A question of value in today's hi-end.

[Phelonious Ponk]

As a feeble attempt to stay on topic, the saying is that good bass is the most expensive thing to do well. Tight bass is a rarity in mass market gear where bloat, overhang and port noise is common even for powered subs so I guess there is some validity to the saying even as rare examples to the contrary might be out there.

That is a truism, sir, but there are even some price/performance ratio busters in that neighborhood. This little REL...

...won't dive to super sub-sonic butt-shakin' home theater territory, but for clean, controlled bass for music, matched to less than gargantuan systems and rooms (I'm learning the qualifiers I need to add around here ), it does a great job and hits way above its weight: 150 watts, about $600.

Tim

 

[NorthStar]

^ Good one Tim; Rel subwoofers from Great Britain are some of the most musical ones around, and they have several models to accomodate a vast portion of customers.

* If you're serious about a musical and controlled sub that blend very well with your front monitors, give a Rel a listen! Click => Rel

 

[DaveyF]

Jack, no need to apologize...I'm really interested in this subject.
Tim, have you heard this Rel Sub? It looks very good and I have heard great things about their line...Not had the opportunity of listening to one in my system..
I do use a Psb Subsonic 5i in my home theater system and it can punch way above what one would expect

 

[Lee]

That is a truism, sir, but there are even some price/performance ratio busters in that neighborhood. This little REL...

...won't dive to super sub-sonic butt-shakin' home theater territory, but for clean, controlled bass for music, matched to less than gargantuan systems and rooms (I'm learning the qualifiers I need to add around here ), it does a great job and hits way above its weight: 150 watts, about $600.

Tim

A good friend has one of the RELs. It is terrific. I'm getting one for the Maggies.

 

[JackD201]

We do realize even $600 is considered excessive for many Even the baby brother quake is one of the rare examples I said are out there. Doesn't go all too low, is so light it tends to wander around a bit when pushed but is very easy to integrate.

I think there's more to pay than just money when one wants more of everything. The more a system and room allows you to hear, you get more of the good AND bad. Not such a wonderful thing depending where an individual is coming from. This is what I mean whenever I recommend that anybody out to get enjoyable reproduction key in to factors that push the right buttons for them and why I mentioned to microstrip that from a consumer's standpoints choosing between things such as scale leaves us with no wrong choices if what's preferred and/or practical is the overriding concern.

I wouldn't recommend my own system to someone who wasn't as maniacal as I am. In the very first page I said categorically that I've set up many systems that do less in technical terms that I sincerely could live with very happily. I also know many people like our own fellow member Jadis, who downsized but is much happier now because he focused on the elements that better connect him with the musical message.

I guess one could say this is the heart of individualization as applied to this hobby and the industry that supports it. It's not anything new anyway. You will pay more for bespoke suit than one off the rack even if the suit off the rack is an Armani at Off 5th using similar fabric. It's also the reason I threw in the mention of intellectual property being at it's most premium now more than ever. When we buy value oriented gear like a Seaton, a Gedlee, a bling free factory direct VSA VR-33 vs it's boutique market channeled stablemates, Gary's 7.1, the excellent Salks or your set of actives, we are paying for the expertise of the people that made them just like we do for a good tailor.

Mark did mention the size of egos too. I will agree that there are quite a few manufacturers out there resting on their laurels and using their names for undeserved premiums in pricing. In my opinion only of course. I don't worry about that too much personally. The market will take care of them sooner or later. Even fanboys have limits. I can also understand the frustration of the value oriented artisans, it's a hard pill to swallow when you know you've made something better but you're up against $$$$$$$ dollar ad campaigns. Unfortunately coming up with hideous pricing is a cheap way to get attention. Then again, like I said, to do that you'd have to demonstrate that price is commensurate to performance at least vis-a-vis the competition. The REAL problem is if all the competition is over priced in the here and now. Which finally brings us back to Davey's OP!

 

[NorthStar]

I think I need a high-end value music server with uncompressed high res audio! ...$50?

 

[Alan Sircom]

If you read Whisky magazine, judging by its content, you would get the picture that single malt whisky represents something in the region of 95% of the market. The reality is single malts account for just 7% of total whisky sales. If you read QP magazine, judging by its content, the average watch owner spent around $10,000 on a wrist watch last year, where in fact the average watch owner might spend $30 on a Timex every few years. If you read Mercedes Enthusiast magazine, judging by the content, there are only two types of cars on the road; new Mercedes and classic Mercedes.

Each of these magazines is geared toward a specific readership, one that represents the enthusiast end of a market that has a distinctly non-specialist end.

