有兴趣的可以看看。。
What hurts hi-end audio the most?
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/forum...hp?f=4&t=21477
What hurts hi end audio the most?
First of all what is hi end audio & where did it come from?
To start off I have to say that I'm not fond of the term High End & am mostly going to use the term HI Fidelity or HI-FI for short. I'm assuming that most people who enjoy listening to a Hi-Fi system today, are probably between the ages of 35 & 65. History I think will support me when I say that the hi-end grew out of the DIY electronics pioneers of the 30's, 40's & 50's. Many WW I & II veterans came back with an interest in Ham Radio & listening to LW broadcasts from around the world. HeathKit (founded in 1912 by Edward Heath) as an aircraft company, started in the business with a kit for a small aeroplane. After Heath's death in a 1931 plane crash, the company was purchased by Howard Anthony, who purchased surplus electronics after WWII & began making electronic kits starting with an oscilloscope. Company's like Heath Kit, such as Knight, Eico, Dynaco & I'm sure many others as well had similar beginnings, at least so far as purchasing war surplus electronics goes. People began building these kits & began constructing their own loudspeakers to go along. This DIY community began to grow. Soon people began modifying their kits. Out of this community a few savvy tinkerers & entrepreneurs began what came to be the called the High End. Companies Like Scott, Fisher, McIntosh, Marantz. Most of these companies also marketed kits or modifications to existing equipment. The first Audio Research Corp. amplifier was a modified Dynaco ST-70. McIntosh also made a kit the Mackit 30. To these people the term used to describe the equipment was high fidelity. Fidelity to what? Why the music of course.
The term hi-end began to be used around 1962 with the publication of J. Gordon Holt's (Stereophile Magazine) & by the time Harry Pearson's (Absolute Sound) was founded in 1973, elitism was making it's debut in our hobby. The whole audio industry the manufacturer + audio media + retail marketing are in bed. In effect it's a cartel.
I have a friend here in Manitoba who builds hi fidelity amplifiers who told me about approaching a US audiophile Magazine for a review of his amp, & was told he would get a review if he purchased advertising to the tune of 10 grand. At one time my friend could have received an unbiased review of his amp in both Stereophile & The Absolute Sound. The problem with the magazine business was that without advertising magazine sales couldn't support the business, I remember reading an editorial in TAS where HP asked the readers for permission to accept advertising, promising to still maintain an honest reviewing policy, I'm not sure when the promise was broken but (my memory is not clear on this) I believe it had to do with a bad review of one of the HI End's sacred cows and the loss of advertising revenue because of that. People forgot about the end of the innocence & continued to give respect to the words of a now morally compromised Audiophile media which is shooting itself in the foot here because what this does is effectively eliminate competition for existing hi end manufacturers by eliminating new manufacturers. They can't compete because they can't advertise, and as a result the need for hi end magazines diminishes. I'm just as guilty of misplaced faith in the audio medea as anybody else. eg. When I re-entered the audio hobby in 1998 after losing interest for a 15 year term; being curious about the pricing of hi fi, I picked up an issue of the Absolute Sound(mistake), because of the headline on the cover which advertised reviews of Hi-end systems from ENTRY LEVEL to COST NO OBJECT. An entry level system at that time was 20 grand! I finally saw the light. I think that for the most part the constant obsessive compulsive need to up grade on the part of the consumer is a function of cartel manufacturers who while inflating the price & hyping the musical sound of their product through the parrot of the audiophile media, who merely report what the manufacturers tell them. The consumers then walk into an audio salon and are confronted by a snotty sales person; asking can I help you? After a series of questions & some further conversation he will determine whether or not you're ready to spend. Ounce he's determined you're a dead end he'll excuse himself thru a pre determined signal to a co-worker, or excuse himself to go to the washroom & after that will totally ignore you. You will get this treament if he deigns talk to you at all. No wonder the Hi End is dying. Also to blame is keeping up with the Jones syndrome. I agree with those who say that the term hi end is used by those that cling to the belief that He who dies with the most toys wins! (the yuppy code) On a political note, thats why we're in a recession now!
I'm sure that any one who has listened to the old kit amps & high fidelity amps of the 50's and 60's knows that early Dynaco, Eico, Marantz, McIntosh, Scott, & Knight, tube gear compares with & equals or even betters the hyper expensive gear manufactured today. If your concern is with bragging rights then I guess Hi-End is the proper term for the hobby! However I think that Hi-Fidelity is the term that should be used, it levels the playing field. The hobby is about listening to music, not peer approval regarding our opinion on what we're listening to. Remember when it comes to the crunch the audio hobby is a form of onanism, or more spiritually a form of meditation. You don't let your friends choose your pornography, or tell you how worship; Why let them pick your equipment for you? (see I even have a sense of humor)
I read a contribution to this thread where the person seemed to be apologising for having had to purchase used equipment. You're the smart one, an audio engineer told me, that there is nothing new in audio, just different ways of applying old ideas & technology. A lot of new audio designs are plagiarised from old out of print sources taking credit for old designs like Led Zeppellin plagiarised old blues songs. In my journey I have had 3 systems that made my audio boat float. Each time I built a system it was because I listened to my friends opinions of my system. Each system took time and money and effort to build. Using what my friend the engineer told me what are the odds that the 1st system would be the equal of the one I listen to today? Were talking 3 systems since 1998.
Addendum; My condolences to my fellow music lovers for the passing of the original Audio Magazine, Listener Magazine (published by Art Dudley now the only bright spot @ Stereophile) and the print version of Positive Feedback!
As far as what I like to listen to ....... I aspire to owning equipment primarily made in Canada or regarding speakers made in the commonwealth.
This is what I'm listening to right now starting from the scource a----
1. Sony CDP 608 ESD as transport thru Mj digital cable into an
2.MSB Link Dac Gold with up grades thru MJ digital cables into a
3.Bryston BP 25 pre-amp thru balanced MJ interconnect into an
4.SAR Labs Mos 400 to using Kimbercable 8TC speaker cable into
5. a pair of Tannoy 10" Super Red Monitors(factory cabinets) or
6. a pair of Tannoy 10" Golds in home made cabinets (super ugly made in the 60's)
7. Rel Q20E subwoofer using the high level connection supplied br REL
8.Hitachi HS-55 very large 2 way using a horn tweeter with jbl style acoustics lens with a 12" woofer port loaded my apology they're Japanese not Canadian ( always had this oriental fetish)