminishing returns in hifi.

What I am looking to explore in this thread is how an objective improvement in sound quality translates into that subjective personal enjoyment.

 

What is the "dog which did not barked" in audio experience "crime analysis" scene ?

Often it is our own acoustical satisfaction which is not there.

 

 

--- Marketing of gear is often  the assassin of common sense acoustics knowledge, the victims are the basic acoustics concepts and their parameters. The dog that did not barked is the absence of satisfaction by a great crowd of consumers in front of their system/room listening and reading "audio reviews" promising miraculous pieces of gear instead of informing us about the knowledge of the necessary controls over our own "room/system"  experiences...
 
 
------ What are these controls of our own acoustical experience? they are the basics knowledge about the working dimensions of any system /room : mechanical (vibrations-resonance controls)electrical ( RFI-EMI controls- cleanliness,low noise levels etc ) acousticals (especially LEV/ASW ratio) DSP controls (via E.Q. tone controls,psycho-acoustics measures,filters,crossfeed and crosstalk controls, etc ) 
 
 
------  There is no such things generally speaking  as a reproduction of a live event  recorded  by a trade-off set of choices of the recording engineer reproduced through playback recordings in your living room... There exist only an acoustic translation from a set of acoustics trade-off choices (recordings)  to another set of trade-off choices which are  controlled or uncontrolled  (system/room/ears-brain) by the owner-listener.
 
 
---   Then there is no absolute good or bad recordings generally speakings  (there is only specific extreme cases of these two ) in general no recordings conditions are the same and then experiences are different from the recordings  acoustics conditions to the acoustics parameters of your system/room/ears-brain . Then speaking of audiophile recording which for sure exist is deceptive marketing or audiophile obsession, because on a well optimized and relatively good system all recordings sound different  at all levels of  good or bad...Then most recordings are acoustically "interesting" neither  absolutely bad nor absolutely  good generally when you own a relatively well optimized system/room...
 
------It is why even if upgrading is necessary and it is sometimes for us necessary to do so, and even possible for our own budget,  the true wisdom is  doing optimization before or in many cases instead of upgrading ...We must listen to which is our own system/room peak optimal working before knowing why and with what doing an upgrade... Many upgrades are unnecessary and costly...It is my experience from the last 25 years searching a good acoustic experience from my system/room...