Technology

Depends. If you're streaming Dire Staits on a $250,000 stereo. You've probably missallocated funds approaching a moronic level from a functionality perspective. However, if you've got half a billion in the bank, I'd say it's a far more wholesome idiocy than for example, real estate. Money inherently means less to rich people. The difference of a few thousand to tens of thousands are, bewilderingly, fairly inconsequential to many people. I'd just assume they put that money into listening to music rather than super pacs or something. Hell, maybe they'll actually hear what the musicians are saying and they'll actually grow a little.

The issue with audio is the same issue with all hobbies. Spending a lot doesn't make you an automatic expert, let alone even know what you're doing. An expensive bat doesn't make a bad player good, an expensive stove doesn't make a bad cook good, expensive clothes doesn't make an ugly person beautiful, an expensive running shoes don't make an out of shape person healthier.

I find shitting on audiophiles particularly annoying because it's smugness on both sides of the equation. The people who buy in think they're better than everyone just like the people who see the con think they're better than the rubes. If I had to pick a side though, I'd honestly pick the audiophiles, because at least they're having fun.

There's a big difference between a $100 sound system and a $1000 sound system. I've gotten the "audiophiles are dumb" lecture for suggesting someone upgrade from 2x4" computer speakers to actual studio monitors for working on their music. But their speakers literally could not reproduce some of the frequencies thru were trying to make, so they mixed the bass WAY the fuck too loud.

But yeah, diminishing returns start to kick in around that point. Quickly becomes the eternal story of a Fool and His Money.

What do you mean? I always pay extra for the audiophile version of vinyl records!