In post #2 of the thread "New think piece from Roy Gregory - thoughts?" AI.M made a a number of interesting points.
He said
Surely highest quality is not the exclusive domain of thesmallest most boutique manufacturers, though the boutiques may well have more innovative thinking, or produce designs that are not practical to mass produce but sound great (Schroder tonearms anyone?). I think boutiques tend to get more press so are more interesting to the average audiophile. OK.
As AI.M says producing things in relatively high numbers gives economies of scale. Logically this means those larger manufacturers must be better value at a given price point than can be manufactured by a small operation. For me this is most clearly apparent at the bottom end of the market.
- So does this logic hold true at any price point? If so my bias against the largest volume manufacturers must be meaning I'm missing out. OR does this logic only apply up to a certain quality and price point?* After all, presumably at some point the innovative design thinking of a boutique organization creates something state of the art that simply isn't thought of by the big firms, so the price of the state of the art has to be paid.
(*I ADMIT that as quality and price increases I get interested or seduced by the hyperbolic reviews and my interest drifts away from larger organizations. I tend to switch off at an Ortofon or Audio Technica cartridge review..)
So am I / are we missing a trick by ignoring larger firms product?
I suppose if you follow the same logic a larger manufacturers flagships should be / must be more cost effective at their elevated price point and so should be investigated. But I'm as guilty of ignoring big manufacturers as the next person.
So where is that certain price point?
Who are the state of the art larger manufacturers we should be paying more attention to?
He said
*) My DAC is also factory direct and produced in relatively high numbers, which allows the manufacturer to buy its components at bulk prices. Without these two factors, the DAC would have to be far more expensive than it is (about 6 grand, as the designer himself explained).
For me this bolded section is the interesting part.Surely highest quality is not the exclusive domain of the
As AI.M says producing things in relatively high numbers gives economies of scale. Logically this means those larger manufacturers must be better value at a given price point than can be manufactured by a small operation. For me this is most clearly apparent at the bottom end of the market.
- So does this logic hold true at any price point? If so my bias against the largest volume manufacturers must be meaning I'm missing out. OR does this logic only apply up to a certain quality and price point?* After all, presumably at some point the innovative design thinking of a boutique organization creates something state of the art that simply isn't thought of by the big firms, so the price of the state of the art has to be paid.
(*I ADMIT that as quality and price increases I get interested or seduced by the hyperbolic reviews and my interest drifts away from larger organizations. I tend to switch off at an Ortofon or Audio Technica cartridge review..)
So am I / are we missing a trick by ignoring larger firms product?
I suppose if you follow the same logic a larger manufacturers flagships should be / must be more cost effective at their elevated price point and so should be investigated. But I'm as guilty of ignoring big manufacturers as the next person.
So where is that certain price point?
Who are the state of the art larger manufacturers we should be paying more attention to?
