Okay sideshowbob, let's accept that I AM mythologising the past - you have still ignored what I have said about the vast and significant changes which have take place over the last two decades to exaggerate the situation as it once was in bringing us to the state we are in today. This is reflected in the mentality of companies and the mentality of the consumer today.
High-end is stagnant because it is a minority interest? Rubbish. Look at the LP - dead or stagnant because CD lead it to become a minority interest? No, the LP is in rude health today and turntable quality is better than ever, yet it has a smaller market than ever - the constant increase in vinyl and turntable quality has lead to a resurgance in LP buying and interest. I don't see this happening with the high-end, because it has nothing to directly compete with it. Without competition, stagnation will occur.
Why is the 2nd-hand market thriving? People are so happy with their purchases that they sell them every 18 months? It is these sort of purchasing habits that tells me something must be wrong with the overall quality and direction of the hifi industry.
What large corporates are you talking about 7_V? Even the largest specialist hifi companies are relative small fry in todays world. All they have (and this is a large part of my point) is a CORPORATE MENTALITY. The corporate mentality has NOTHING to do with the individual. Where are todays great designs then? Most of the true innovation has already happened and most people simply regurgitate. The cream DOES NOT rise to the top, that's why I am debating this subject! Mediocrity has become standard and most people accept it.
I think the problem here MO is that members THINK they know the score. I haven't read ONE post which manages to disprove anything I'm saying, even though I've met with such opposition - replies seem to be, 'I know but who cares', or 'It isn't that bad' or, 'I know but I'm so well informed that I make all the right choices'. Isn't it odd that not ONE person has either 1) Agreed with me or, 2) Taken on board what I've said and genuinely considered whether it is true or not and what the wider implications are - most replies are merely hifi rhetoric.
Buying the kit itself isn't what I'm debating here, it is only the end result. Spending a lot of money on something such as hifi, as many here do, should be something of a long term, if not at least a mid-term purchase. I know very few people who keep hifi components for longer than 3 or 4 years. Years ago when I was part of the hifi cycle, I found myself buying new kit every 2 years or so, and saw myself continuing this routine indefinitely, with only gradual improvements with each upgrade, sometimes costing twice the price of the replaced component. This struck me as very wrong, especially in an industry which seemingly prides itself on development, technological superiority, high quality and high individual standards, and a press that enforces this perception. Hence my decision to partly move 'outside' the industry and get my hifi custom-built. I'm happy now and in all honesty this is the hifi I want to, and can, live with for the rest of my life. That I find extremely unusual, even the INTENT to do this. Most people really do seem to WANT to continue this cycle of constant expenditure, simply changing or slightly improving the sound each time they 'upgrade'. This is constantly what the industry and press is telling us to do, so when most people ARE doing it, I simply don't buy the assertation that most audiophiles exert a great deal of independence in how they listen and what and how often they buy.
