Stop buying new stuff, says government advisor

prowla

ukcarper wrote: »

My system is not as esoteric as yours but I went down the route of streaming a couple of years ago and am very pleased with sound quality compared to cd player.

The manufacturer of my Hi-Fi also does streaming products in a big way; indeed I play my TV through the Hi-Fi and also have a DAC and a computer.

zagubov

kabayiri wrote: »

I'm not sure how I can see our economy competing on conventional consumerist lines. Will it only be a matter of time before most conventional cars are built in China or Korea too? It seems everything is being defined by cost.

Good design practice can make most things modular and upgradeable and repairable if there is an economic driver for doing so.

I've heard a lot of European car production has shifted to places like Slovakia and the labour crosses the border from lower-wage non-EU countries like the Ukraine.

Loughton_Monkey

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The title of the forum is Debate house prices and the economy.

This thread is very much linked to the economy, as buying and selling stuff is a major part of our economy.

If the only concept is "economics" then it's a no brainer. If your washing machine is going to cost £200 to repair, and a new one is going to cost £180 and be better, then there's no argument.

If you want a 16th generation octaphonic i-Toilet with shat-nav costing £1,600 and can afford to buy it, then buy it. No question.

Any more 'stuff' you want and can afford it? Then buy it. Quality of life and all that.

It is generally held that more spending is "good" for the economy. Spending on imported goods less so than on British goods, but better than not spending at all we're told.

If, however, you wish to become a slave to environmental thoughts, then that's a totally different argument. If, also, we wish to talk about people buying "stuff" on credit that they can't afford, then that's yet another argument.

michaels

ukcarper wrote: »

My system is not as esoteric as yours but I went down the route of streaming a couple of years ago and am very pleased with sound quality compared to cd player.

Most MP3s feature compression that is not loss-less, thus using the same components, the original CD wav should sound better. Similarly CD is only a sample whereas the analogue reproduction of vinyl has no loss of information (depending on mastering etc of course).

I think generally the components (and sound quality) of similar 'level' hi-fi systems are less good now than they were 30 years ago - most modern TVs have carp sound.

chewmylegoff

ukcarper wrote: »

I'm afraid that's where your wrong turntables, amplifiers and speakers from 30 years or more ago can easily out perform a lot of todays music systems.

that doesn't amount to the technology having gone backwards and considerations like real terms cost need to be taken into account and whilst the best systems from yesteryear may still stand up i would be surprised if the cheap and nasty systems were better than today's cheap and nasty ones. my parents used to have a cheap and nasty turntable and the noise that came out of that was not particularly impressive and was certainly inferior to sticking an ipod in a crummy docking station with speakers.

whilst it is true that vinyl can convey a broader range of sound frequencies, it is also true that the human ear cannot hear them. in the end it is just a matter of person preference... anyway, you still can't get a turntable in your pocket or create your own playlists, or shuffle all your music as you choose, or take thousands of songs with you in the car etc. i'd say that the technology is vastly better than it was.

ukcarper

michaels wrote: »

Most MP3s feature compression that is not loss-less, thus using the same components, the original CD wav should sound better. Similarly CD is only a sample whereas the analogue reproduction of vinyl has no loss of information (depending on mastering etc of course).

I think generally the components (and sound quality) of similar 'level' hi-fi systems are less good now than they were 30 years ago - most modern TVs have carp sound.

I've ripped all my CDs to lossless FLACs and use a good DAC so quality is good.

ukcarper

chewmylegoff wrote: »

that doesn't amount to the technology having gone backwards and considerations like real terms cost need to be taken into account and whilst the best systems from yesteryear may still stand up i would be surprised if the cheap and nasty systems were better than today's cheap and nasty ones. my parents used to have a cheap and nasty turntable and the noise that came out of that was not particularly impressive and was certainly inferior to sticking an ipod in a crummy docking station with speakers.

whilst it is true that vinyl can convey a broader range of sound frequencies, it is also true that the human ear cannot hear them. in the end it is just a matter of person preference... anyway, you still can't get a turntable in your pocket or create your own playlists, or shuffle all your music as you choose, or take thousands of songs with you in the car etc. i'd say that the technology is vastly better than it was.

A lot of what you say is true but that doesn't alter the fact that 30 year hifi can sound as good if not better than modern systems. I'd say most crummy docking stations are just that but then there is nothing stopping you buying a doc that connects to the AUX on your 30 year old system and enjoying the benefits of both.

prowla

chewmylegoff wrote: »

that doesn't amount to the technology having gone backwards and considerations like real terms cost need to be taken into account and whilst the best systems from yesteryear may still stand up i would be surprised if the cheap and nasty systems were better than today's cheap and nasty ones. my parents used to have a cheap and nasty turntable and the noise that came out of that was not particularly impressive and was certainly inferior to sticking an ipod in a crummy docking station with speakers.

whilst it is true that vinyl can convey a broader range of sound frequencies, it is also true that the human ear cannot hear them. in the end it is just a matter of person preference... anyway, you still can't get a turntable in your pocket or create your own playlists, or shuffle all your music as you choose, or take thousands of songs with you in the car etc. i'd say that the technology is vastly better than it was.

Mostly true - the low-end turntables could be spectacularly bad.

But the better ones can be alarmingly good; I've got a really good CD player, but I wouldn't stand it up against a really good vinyl spinner.

I've got an iPhone too, and have loads of music on it. And the convergence of phone/internet/games/messaging/music/movies is something that would have been considered science fiction when some of my hi-fi was made.

So in that sense, the technology has certainly come a long way.

And the digital nature of the content means that every copy is exactly as good as the original finished work and will never wear out.

But it doesn't sound better.

I've got some hi-res digital recordings, and, through the right equipment (which I don't have, cos I'm short about £6.5k of disposable income ), they can be better.

prowla

michaels wrote: »

Most MP3s feature compression that is not loss-less, thus using the same components, the original CD wav should sound better. Similarly CD is only a sample whereas the analogue reproduction of vinyl has no loss of information (depending on mastering etc of course).

I think generally the components (and sound quality) of similar 'level' hi-fi systems are less good now than they were 30 years ago - most modern TVs have carp sound.

Well, my opinion is almost the opposite of that!

MP3 is a lossy format, but you can rip to lossless too (WAV, FLAC, Apple lossless, etc.). And you can get the hi-res recordings (24-bit, 96 kHz) which may sound better on several fronts: (a) it is easier to produce systems to reproduce them, (b) they may not require changes to bitrates in the processing, (c) the producers of the material may be more aware that they is an audio quality imperative (and thus do their job better!).

These days, most recordings are digital, and so remain in the digital domain from recording through the various stages of processing and out onto CD.

The analogue reproduction onto vinyl is inherently lossy; each copy that is made is (slightly) less than the original, and the masters wear out.

I think the hi-end hi-fi has gone astronomical, and there is like-for-like kit which exceeds what used to be. But I'm talking £10k+ (or £100k+!), which is silly money for most sane people.

I get some rather good sounds out of my Sky TV setup, but of course it's playing through my hi-fi system and speakers.

N1AK

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

Technology moves on.....and a good time to catch up with that technological advance is at the point that something breaks...

To a point and depending on the item. A tablet computer from the last 5 years would quickly become outdated and the benefits of replacement after 2-3 years are considerable. A microwave on the other hand does not get outdated quickly at all either in terms of functionality or efficiency.

What I, and some others on here, find frustrating is when devices are designed or supported in such a way that they break or require replacement sooner.