MUSINGS: On high-end audio component prices, inflation, April Fools and peak "greedflation"?

 

Let's consider how over the last while even audiophile magazines have wondered about the High-End Audio Industry's escalation in suggested retail prices for their products.

A year ago, Stereophile attempted to answer "Why Hi-Fi Prices Have Risen". To be fair, I think Jim Austin in the article made some good points about inflation, tariffs, etc. I'm glad that the article also acknowledged the fact that for years now, each generation of "high-end" audio products seemingly have also been just getting more expensive, untethered from inflationary expectations.

Grab a nice beverage, have a seat. Let's talk about prices in audiophilia. Is it true that the "high end" has become much more expensive?

[Some of these thoughts will trickle into the psychology of other luxury products beyond audio. Also, we'll be talking about dollars and cents in this post. Since most audiophile goods are priced in US dollars, let's use that through this post, with early April 2026 currency conversion as needed.]

As if higher prices always correlate to fidelity: Stereophile's Defense of Luxury Audio & the false Binding Statement of High-End Audio.

Hublot Big Bang Unico, ~US$20k+ depending on model.

Hey everyone, I just got back from the wonderful trip to Central Europe and figured I'd extend some thoughts expressed in the previous article: The Luxury of Sound and Time: Audiophile products, the Rolex and Timex Analogy.

That article went online October 12th and I was surprised to see Stereophile posted their article “In Defense of Sticker Shock” on October 17th written by Rogier van Bakel featuring a fancy looking, but inexpensive quartz wristwatch as the title image; what synchronicity! I assume his article must have been published in print/e-magazine earlier than when it showed up online.

I see the article pretty much opens with this statement:

Say “$10,000 DAC” and watch audio-forum commenters descend like pigeons on a dropped hot dog, flapping and furious.

Yeah, that's probably a fair observation! However, I think the first question we must ask ourselves is: “What’s wrong with that?”

The Luxury of Sound and Time: Audiophile products, the Rolex and Timex Analogy.

Left: This certified authentic Used Rolex Cosmograph Daytona Watch, with the Model Number: 126598TRU, has a Yellow Gold/Diamonds 40 mm Round Case with Screw Down Crown and a Gem Set. This Men's Rolex Cosmograph Daytona has an attractive Diamond Pave Dial with Gems Dial Markers. The certified Swiss tested Rolex Automatic Movement will keep perfect time for you. The elegantly designed Rolex Yellow Gold with will look great on your wrist.

Right: Timex Men's Waterbury Classic Chrono 40mm Stainless Steel Quartz Dress Watch with Leather Strap. Reviewed to be one of the best well-priced mecha-quartz watches.

If we plug in the phrase "Rolex vs. Timex" into Google, we'll see that there have been a number of articles written about this topic aimed at wristwatch hobbyists that compare and contrast things like history, the products, features, and prices (like this). For the purpose of our discussion here, the actual brands are of could not too important; these are mere archetypes - Rolex the Swiss brand that caters to the prestige luxury market, while Timex is an American company (originally started as the Waterbury Clock Company in 1854, these days American-Dutch) known to produce mass-market time pieces for the "common man"; to satisfy the needs of kids, the athlete, and yes, even dipping its toes into the luxury market though nothing like the Rolex brand price-wise. As per their classic slogan suggesting the device is meant for the conditions of daily life, the Timex - "It takes a licking, and keeps on ticking."

Over the years on this blog, I've touched on the ideas behind luxury products - here and here for example. We've also discussed the wine-tasting pursuit compared to audiophilia, but I think there is an even better analogy we can make when we look at something like the wristwatch collector (horophile) hobby. Since both audio products and watches are products of technological evolution, I believe there are similarities when it comes to the trajectory of these products, the industries behind their production, the consumers who buy them, the way they are portrayed in advertising (including in reviews) and social sentiment.

So grab a comfortable seat, maybe get a nice beverage, let's take some time to think and discuss...

Linn DS streamers: Majik DS(/1), Klimax DS/2 and Klimax DSM/2 measurements. (Examples of "high end" audio.)

The Linn Klimax DS/2 here at home for auditioning back in 2024.

