<p>This reminds me of something I saw on Lifehacker (but didn’t bother to click through) - can you tell the difference between different forms of compressing media (I gather this has to do with stereos, and the kinds of people who go on about how there’s nothing like vinyl and how listening to music on an iPhone through Apple’s earbuds is just the most awfulest experience ever, and sound engineer blah-blah-blah). I’ve got 1000 songs on my iPhone, but listening to them through Apple earbuds is absolutely fine for my needs and the fine distinctions of all these different technologies is completely lost on me - as is most “remastering.”</p>
<p>I am interested in the history of fashion from the beginning of time. When I look at “old masters” one thing I’m studying is costume. For me any museum costume exhibit is an intellectually enriching experience and changes how I think about my own clothing choices. I am fascinated by where current designers get their ideas, what they are copying or transforming. I don’t think it is necessary anyone else view the world this way but I don’t think it is a negative approach. It’s just another in a variety of approaches to life, none better or worse. ymmv I think there is a whole lot to recommend in choosing handmade clothing and shoes, if you can afford it and are willing to do so. I didn’t invent this idea. The Bloomsbury group were sort of famous advocates. Especially when supporting local artisans. Even more especially, women owned and staffed studios. So I may be looking at this a little bit differently than Gourmetmom in that aspect as well.</p>
<p>Funny how some people like to snicker when other people experience bad luck or problems with an expensive item - a Ferrari that blows an engine or a lemon Jaguar (which nowadays are quite reliable from what I understand). Do they feel that the person deserves the problem because they had the nerve to spend a lot of money? Does it stem from jealousy?</p>
<p>We are talking about jewelry here, BTW, it’s not a metaphor for life. </p>
<p>There are lots of “bests” that I know nothing about. Scotch for example. My brother loves scotch and I wanted to buy him a nice bottle to have when he visited a while back. I went to the liquor store where I normally shopped and bought a bottle of their “best.” Turns out, it’s just so so and he drank from another bottle I’ve had sitting around for years that was “better” although not really great, either. I had no idea…but I wasn’t offended whatsoever, nor did I take it as a personal affront and make it clear to him that my scotch was just as good as any other scotch. </p>
<p>Snickering? No one is snickering. Just seeing that as an example of bad judgment in the name of flashiness. That said, as aside, the fact that those relatives chose to buy TWO jaguars because one was always in the shop seemed remarkably unintelligent to the rest of the family members. I was a new member of this family, having only recently married DH when I heard about this back then. </p>
<p>Its merely another example of discussing items of perceived quality, just as artwork, haut couture, fine wine or scotch, or the reported quality of current jags were brought into the discussion.</p>
<p>Friends (and my husband) are whiskey connoisseurs, so this is a useful example for me. I don’t have much of a palate and my “best” is not their best though not an outright embarrassment. ; ) I think almost every thread on this board at this point in time is a metaphor for life. And on many different levels. That’s the only reason I’m still reading along after all these years. </p>
<p>alh - I buy lots of locally made items, at home and when I travel, especially art glass, pottery, textiles. I have jewelry from several local artisans - most of it is not really fine - semi-precious stones, brass or plated or silver. It’s pretty and decorative, but it doesn’t last forever - discolors or breaks after a few years. I don’t care…if I can wear it and it looks nice, so what? But I’m not kidding myself that it’s just as good as my Bulgari. </p>
<p>My mother was a painter, and I grew up around people who made all sorts of things and in a house where the art was hung from floor to ceiling. We lived in an art colony in the summer…my understanding of that way of life and way of thinking runs deep, and I have a great appreciation for creativity and the notion that there can be beauty in many things.</p>
<p>For a time when I was growing up my dad would only buy Rovers (not Land Rovers, but the sedans). He is English and he had a lot of nostalgia for British vehicles. At one time we had two–they were ALWAYS in the shop, as were a lot of other European “status” cars of the era. He would be the first one to snicker about it today, now that he has gotten religion on more reliable vehicles.</p>
<p>(Off diamond topic) Really like rings with the mate’s fingerprint etched/molded into it. Can be inside ring or outside. Good for your child’s fingerprint too. </p>
<h1>345 - this is going to come across as one upwomanship and snitty but I don’t know how else to say it. I’ll stick with the jewelry example. I have a friend who makes jewelry. He’s an artist whose work is shown internationally in museums and galleries. Oligarchs show up at his very remote farmhouse workshop to buy pieces. He doesn’t really advertise. In my opinion, his pieces are in a different category entirely than Bulgari. Of course, that is a matter of opinion. “Best” will always be subjective. I’ve been thinking about this since someone described the Mona Lisa as the best painting. Then someone else said maybe the most famous painting. That made more sense to me. I am not trying to be insulting, just musing on this thread and where it went.</h1>
<p>“… the notion that there can be beauty in many things.”
