|
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,656
Joined on 10-12-2006
Post #:
|
2
|
Post ID:
|
25751
|
Reply to:
|
25750
|
|
|
|
Not sure of the cost of advertising in the "big audio journals", but it seems "the companies with money" are always trying to maximize return on investment, like any "good" business venture does. One popular strategy is to "get a name, then reel 'em in", and it seems to work at any price point. It's been a toss-up for many years whether the best way to sell audio products is with "product development" or advertising hyperbole, with the former seeming to be either rudderless or trend/feature driven, and the latter the same old shit, basically foaming at the mouth that's "endorsed"/promoted by paid spokespeople. As we note often around here, just listen to the "music" the "manufacturers" choose to "demonstrate" their products. I suppose this means that people who buy their stuff also listen to this "music", if only for the purpose of reinforcing their self-imagined places in the crowd, in some sort of self-referential circle jerk. As for the cost of admission, the promoted notion for years suggests that working one's way to the top (or the inner circle) not only involves hitting a moving target but it gets increasingly, exponentially expensive as one gets "closer to the top". Obviously, I find it disgusting, but I'm not really surprised that $200k no longer gets you a VIP Pass. Meanwhile, my own thoughts are that the information is available to pile up and develop an acceptable system for a good deal less money, but the process begins with a candid assessment and awareness of one's personal objectives, which is pretty much the antithesis of the approach to the Inner Sanctum of "popular", consumer hi-fi. Again, Top Hi-Fi Lesson for 2020: It's Personal, and "They" can't help you get around this.
Paul S
|
|
|