Readers might recall about a year ago, we ran a blind listening test using hi-res captures of the analog output from different DACs to see if there was a clearly audible difference between a very cheap DAC (the Apple USB-C headphone dongle) versus much more expensive "audiophile high-end" streamer DACs which were the Linn Majik DS(/1) and Klimax DSM/2 Katalyst. If you don't know the results of that online study, here they are, and the subjective comments around what was heard.

While I showed 0dBFS 1kHz THD+N results for the Majik DS and Klimax DSM/2 back then, there was quite a bit more data collected as part of the preparation for that Internet Blind Listening Test that I did not publish. Even though my friend linnrd (who has contributed to these pages), as suggested by his screen name, happened to be quite the Linn fan, I appreciate that he is not blinded to the complexities of human preferences. He's well aware that both subjective impressions and objective performance play their part and he was totally open to me running measurements on his Linn digital gear to examine for technical accuracy.

For this post, let's dive deeper into the technical performance of some Linn streaming DAC gear. Here are the devices I'll be showing results of...

Part III: Topping DX9 "15th Anniversary" Limited Edition DAC & Headphone Amplifier - DSD, S/PDIF inputs, headphone out, pre-out, and AMPT. And the desire beyond Perceptibly Perfect.

With Raspberry Pi 'Touch' streamer showing album art running RoPieee, and the Topping DX9 VU meters playing, this looks quite nice in the audio rack!

Let's finish up with the last installment of the review/measurements for the Topping DX9 "15th Anniversary" DAC (see Part I, and Part II previously). As we have seen up to this point, it's quite a unique looking DAC and the initial PCM measurements over USB2.0 look great as a modern hi-resolution converter. In Part II I noted that there was an issue with the 176.4/192kHz frequency response that Topping was able to correct quickly with a firmware update. I'll be using the latest firmware 1.23 for the measurements here.

Let's continue then to dive in and explore the objective performance with some of the other main features for this DAC.

Part II: Topping DX9 "15th Anniversary" Limited Edition DAC & Headphone Amplifier - PCM Filters, Frequency Response & DAC Resolution. (And Trump's ongoing oblivious narcissistic tariff buffoonery.) [Firmware 1.23 Update]

Continuing with the discussion in Part I, let's proceed with Part II of our look at the Topping DX9 "15th Anniversary" DAC as we wade into some of the technical capabilities and performance of this device.

As I discussed the other week, my belief is that for relatively "simple" devices like DACs where what we want is as-accurate-as-possible conversion of the audio data into the analog voltages, measurements are really all we need to characterize the accuracy, the transparency of the device using modern tests and instruments that are capable of capturing details beyond the ability of human hearing. The capability for any device to achieve transparency of course does not guarantee that we'll be able to enjoy the sound or the music which are determined by individual subjective psychological factors.

With that, let's jump into some PCM measurements of this Topping flagship product.

Part I: Topping DX9 "15th Anniversary" Limited Edition DAC & Headphone Amplifier - build, features, listening impressions & subjective luxury.

As many audiophiles will remember, the well-known DAC chip maker Asahi Kasei Microdevices (AKM) suffered a massive fire at their factory back on October 20, 2020 in Miyazaki Prefecture, Japan. This resulted in a shortage of their chips for awhile until they rebuilt the plant and started offering devices again by the end of 2021.

In June 2021, AKM issued a "last time buy" notification for final stock of a number of their products. This included their top-of-the-line DAC chip, the AKM AK4499EQ which was initially released in January 2019 and had made its way into a number of devices over the ensuing couple of years. By later 2021, some devices like the HiFi Rose RS150 had to transition to ESS. With 4 channels, a published THD+N of -124dB (mono mode), 137dB SNR in stereo (140dB mono), DSD "direct" (volume bypass), this chip remains a formidable converter even in 2025 with newer generations of AKM and ESS chip DACs. While audiophiles and manufacturers like to talk about discreet DACs like R2R stuff or custom "Ring" DACs, or DSD-processing DACs (like Meitner products or Playback Designs), while I'm sure they sound great, there is no evidence that these are capable of achieving better objective resolution than state-of-the-art converter chips from semiconductor companies with significant R&D resources.