Absolutely! Woodworking tools on display at an art museum? Uhm… Until I saw the photos:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.bellevuearts.org/exhibitions/quality_is_contagious.html”>http://www.bellevuearts.org/exhibitions/quality_is_contagious.html</a></p>
<p>alh - Joel Rosenthal? Of course there are other designers…but for the sake of this discussion, few have heard of him.</p>
<p>^no. But the fact few have heard of my friend was pretty much my point. : ) </p>
<p>Ha - I have nothing Bulgari (not my taste), but my last experience with Bulgari was when I went with a group of girlfriends to the Caribbean last year. One friend had a time share at the Ritz so that is where we stayed. Bulgari did a little wine-and-cheese reception where they showed scarves and had a little seminar on how to tie them, etc. The woman was completely ill prepared, had basically one sloppy knot – and we were all better and more imaginative and skilled at tying scarves than she was. And the Bulgari scarves were ugly!</p>
<p>Gourmetmom, I suspect you might like Hermes scarves and if you do, you might enjoy the Mai Tai blog. I don’t have a link, but google Mai Tai and scarves and you’ll find it. She’s an elegant French woman who has a collection to die for and wears them very well. I don’t have any myself but do covet them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Apologies for OT:</p>
<p>Some of the differences perceived by hardcore audiophiles is due to the fact they are so interested and engaged with getting the best sonic experience from their music that they are willing to spend thousands/tens of thousands on high end audio playback equipment/speakers where differences between vinyl, CDs, and lossy compressed file formats may likely show up. If you’re using most of the mid-end or lower stereos or worse, most computer speakers, including expensive computer brands you’re unlikely to hear much if any differences. </p>
<p>Another thing many don’t discuss is the lower quality of CDs or lossy compressed file formats is much more likely due to the poor quality of mastering the music onto those media by the studio or individual doing the compression. </p>
<p>Poorly mastered CDs* or individuals/organizations screwing up using lossy compression programs has been a serious issue. And that’s not even bringing up the “loudness wars” issue with CDs being mastered from the '90s onward which is more likely to detract from the music listener’s enjoyment of the music on that medium due to volume and the compression of the highs and lows. Especially if it’s a classical or jazz recording. </p>
<p>The vast majority of the music consuming public don’t have the money and/or don’t feel the need to get themselves such high end audio equipment. </p>
<p>And that’s assuming there is scientific validity to the “golden ears” phenomenon among some people which has been called into question according to some blind tests done with some folks. Vast majority of the music consuming public has already voted with their ears by overwhelmingly preferring digital downloads in lossy compressed file formats even though vinyl has had a serious resurgence among hardcore music fans/audiophiles. </p>
<p>In short, a large part of this is very YMMV. </p>
<ul>
<li>One issue hardcore audiophiles who favor vinyl and disparage CDs have is the fact vinyl is recorded in analog which has the potential to retain all the information from the recording at the expense of taking up more physical and file storage space. CDs are recorded digitally and have more compression in comparison to squeeze more audio data onto a smaller physical medium.<br></li>
</ul>
<p>Some sound engineers have likened it to viewing a full film versus viewing fewer snapshots at key points with some clever tricks to fool you into thinking you’re viewing a full film.</p>
<p>Never mind. Original post deleted.
The off topic intervening post above made this one hard to follow. </p>
<p>“Snickering? No one is snickering. Just seeing that as an example of bad judgment in the name of flashiness. That said, as aside, the fact that those relatives chose to buy TWO jaguars because one was always in the shop seemed remarkably unintelligent to the rest of the family members. I was a new member of this family, having only recently married DH when I heard about this back then.”</p>
<p>MIL had a Jaguar years ago - no problems with it and she bought it because she thought it was an attractive, comfortable car, not because it was “flashy.” Is it hard to imagine that some people buy what they buy because they happen to like whatever it is, not to impress others?</p>
<p>“You can appreciate a good $8 wine if you know what a fabulous $400 wine tastes like.”</p>
<p>I don’t think you need to taste a $400 wine to know if you like an $8 one.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t mind a $400 bottle of wine as long as someone else is paying for it. </p>
<p>I rarely wear silk scarves, and have never been attracted to Hermes, for some reason. FWIW, most of their jewelry is costume grade - I liked one of their watches a few years ago and was dismayed to find that it was gold plated. </p>
<p>Just asked DH what he wants as a gift. He said a new elliptical or treadmill. I suggested we look at Costco or one of the places that sells used gym equipment. He told me I needed to rethink my approach to how we manage our spending. So I am perfectly OK giving DS some $$$$$$$ family diamonds but dont want to spend much on ourselves. Oh well, I am ok with that.</p>