Tim ,
Do you have any real data on the numbers of homes with AV systems versus 2 channel audio systems in the USA?
How much is too much?
- Thread starter DaveyF
- Start date
Tim ,
Do you have any real data on the numbers of homes with AV systems versus 2 channel audio systems in the USA?
Mark,
You are quite fortunate to have the space. I have been forced to combine both in a single room and a system. But, I have tried to make the most of it with the selection of components and equipment in the single room. Now I have all of the 2 channel components running into my ARC LS10 which runs into my Onkyo 5508 which allows me to use Audessey for both systems. Lots of cables though.
Rich
No, but I spent 2 1/2 years, between the recession crashing my consultancy and my recent return to my field, working in a relatively high-end AV retail store. In that 2.5 years, I can count on one hand the number of people who bought 2 channel systems. We sold them, but not many. Here, a lot of good electronics stores just don't stock them anymore. Two-channel does seem to be doing better in Europe, though.
Tim
Lets take a comparison:http://www.soundstagelive.com/factorytours/magnepan/ vs WIlson Audio
http://www.wilsonaudio.com/company_factory.shtmlBoth won awards this year. The Wisonon Sasha and the Maggie 3.7.
http://www.wilsonaudio.com/company_factory.shtmlBoth won awards this year. The Wisonon Sasha and the Maggie 3.7.
Last edited:
Well, the Clever Little Clock got a Brutus (Bluto?) award from Positive Feedback Online. What does that prove? To me, it proves that the high-end audio press has a rather severe credibility problem. Given that, how can one take an award as any kind of credible indicator of quality?
Don't get me started about Magnepans. I got a pair years ago that delaminated within a couple of years and sounded like #%&. This was quite some time ago, so maybe they've fixed that.
Greg, you crack me up sometimes....LOL
The Donald in high end would be the last straw that would break the camels back
I wouldn't want to even think about it!
Well there ya go. "Not many". There's a loop in the logic Tim. How does pointing out the giant killers entice readers when the readers don't know who or what the giants are? Such a mag would still be aimed at the same market. Giant killers are prized not just for what they do but also because there are really just so few of them out there. It'll go around and glaringly point out that there IS no reference for the market to follow. Like you said in a prior post and I pretty much said the same thing in another thread, the markets are being segmented into tinier and tinier slices. The proliferation of choices is, I think we can agree, the attempt of businessmen the world over to fill all these differing wants. To put it bluntly, this halo thing is just a way of getting attention. Some halo products deliver, most don't. Agreed. However, those that do, well I guess those are the giants ripe for slaying right there. Sadly, if we're talking about the mass market and actual performance, the giant ripe for slaying starts with the letter B and ends with the letter E.
I still don't see what's wrong with lusting after a Ferrari Italia even if in the end I go for a Camry because it seats five, has a sizable trunk, doesn't guzzle all that much gas and now has mats that don't get the accelerators stuck. All I'm saying is that I'd pick up the Mag with the Italia on the cover because it's exciting. Exciting is not a word I'd use to describe a Camry and buying the Mag doesn't mean I have any intention of buying a Ferrari. Window shopping is innocent fun.
LOL....a product in search of a market. Hope you can afford to lose a million or so Tim (or if you want to play with the big boys like Hachette, Hearst 10 million; and then the pub might shut down after three issues because it doesn't have ad support). Industry stats shows that most HT/AV only mags don't survive. Reason number one: HT people don't care because there isn't the same pride of ownership. BTW, those high-end stores that put all their eggs in the HT market are probably now gone. That market has plummeted and basically these people come in and it's one and done. No repeat business save if something dies after five years.
Same goes with mags covering the inexpensive audio products. Everybody howls about equipment cost but when a magazine comes along that reviews modestly priced equipment, no one supports it. No one buys subscriptions. Affordable Audio is the only one online pub left that comes to mind--and they have begun to review more upscale equipment.
Oh, and the mags that review the ultra ne plus continue to survive in the rough and tumble publishing industry. Because the people who buy those mags have money and support the publications. Someday you should sit down and calculate what the costs are to run a print publication. You might be surprised.
Ah...you're probably right, boys. Sadly, if you want to lose a million dollars, a magazine is probably a great bet these days, almost regardless of content. An attempt to appeal to a market that might actually be large enough to support a magazine probably wouldn't change that.
Tim
Tim
In this day and age even Hef, Guccione and Flint are sufferin', talk about a large enough market right there.
Exactly and the two channel market s buying headphones, earbuds, iEMs, etc. The market is there, it's just got a new face.
While looking for some facts about B&W for another thread I found something that applies to this thread, as it came for a company who manufactures very expensive top speakers - the Nautilus. Quoting the company founder, John Bowers, from the B&W site " "If you can make a better product, then you will sell it" This simple sentence lies at the heart of John Bowers approach to the company that he founded. And is the driving force that still drives Bowers & Wilkins today, two decades after his death. "
No doubt this labor intensive. Add to it distribution. costs and limited sales.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj2wnK4u78Q
130,000 eur
Is that correct.......
I read down the comments on the you tube video and there were some complaining about the quality of the sound!
"I have already heard this loudspeaker in milano and i really do not know what make these sso special. when i listened to the genesis 2 by arnie nudell in noticed a much better deeper bass and crystalic clear highs you could hear the msuicans breathing and the loudspeakers dispaered completely. even choral music was no problem. i could identify every signle voice of every human that sung.....
at the grande utopia i couldn't hear anything...... "
You will have that response no matter,but for that price these speakers should at least disappear, mine do and I paid 1900 bucks for them in 1980 and that's the problem. With constant currency devaluation,a worldwide skilled labor shortage and the increasing mega bubble. You can't be positive about true value anymore,everything is so out of whack.
Last edited:
I think that even though you did not actually address the question of cost benefit you make a good point. Making a speaker "disappear" as you put it, or a speaker that has good off axis response and front to back imaging, is a good measure of a speakers quality.
If we are talking about "what is too much?", Certainly one could see how it might reach a stratospheric price. If you are correct about its sound the answer would be too much. If others are correct then it would appear to be just enough.
If we are talking about "what is too much?", Certainly one could see how it might reach a stratospheric price. If you are correct about its sound the answer would be too much. If others are correct then it would appear to be just enough.
To be fair,I have never heard these speakers. What is just enough? 130,000 Eur is a boggling price for any speaker or for that matter any piece of audio equipment by historical standards, that seems to be the norm though. High end audio has no comparison. You can purchase a new 500k Ferrari and point to extremely rare Ferrari's selling for millions of dollars. You can't point to any such example in audio gear.
Similar threads