The same applies to most audio magazines today. Their content does not necessarily represent the entire market, but represents that part of the market sufficiently enthused and engaged to continue to buy a magazine about that subject. Using QP magazine as a parallel, I'd lay good money down that only a tiny handful of people walking round with a Swatch or a Seiko know of the existence of such a magazine, and I'd also bet that anyone owning a Grönefield and wearing a Bremont is a subscriber. And no, I'm not a watch expert... isn't Google wonderful?

Catering for the needs of an enthusiast creates a distinct skew. In audio, it means your Mark Levinson and Audio Research owning readers would rather read about what they aspire to, rather than what's new at NAD, just as guys who already own bottles of a'bunadh and Uigeadail aren't going to be too interested in a shoot-out between cheap supermarket branded scotches. That one I didn't need to Google, hic.

Magazines and manufacturers follow the money. There is no point targeting a sector of a market that doesn't exist, or doesn't want to know about your product. And right now, the audio market is hugely U-shaped; there are products selling at the budget end and at the super-high-end end, but the in between bit just isn't happening in the way it used to. We'd like it to come back, because the jump from a $2,000 system to a $200,000 one is more than a little abrupt. But at the moment, it seems people like the idea of there being products in the $4,000-$10,000 price range, but don't actually want to know about them. Or buy them.

 

[DaveyF]

If you read Whisky magazine, judging by its content, you would get the picture that single malt whisky represents something in the region of 95% of the market. The reality is single malts account for just 7% of total whisky sales. If you read QP magazine, judging by its content, the average watch owner spent around $10,000 on a wrist watch last year, where in fact the average watch owner might spend $30 on a Timex every few years. If you read Mercedes Enthusiast magazine, judging by the content, there are only two types of cars on the road; new Mercedes and classic Mercedes.

Each of these magazines is geared toward a specific readership, one that represents the enthusiast end of a market that has a distinctly non-specialist end.

The same applies to most audio magazines today. Their content does not necessarily represent the entire market, but represents that part of the market sufficiently enthused and engaged to continue to buy a magazine about that subject. Using QP magazine as a parallel, I'd lay good money down that only a tiny handful of people walking round with a Swatch or a Seiko know of the existence of such a magazine, and I'd also bet that anyone owning a Grönefield and wearing a Bremont is a subscriber. And no, I'm not a watch expert... isn't Google wonderful?

Catering for the needs of an enthusiast creates a distinct skew. In audio, it means your Mark Levinson and Audio Research owning readers would rather read about what they aspire to, rather than what's new at NAD, just as guys who already own bottles of a'bunadh and Uigeadail aren't going to be too interested in a shoot-out between cheap supermarket branded scotches. That one I didn't need to Google, hic.

Magazines and manufacturers follow the money. There is no point targeting a sector of a market that doesn't exist, or doesn't want to know about your product. And right now, the audio market is hugely U-shaped; there are products selling at the budget end and at the super-high-end end, but the in between bit just isn't happening in the way it used to. We'd like it to come back, because the jump from a $2,000 system to a $200,000 one is more than a little abrupt. But at the moment, it seems people like the idea of there being products in the $4,000-$10,000 price range, but don't actually want to know about them. Or buy them.

That's very interesting, Alan. Although I don't think I was referring to magazine articles in my OP. I would presume that hi-end manufacturers follow the money, like you say. Although, it does sometimes seem to me to be not the case. I say this, as I have several VERY well healed a'phile friends; who in fact suspect that many of these same manufacturer's must think them to be "pigeons"
Why do you feel that people like the idea of products in the $4K to $10K price range and yet don't want to know about them? or Buy them?

 

[NorthStar]

Hi Alan,

Luv your Mag! ...An avid reader for several years, and the very best quality Audio mag in its presentation, pictures quality, paper quality, cover quality, music reviews, articles, product reviews, interviews, etc.

Well, I am one that read about ALL the classes in Audio & Video! Because there is value in the $200, $2,000, $20,000, $200,000, and $2,000,000 price range!
And if someone has a setup that is worth $20 millions, I'd luv to read about it as well!

Me, in real life, with my brains first and money second, I'm right in the middle!
So $4,000 to $10,000 suits me just fine!

* And if I like what I read, I'll try to read even more about it!
And then I'll make the first important move; audition it in my own system!
And if it truly turns me on, I'll buy it! Pure & Simple!

 

[JackD201]

I just did. I ordered a pair of Unifield 1s for myself, I believe Alan reviewed these himself along with a Valvet Soulshine and A3.5, reviewed recently by Bob (rblnr). Total price with modest cables around 14k without sources.