For comparison, based on company specs, the current premium DAC chips are ESS's ES9039PRO rated at -122dB THD+N mono, and 140dB SNR mono. And AKM's current flagship, the 2-channel AK4499EX DAC released in 2021 listed as THD+N -124dB and SNR 135dB stereo (138dB mono). The AK4499EQ as a 4-channel DAC is a much more complicated chip than 2 AK4499EX's because it also incorporates the sigma-delta modulator internally while the AK4499EX needs to be fed 7-bit modulator data at 5.64/11.29MHz from a separate source like the AK4191EQ ΔΣ Modulator!

So, basically, as a single chip, the discontinued AK4499EQ after only about 1.5 years in production, remains the highest performing device among its peers after all these years; on paper at least.

And that's why I bought one of these for my system - the Topping DX9 "15th Anniversary" Limited Edition DAC & headphone amplifier (US$1299, CAD$1900, depending on tariffs you might do better ordering from China through AliExpress):

This is Topping's flagship DAC, released in late 2023. It's said to be limited edition due to the restricted number of DAC chips; I connected with Topping and was told in total they made about 1800 units.

I bought this unit from the usual retail channels and have no affiliation with the company.

Multichannel/Atmos 3D Audio Walkthrough. The idea that DACs sound about the same. Countercultural & honest audiophiles?

Hey audiophiles, I've been wanting to do this for awhile now. Back in 2021 when I wrote about "Spatial Audio" music streaming on Apple Music, in the back of my mind I was thinking it would be pretty cool to not just listen to the music and consider whether this kind of content is worthy of audiophile exploration, but to actually fire up a DAW (digital audio workstation) and play around with Dolby Atmos myself to create a little something that I can also use as a demo or to help with set-up in my own room.

Nothing too fancy of course since the intent is to demo spatial capability rather than wow the listener with overly complex sounds or movements. It's also a fun way for me to learn how to use the software and to go a bit deeper into 3D audio - beyond just expressing opinions on the consumption side.

So, over the Spring Break with a little more time available, I bought a copy of DaVinci Resolve Studio 19 (currently US$300) and got to work on figuring out how to author some 3D audio content. The price is very reasonable for such a powerful piece of software which I plan to use in other audio/video projects. Other packages that allow Atmos audio mastering include Avid's ProTools, Steinberg's Nuendo and Cubase, Ableton Live, Apple's Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro.

Once I figured out how the Fairlight "audio console" module in DaVinci Resolve worked and got the immersive pieces authored, a friend who works in audio professionally helped with the Dolby Media Encoder (US$400/year subscription) side to bring the track over to Dolby Digital Plus / EAC3-JOC, TrueHD-Atmos, and AC-4 IMS.

DIY: Archimago's "RED DRAGON" Speaker Cables - Canare 4S11G (OFC, Star Quad, 11AWG). [And fascinating Townshend video with Wireworld in the mix.]

Alright friends, time for another fun and easy audiophile craft project! 🙂

Among the cables we use in audio, I would argue it's most fun fooling around with speaker cables as a DIY project. This is not necessarily because it "sounds different" (after all, this recent blind test didn't show a difference between $27 12AWG OFC zip cord and a $20k Gryphon set as discussed here, right?).

No friends, within reason, speaker cables have never really been proven to sound all that different from each other unless there are clear effects designed into them (stuff like the MIT cables with "articulation control" filter box come to mind). Rather, these are "fun" to make if you have time because you and your visitors can see the cables. A nice looking, relatively thick set can look impressive compared to generic thin wires. While we might measure and find good numbers, or subjectively hear nice-sounding music regardless, appearances cannot be underestimated in the world of the audiophile; after all that's been said and done, we don't need to pretend that it's all for improving sound quality, right? 😉

And so, for fun and curiosity, I found the Canare 4S11G which is the Oxygen-Free Copper (OFC) variant of the well-known 4S11. Many cables claim to be OFC, but the conductor here is certified Japanese Industrial Standard JIS-H-3510.

