[zmmmmm]

It's been an interesting evolution as I have aged to observe myself going from one end of the spectrum to the other (mainly, as I've accumulated more wealth).

I'm now at the point where I crave quality at just about any cost because it's abundantly clear to me that buying crap is bad value. Many of the few high quality things I bought early on in life are still with me and I love them. But so is a huge amount of the garbage I bought earlier and I hate it.

So where I used to go into shops and look at all the expensive items with scorn and think "what idiots must there be who buy all these things that are twice the price!", now I go in and actively try to find out "but is there an even more expensive one I could get with higher quality?"

[lupinglade]

It's not always the price too, often enough the higher quality item can be cheaper, just less of a fancy package maybe. A lot of companies blow all their budget on advertising and packaging instead of product quality and research. Knowledge is key. Especially be careful in stores like TJ Maxx, Home-sense and such -- lots of lowest quality fancy packaged junk to be had there.

[jack_pp]

One example I'm aware of is headphones. A while back everyone thought Beats are the best because they were expensive and had good marketing but really they were shit and you could get much better quality for less price

[colanderman]

At the same time, in keeping with the theme of the article -- spend the $75 for a good (i.e. well-regarded for your use case) pair of headphones if you enjoy music. It is absolutely night and day compared to $10 crap.

[megameter]

I've swung towards the cheap end and am currently wearing some basic Sony over-ears.

I have more expensive gear. The value here is not really in the audio quality - which, apart from the most strenuous audio engineering flat-response-and-detailed-image-needed cases, is fine, really - but in being light and cheap and embracing that quality. It rattles a little when you hold it, but it's made to withstand a few drops, and it won't pressure your skull or force your neck out of posture with hours of use. The cable is soldered in but sturdy.

The $75 ones I've used always tend to end up with issues because they don't have these qualities. The cables are still soldered but of a lower thickness, and the rigidity of the frame makes them disconnect more readily. They pinch your ears and crush your skull. The quality is better but not enough to matter in everyday use - a good DAC and a low-noise environment makes more difference.

[lupinglade]

This is mainly because Beats headphones are just terrible at any price and a perfect example of all their budget going on marketing. Other headphones in the same price range or even below can be very good.

[joecool1029]

Beats/Bose were always like this. Selling the branding I mean, at least Beats had lineage of Monster producing a few decent units before they nudged them out of the picture.

Better example in the headphone world were high-end IEM's (Shure/Westone/Etymotics). Most of them were in the many hundreds of dollar range for good multi-driver units. In the past few years though Chinese manufacturers (KZ is one I can think of off the top of my head) sell their own lines on aliexpress/taobab using the same drivers for 10% of the cost.

I can't justify recommending the old names now to people, the value just isn't there (and most of the old big names stopped producing in US/EU since China turned out to have better QC). Why pay $200 for a double-driver Westone when I can recommend a 5-driver KZ unit for $60? I just don't get it.

[modeless]

Honestly I've gone in the other direction. Quality for its own sake is not a virtue; all that matters is whether the item meets the needs you have. An item that breaks and needs replacement is waste, but an item that is overbuilt and never used to its potential is a different kind of waste.

I don't need the best tools in the world for my home toolbox. I use each tool maybe a couple of times a year and even the cheap ones don't break at that level of use. I bought a $250 RC car and a $10 one, and while the $250 one is awesome I've gotten more use out of the $10 one. Sometimes you need quality but sometimes you don't.

[orwin]

I disagree so much with this. I don't pay 250 to 1000 euros for each of my tools because i use them a lot (even though during the lockdowns i did). I got them because professional tools are:

- easier to store - easier to use - pack more power (thus less time spend) - more precise (i'm annoyed if my angles are one millimeter off) - less brittle (its not that cheap ones are breaking, its that even a small, almost invisble chip of metal off your torx head will make your life harder) - less dusty - safer - easier to clean - Combine themselves (transformers for woordworking smh) - Have complete accessories (angle transmission being the most usefull, also the protractor going directly on the radial saw gives you perfect results)

If you want to replace a door with cheap tools, be my guest, i did it once with a friend, i'm not doing it ever again. I'm now bringing my tools every single time.

[lelanthran]

> I disagree so much with this. I don't pay 250 to 1000 euros for each of my tools because i use them a lot (even though during the lockdowns i did). I got them because professional tools are:

I've got both professional tools and el-cheapos so I'm familiar with all your plus points, but I still think that parent has a point.

IME, "buying cheap" does not mean "a tool that breaks on the second use", or "makes your life harder". It means "I don't use this tool frequently enough to care enough to pay more".

I've got a cheapo cordless screwdriver that works well enough to do battery replacement on children's toys and similar. When I want to drive self-tappers into wood I use an expensive driver in the garage.

[steverb]

I have a rule for buying tools. The first one I buy, I buy the cheaper version (Harbor Freight house brand for instance). If I use it enough to break it within3 years, or become frustrated with its shortcomings, then I go buy a "pro" version.

Yes, it does mean I have spent more money than absolutely necessary, but on the other hand I have a lot of cheap tools that are perfectly serviceable for the two times a year I actually need to use them.

It works for me, you go do what works for you.

[hutrdvnj]

Yeah, I think that is the best approach especially if the price difference is like tenfold for the high quality product.

However there are some exceptions to the rule, for example I would never buy a low quality notebook or a low quality car.

If the price of the high quality product is too high for me, then I don't try to look for a cheaper model immediately, but try to go second hand first.

[steverb]

Oh yeah, there are certain things that I know I am going to really care about the quality of.

Never ever buy cheap jack stands for instance. The extra money you spend on the good ones is just life insurance.

[varispeed]

There is nothing worse than a weekend and sudden urgent repair to be done. Then you take out your tools and it breaks... It's so frustrating. On the other hand if you pull out a good quality tool, not only you'll fix the problem, but you'll feel good from even looking at it (or at least me).

[hashkb]

That's fair. There is also a category (I'm thinking musical instruments, sports equipment, vim) that grows with you. You might miss out (or worse, quit guitar) because you were too cheap to ever figure out what you were missing.

[avalexandrov]

I have been feeling exactly like you for the past couple of years but I've noticed that sometimes items that are known to be "buy it for life" kind of quality level have disappointed me a bit. My most recent example of that is the Herman Miller Embody chair I got just two months ago. Sure, it's very comfy and it worked really well during the first month. And then came the second month and it started to creak, squeak, pop and all kinds of other weird noises. I've researched the issue online and it turns out Herman Miller consider this perfectly normal because apparently it's a "complex product with a lot of parts". I'm not sure how that makes any sense for a product that costs this much. My IKEA Markus is 5 years old by now - it makes zero noise, it has 80% of the comfort of the Embody and it cost literally 1/10th of the price.

So yes, I also want the best of the best and "buy it for life" but I'm starting to think that sometimes this classification is a bit overrated and you need to find a very good balance between price and quality.

[jimktrains2]

For me the issue is figuring out what is even quality. It feels like a lot of the time all options are meh or the feature set I want just doesn't exist.

[nicbou]

Is it maybe just the result of aging?

My hobbies and interests are more established. I know which tools I use a lot, how I use them, and where spending more makes a difference. I've owned and outgrown my entry level gear.

That, and I have more disposable income. I can afford long term investments because they don't incur short term deprivation.

On the other hand, when trying something new, I still go with the cheaper option until I can appreciate what a better tool would do. In most cases, I find that the cheap tool is enough.

[ridethebike]

There's russian saying for this: greedy man pays twice.