I mention this because in form factor they are small, simple and unassuming. Side by side in a showroom with let's say a pair B&W CM5 and NAD separates it will be hard to wrap one's head around a price difference amounting to a pretty decent used car, just by looking at them. Then for the non-enthusiasts the subjective quality differences are much less than those of an enthusiast too making the price differences all the more befuddling.

 

[Bruce B]

I love reading about the Bugatti Veyron, but will never have one. People have this artificial ceiling of $5 - $10k as being the point of diminishing returns. It's also the thing about $4995 sounds much less expensive than 5-Grand!

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim, have you heard this Rel Sub? It looks very good and I have heard great things about their line...Not had the opportunity of listening to one in my system..

Every day at the store. This is a T3, one of REL's entry-level models. It doesn't have big rumble for home theater, but I couldn't care less about home theater. What it does have is what it needs to add real depth and punch to a kick drum, floor toms and a standup bass. That, I care about. Very sweet, clean and controlled. Very easy to integrate with big stand mounts or smallish floor standers. Haven't tried it with any big full-range speakers, but given what it does, that would be redundant anyway.

Tim

 

[Alan Sircom]

That's very interesting, Alan. Although I don't think I was referring to magazine articles in my OP. I would presume that hi-end manufacturers follow the money, like you say. Although, it does sometimes seem to me to be not the case. I say this, as I have several VERY well healed a'phile friends; who in fact suspect that many of these same manufacturer's must think them to be "pigeons"
Why do you feel that people like the idea of products in the $4K to $10K price range and yet don't want to know about them? or Buy them?

No, I realize you were not talking about the mag review, but the product that it was of, but the point holds. A portion of the industry is targeted toward extremely wealthy buyers now, and the high-end magazines reflect that portion somewhat disproportionately. Part of this is down to there no longer being (in the US at least) a magazine that represents the lower priced end of the audio market.

But that middle region has fallen away. Even in places where there is a broader spread of mags covering the whole gamut of audio, that middle region has fallen away. I suspect this might be down to the economic situation and the damage it causes to middle income households. Or it might be down to Generation iPod growing up and no longer investing in specialty audio in anything like the same way previous generations used to. Or a combination of these things.

As to the huge increase in prices at the top end, I read recently that 25 years ago, an investment banker was likely to earn five to ten times what a secretary in the same office might earn. Today, an investment banker might earn 500 times what that secretary would take home. That huge disparity of wealth has left the rich seeking out ever more expensive products upon which to dispose their disposable income. Which is why I just finished a review of the new Sonus Faber Amati Futura and - although the loudspeaker sounds significantly better than the Amati Homage it is based upon - I suspect the outstanding finish and attention to detail will be all the justification many buyers need for a loudspeaker that costs almost half as much again as the standard Homage.

Is this a good state for audio to be in, where top-end buyers are more likely to invest in a product based on its looks? As the product sounds good too, it's a moot point in this case. But ultimately the question still hangs around like a bad smell in a camper van.

 

[Gregadd]

To approach that from the other end. The scretary is the potential customer for$2-10k range. Her wages are stagnant. Her life necessities have witnessed massive inflation. Her disposal income has become non-existent. If she does have savings her lack of job security makes her afraid to spend it or take on credit.

 

[NorthStar]

I really like this thread here and people's opinions because you guys are touching the very essence of Value in today's High-End world we live in.
...And that is directly related to our lifestyle, our earnings, our jobs, our securities, our dispositions, our true love for Music, our affordable taste on beautiful things, on performance, on sound quality, etc.

In reality High-End value has a different balance for each person. We are what we are, buy what we can afford (hopefully) according to our personal finances and set of rules. We also aspire; dream of a better setup, house, car, more financial freedom...

And value today is everywhere; in inexpensive products and also in more expensive ones.
But it's up to us to search those values, to analyse, to decipher, to investigate as knowledgeable consumers.
I know some people that when they go to an Audio store, they simply ask the salesman what is their better amp, their best preamp, their top receiver, their best set of loudspeakers; and they simply buy it!
Is that the right approach? I certainly believe not! But that is one part of the reality though!

There are also those that based their purchases on lab tests, ignoring the true sound attributes of components! And those who goes by names; the ones they bought before and found comfort and reliability and also support from the manufacturer. ...By reputation, prestige...

On the other end, you have people like us perhaps, that discuss what we know, what we found, where to buy, the best prices for a particular product, and the average of happy owners...