I reached out to AVshop.ca here in Canada and grabbed 25' (CAD$3.16/ft or just less than USD$2.50/ft) of this wire to play around with. Here's the result of a little DIY, what I'll call my "RED DRAGON" speaker cables. Because red is cool and dragons are auspicious and marketing departments seem to think "mythical creatures" cables 😯 appeal to audiophiles:

"High-End" DAC Blind Listening Results - PART III: Subjective Descriptions

In this last part of the "High-End" DAC Blind Listening Survey write-up, (see Part I, Part II) let me document the more qualitative aspects of the responses I received from listeners. These come from the comments section where listeners described what they heard. You'll also get to see in context some of the descriptions of the hardware used in the evaluation.

Comments will be posted verbatim other than removing any identifying information and names unless the person specifically says it's OK. Not all comments are posted, only the ones with a fair amount of subjective experiential content or description of evaluation procedure. It's interesting knowing which city/country some folks are from so I'll leave that information if mentioned.

So as not to neglect those who said they heard no difference (yet I know many spent a good amount of time on the test), let's start with that group of respondents... I'll add some comments/responses along the way.

"High-End" DAC Blind Listening Results - PART II: Results & Analyses

I imagine that the banner graphic above must be so bizarre for some audiophiles! How is it even possible that the audio output from something cheap like the Apple USB-C headphone dongle could be mistaken for the way more expensive Linn digital streamer devices that cost orders of magnitude more?!

Well, of course we can! And if we are to honestly appreciate the difference in sound output between the very cheap and very expensive (we can buy a lot of other stuff, services, and experiences for US$20,000!), IMO, as audiophiles, we must open our minds to such comparisons. The hi-fi audiophile pursuit is not a cult; everything is up for empirical examination regardless of company, price tag, or which heroic personality is attached to said product.

Last week in Part I, I unveiled the identity and discussed those DAC/streamer devices. Let's proceed today with looking at the data from the recent 2024 "High-End" DAC Blind Listening Survey which collected listener impressions for 6 weeks; plenty of time I trust for those motivated to download, listen, and offer their subjective opinions.

As usual, let's go through the data broadly and then let's see if the results can provide some answers for specific questions around audibility, preferences, and listener subgroups. I'll group these questions and evaluations into a number of Sections.

Grab your favorite beverage, have a seat, this is a pretty long one... 🙂

"High-End" DAC Blind Listening Results - PART I: Devices Unveiled!

The time has come friends. Over the last 6 weeks, I've been collecting the data from the 2024 "High-End" DAC Blind Listening Survey. The procedure I think is already well described in that test invite post so I won't spend time here recapping that. Thanks for everyone who participated in the blind listening!

As with many blind listening tests, unless it's literally obvious, I know it's not easy to flip back and forth and it's very common after a few A/B/C switches to second-guess oneself! I certainly appreciate the time that participants spent downloading the >500MB file, getting it onto your listening devices, and the listening itself.

For this post, let's talk about the test, some rationale, and let me unveil the 3 DACs that were used.

2024 "High-End" DAC Blind Listening Survey!

*Surprise!* It's time for another listening survey.

I like doing these once awhile because it's an opportunity for audiophiles to actually listen for differences between devices, resolutions, or even things like filter settings for themselves as opposed to hanging on to the testimonies of others whether in text or expressed in videos. We can argue all day long about whether THD+N of -120dB is better than -85dB, or if a US$20,000 DAC sounds better than a US$500 one; what matters ultimately is in the listening.

[I agree with Taylor Christensen in his excellent article on "subjectivisms" that what we need more of these days is audibility data to address the category of "scientific subjectivism"; not just opinions or measurements.]

This time, I'll be using recordings of the AMPT Test Track from 3 different DACs for you to listen to. These were created based on my standard procedure of recording and processing described in the link. The only difference is that I'll be using the 24-bit version of the AMPT for this survey to maximize higher resolution dynamic range potential from the DACs.

As a blind survey, I will not tell you which DACs these are to minimize bias. What I can say for now is that these are not devices from Chinese brands although anything can be "Made in China" these days (ie. these are not Topping, SMSL, Sabaj, Shanling, Matrix, Gustard, etc.). Some of these devices can be considered "aspirational" DACs or streamers in that the MSRP of the device could be out of reach to many, even priced "ridiculously" high.

Perhaps this fact might encourage you to listen for yourself: the difference between the least expensive and most expensive device is >100 times!

