But then I guess you can't just replace the stylus yourself... By jove, I think [s]he's got it!!! |
Acutusrex- Sorry to have offended you; I was just trying to light-heartedly say I agreed w you. The cost is very high compared to the cost of a new product. However, rebuilding/re-tipping high end MC carts is a sub-niche of a niche market and one that cannot be accomplished on a DIY basis. Tube power amps are a sub-niche market but most can be easily re-tubed at home and in most cases, the materials are readily available from a range of vendors. So you have a classic case of constrained supply which is going to keep prices high. However, I also freely admit that I have no idea how much of the cost of building a new cart is labor vs. materials and how much of the materials is in the body vs. the stylus/cantilever/motor assembly and how much can be re-used. I do believe that a rebuild/retip would be much more "customized" for each unit, which would drive labor costs up per unit, even when compared to a new build.
That's not to say that I do not believe that the costs of these services, like much of the high end, is totally out of control. |
One other point that deserves to be mentioned regarding the analogy of high end auto to high end audio (hmmm, only differing by 2 letters...coincidence???) is that there are generally accepted objective performance criteria for autos. Horsepower, torque, 0-60, 0-100, 100-0, skid pad G force. Subjective criteria also fairly well identified. Beauty, creature comfort, reliability. [Of course, NO ONE expects a high performance auto to rate high on reliability. But we do damn sure expect that when the dealership delivers it that it will start when asked and that the wheels will not fall off on the way home] W high perf. audio, we can measure some of the performance criteria (wow, flutter, certain kinds of distortion), cannot measure some, cannot agree on others (PRAT, "jump factor") and can agree that some are immune to measurement (ability to convey artist's intent...etc.) So I think that w such a subjective, potentially expensive, and emotionally involving past-time, people are more apt to have passionate disagreements. Also for whatever reason, with the large number of small manufacturers involved, it tends to be more "personal", and when it's personal, again, it has a tendency to become more emotional.
Also, not to be argumentative, but the folks who "tune" and race WRXs probably have no use for the guy who walks in, drops 180Gs on a Porsche 911 Turbo S and then blows them off at a stoplight.
Rant over. Doug, call me if you are still interested in talking about things swampy! Sorry for going OT, Acutusreus. |
you'll surely see many who will tell you a $20K amplifier sounds like crap. Or that it sounds no different than a $2K amp, or, or that amp A sounds different than amp B, or that $20K amp C sounds like crap when used w pre-amp D or, dare I say it, power cord E! Of course, another way in which high end audio differs is that the amp by itself cannot make any sound; in some ways it would be like trying to evaluate a car solely on the basis of how many horsepower the engine can make, without considering the suspension, chassis, tires, gearing, etc. I also think that people become so passionate just because there ultimately are no objective criteria (sorry, Raul, not in my world!) and so arguments/discussions/disagreements have no verifiable "correct" resolution. Back to the Anna- I could not agree more w Actusreus (you know, that's even harder to spell than Swap...Smwap...Swapmwalker...); it's totally incomprehensible that a well-established industry leader (to say nothing of a garage shop) would send a flagship product to the English-speaking world's most widely read reviewer in their specialty w/o making 100% certain that the sample was PERFECT!!!!! It's not like Consumer Reports where they buy one off the shelf. It's not like there is an assembly line churning out an Anna every minute, 24/7. Ortofon knew it was a review sample and who was doing the review. At that price, the customer has the right to know/demand every single cart is individually tested and sold w a spec sheet to verify it meets the design intent and meets or exceeds the published specifications. If that were my company, the head of QC, head of marketing, and the QC inspector of those units would all be looking for new jobs. |
Pops- I am sure you are correct; maybe that's why I am not a CEO of a major corporation. I also believe that mistakes can happen and you generally can't take a person's measure by one event, but c'mon???? It's your flagship product, hand assembled in very limited quantities for a very select, niche market, that will ALL (and I pretty mean pretty much ALL) be reading the review. How can you NOT test that individual unit to make sure it works perfectly???? It's not a blind audition. You get to pick the unit that goes out. And it is defective. TWICE!!!!! I would think that they would have resigned w/o having to be fired. In the good old days, they would have been given the opportunity to take the honorable way out...a 38 caliber letter of resignation ;-) |
"Swampwalker, Swampwalker, Swampwalker,..." 97 more to go...:) Actusreus; Actusreus; Actusreus...I think I've got it... Acutusrex; Atcususreus; Acuteresus; !@#$%&. ;-) never let the facts get in the way of a good story. Words to live by!!! And, what the heck does The amplifier in question failed from a non related component failure in the power on circuit. mean? What the heck is a non-related component??? I say again, how do you send an audio component that costs as much as a car out to a reviewer without at least running it in to make sure that the bloody thing works!! I agree w Wolf. It's entertaining. A little bit on the "watching a train wreck" side, but since no one is physically injured; what the hay. Nothing against Mr. D'Agostino, whose cred is impeccable, but the fact that other amps run hotter, while true, is totally irrelevant to the fact that the unit under review did not operate within its design envelope. For this kind of luxury product, that's inexcusable. IMO. YMMV. |
So would you feel better, or at least less upset, if the manufacturer had tested and hand selected the cartridge in a manner not available to normal purchasers? First of all, there are plenty of audio manufacturers who test/burn-in EVERY product they ship. Carts, electronics, speakers. For a flagship product that is basically handmade, the consumer has every right to expect that. If I were in the market for an $8 cart or a $40,000 amp I'd demand it. At those stratospheric MSRP price points (assuming street price is also at the very top end), I'd want the reviewer's sample and mine to be virtually identical. It's not like people are lined up out the door waiting to snatch these things off the shelf! Or maybe that's what the line of Saudi princes I saw when I was in NY for the show last month was all about? |
Anyone know why sometimes you can edit a post and sometimes not???? Ain't progress grand??
$8K cart is of course what I meant. |
his is what I would do if I were a cartridge manufacturer in a similar situation. I would contact each registered purchaser of the cartridge and offer an explanation of what the problems with MF's review samples were. I would further offer any owner a factory review and re-certification of their cartridge at no cost. If during that review process a cartridge is determined to be out of spec or defective I would offer a free repair or replacement. For cartridges that I determined to be past their useful life due to normal wear and tear I would offer a reduced price replacement. Cartridges that I deem to have been mishandled or abused would be handled on a case by case basis. Totally agree. But wouldn't it be much less expensive AND much less damaging to your brand to just mount and test each cart before it goes out? |
Mikelavigne- Thanks for your comments, which add a valuable perspective to this discussion. I guess we always need to remember that there is a reason the call it "the bleeding edge". I also agree that these threads can suffer from too much negativity. There obviously can be manufacturing problems in pre-production. But it also clearly demonstrates the dangers of beta-testing your products in the public eye. |