Then you also have the true experimenters, the ones that try different components in their own systems at home; some of us here, and others over there...

The world has two type of people in it; the ones who sell, and the ones who buy!
There are good salesmen and there are good buyers. And vice versa...

True Value is a Research! It is an investigation, a thoroughly analyse... Takes patience, dedication, concrete experience, up to date with the latest, it is an always moving target, and we are more or less good shooters at it!

Also, today is not like it used to be yesterday! With the Internet and new ways to stream music now, the clock is ticking to a different tempo. And we gotta click with it! I think!

* One thing remains though! And it's the artist, the soul of the music, the classical exploration, emotion, inspiration; the one that directly talk to us, that touches our senses at the highest levels.
I know so many people who put the main accent on hardware but are lacking in the software department, on the variety, the diversification of the true creative world out there with all their true poets, songwriters, accomplished musicians, the grandiose scales of a full Orchestra, of an Opera, of a great Choir from a Choral, etc. And of course that includes the true great heroes of Classical composers, smaller Jazz and Blues bands, the Jimi Hendrixes, the Miles Davises, the Coltranes, the Petersons, the Ellingtons, the Evans, the Holidays, the Fitzgeralds; and the contemporains artists as well... You know them as well as I do, so I'll save some space here at What's Best!

 

[Bruce B]

Now, I have to scrutinize every purchase I make. I have to make a good "business" decision. I have to ask,

1. Will this piece of equipment make my job easier?
2. Will this piece of equipment bring me more money?
3. Will this piece of equipment bring me more clients?
4. Will this piece of eqiuipment stand up to being on and used every single day.
5. What about manufacturer support?. I can't have a piece of eqiupment down. Time is money.
6. If I get rid of this, how big of hit can I afford to take and what is the replacement/upgrade cost.

These are totally different questions, or maybe not, that audiophile hobbiest have to ask.

 

[DaveyF]

Now, I have to scrutinize every purchase I make. I have to make a good "business" decision. I have to ask,

1. Will this piece of equipment make my job easier?
2. Will this piece of equipment bring me more money?
3. Will this piece of equipment bring me more clients?
4. Will this piece of eqiuipment stand up to being on and used every single day.
5. What about manufacturer support?. I can't have a piece of eqiupment down. Time is money.
6. If I get rid of this, how big of hit can I afford to take and what is the replacement/upgrade cost.

These are totally different questions, or maybe not, that audiophile hobbiest have to ask.

Bruce, those are all pertinent questions for a business owner. OTOH, I do not think that they necessarily apply for an end-user or hobbyist.
The number one question I would think for the a'phile hobbyist or end-user is: Does it give me the sound I am looking for? Secondly,is it in my budget?--or maybe the questions are the other way around
IMO, if the typical a'phile was primarily concerned about re-sale value then probably most would only buy used and then possibly only the lower priced gear. ( thereby risking minimal loss for a future resale)

 

[Lee]

ICatering for the needs of an enthusiast creates a distinct skew. In audio, it means your Mark Levinson and Audio Research owning readers would rather read about what they aspire to, rather than what's new at NAD, just as guys who already own bottles of a'bunadh and Uigeadail aren't going to be too interested in a shoot-out between cheap supermarket branded scotches. That one I didn't need to Google, hic.

This is just further proof that reviewers are drunk fools. I kid. I kid. Glad to see you on the board Alan.

 

[caesar]

Magazines and manufacturers follow the money. There is no point targeting a sector of a market that doesn't exist, or doesn't want to know about your product. And right now, the audio market is hugely U-shaped; there are products selling at the budget end and at the super-high-end end, but the in between bit just isn't happening in the way it used to. We'd like it to come back, because the jump from a $2,000 system to a $200,000 one is more than a little abrupt. But at the moment, it seems people like the idea of there being products in the $4,000-$10,000 price range, but don't actually want to know about them. Or buy them.

This hour-glass economy has been around the last 5 years or so. Someone would rather eat the generic brand of mac and cheese every night and wipe his tuchus with Walmart toilet paper, but drive that shiny Beamer (or listen to speakers that cost as much). In all industries, the middle is disappering. What we are getting is a lot of the ultra expensive and the ultra cheap.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

This hour-glass economy has been around the last 5 years or so. Someone would rather eat the generic brand of mac and cheese every night and wipe his tuchus with Walmart toilet paper, but drive that shiny Beamer (or listen to speakers that cost as much). In all industries, the middle is disappering. What we are getting is a lot of the ultra expensive and the ultra cheap.

The middle class is what's disappearing. The markets are just reacting to it.

Tim