Cautionary Tale: Audiophile's dream's end... Make sure to find balance, audiophiles.

 I remember a couple of years ago, I saw this YouTube documentary on Ken Fritz:

[Available as audio podcast summary.]

That is certainly an impressive demonstration of dedication and passion poured into the sound room and audio system! Few would have such tenacity, disposable financial resources, or apparent family support. Admittedly, I wondered while watching that video just how well those massive DIY speakers integrated into the room and what measurements would have told us about frequency response and time-domain performance. There's a low resolution frequency response graph here. Yeah, I'm sure the system could play loud with 35,000W* of amplification.

And 2 years later, sadly, the final chapter of the life story was published a few weeks back:

He spent his life building a $1 million stereo. The real cost was unfathomable.

I guess we'll never know exactly how that system sounded like now that everything has been taken apart. What looks like 27 years of labor and $1M original price was dismantled and sold off for $157k total in a comparatively short time. Clearly, neither the family nor the new home buyers had need for the extravagant system in the large room. The dead might at best influence, but cannot declare the will of the living.

Here's a detailed description and list of components. Obviously, audio/music items are generally not investment vehicles unless it's attached to someone very special (like maybe say Hendrix's guitar amp). These things we talk about are for the consumption of music primarily. The non-investable nature of these products is especially true of DIY items given that the quality of such items are unknown even if the bits and pieces like speaker drivers could be from a reputable brand. Over time as components degrade, it could be difficult performing repairs on non-standard builds.

MUSINGS: Fidelity, Immersion, and Realism (FIR) - Levels of Audiophile Attainment

As we start 2024, let's think about a "big picture" topic. Like with most things in life, I find it useful to think about the overarching philosophy - the "forest" if you will - alongside the details - the "trees" - which is when we get down to measurements and tests of specific products. Hopefully by doing this we can develop a more comprehensive understanding of whatever it might be we're engaged in.

As discussed years ago, I don't think the audiophile hobby is a monolithic entity based on only one core pursuit. In reality, it's a multitude of hobbyist pursuits ranging from the "music lover", to the "hardware audiophile", to subgroups like the "gear hoarder", "LP collector", even "high end (luxury) enthusiast", each of us at varying levels of emotional intensity; even resulting in more "fetishistic" extremes! 🙄

We're not a particularly large group of hobbyists. Sure, there are billions of music lovers out there, but when it comes to guys (mostly) wanting to talk about audiophile hardware, geeky high-fidelity (transparency) reproduction, and things that appear extravagant to the general public, there really are not many of us. It's also hard to know if this hobby is growing, stagnant or diminishing in numbers.

As I look around at magazine reviews and YouTube videos, that idea of stagnation has entered my mind many times over the last few years. Not just wondering about the numbers of audiophiles and whether the hobby is growing, but rather, in what directions are we as hobbyists going forward, if even at all!

Approaching the mid-2020's, are we still in search of "High Fidelity" after all these decades and the multitudes of products? Maybe, maybe not... Let's talk about some ideas which I believe are the goals that audiophiles can aspire to which I've acronymized as FIR - Fidelity, Immersion, and Realism.

MUSINGS: "People, please, you want to grow our industry?" - Comments on Jonathan Scull's Stereophile article and what is "High End" audio good for?

Make sure to consult this site if you see anyone ever consumer one of these mushrooms BTW... :-)

As you can see, I have a picture of George Carlin (from 2008, RIP), known for the quoted comment beside some arguably "pretty" Amanita mushrooms above. These pictures represent some ideas I'll be talking about in today's post. The mushrooms by the way grow around these parts of Southwestern British Columbia and Pacific Northwest US. They look quite pretty in the wild, but these are toxic if consumed. They're bad for ya... Of course, there are many things (and people) in life that look good on the surface, but ultimately unwise to be enmeshed with, pretty mushrooms are just an innocuous example. :-)

When I say that those mushrooms are actually "bad for ya", I trust nobody would disagree, right? After all, it's easy to say that as humans, since these mushrooms will damage our health, we can easily judge them to be "bad" and should simply avoid getting near.

I could not help thinking about this a week back when I read Jonathan Scull's article "Something's Coming" in Stereophile.