Do you think it preys on delusion more than the "high end" spaces of other niche markets? I think the same kind of upsells occur in spaces like sporting gear, bags and luggage, computer peripherals, etc. Hell, I think even fine food and wine are similar in how they project an artificially high "taste ceiling," if you will.
It really wasn't intended to come across as an argument, thats why one isn't present. I don't think this is really a problem easily fixed (short of overhauling the ethos of consumerism). I was just curious if the commenter thought the "high end audio gear" market was distinct for some reason.
Yes, the audiophile market is uniquely stupid, in that they tend to make specific claims that are objectively wrong. The ethernet cables come to mind, or any (digital) cable that's supposed to be better at conducting a signal than any generic spec-compliant alternative.
Wine, for example, just doesn't usually come with specific claims, except it's "good", or "fruity", or "created in the rich terroir of the L'Alpesian Valley". That region may not actually be better than any other, but it is different. Beyond that, everyone knows it's a matter of taste, with no objective measures of "good" or "bad", although there are obviously (imprecise) trends that many people tend to agree with (i. e. wine is better than vinegar).
Ah, yeah, I'm with you. I think the distinction between taste-driven preference vs technical superiority is important (maybe a more interesting discussion would surround the juxtaposition of audio gear and organic/non-gmo food marketing).
But, I do think the same kind of "objectively irrelevant" upsell _does_ occur with the other non-taste-driven markets (electronic peripherals, sporting gear, etc).
I'm not trying to come across as combative - I'm just trying to figure out why the consumer side of the "audiophile" market gets such a bad wrap. As I commented elsewhere, I think a majority of people who are "into" sound gear don't buy into the snake-oil of special ethernet cables... just as I don't think most consumers opt for gold-plated display cables. However, there are distinctions between different monitors and TVs; people seem to agree that they are perceptible, and they don't bat an eye at someone spending a bit of their time figuring out the optimal display for their situation and price point. I think I'm just trying to understand why, when someone compares headphones to other headphones based on pricepoint, they are assumed to be ceramic-cable-buying elitists.
the commonality between the phenomenons of audio and wine etc. is that they start on a foundation of objectivity and end in subjectivity and cognitive bias. Hearing and taste are two things that are literally unique (almost impossibly equivalent, probability wise) for every single person.
As you go towards the top end of these things, the delusion creeps in, which is that the objectivity extends from the foundation to the roof, so to speak. The fact of the matter is that it was gone somewhere in the middle, e.g. why "trained listeners" cannot distinguish between a coat hanger and $1,000 cable, and while "wine experts" will often pick a $15 grocery store bottle over a $300 bottle in a blind taste test. And they will reverse their answers if told the price ahead of time.
These same concepts exist in other product categories, but I don't know of any better examples than audio and wine.
