Very. I've always loved the look of Conrad Johnson and Atma-Sphere's champagne-colored faceplates, the control knob layout on the Marantz 7, the Marantz Model 9 power amp, and the retro-styling of the Atma-Sphere M-60 Mk.3---with rounded corners and stainless steel plate behind the tubes (and original Quad tube pre, which can't really be retro, can it?!). In loudspeakers, the Magneplanar Tympani-IVa in black cloth and oak side rails looks amazing. George Cardas owns a pair, as do I.
How important is component “aesthetics” to you?
Obviously, performance, sound, etc is what matters most. However, some super fine, high performance products are just plain ugly. Aesthetcs does play an important role for me since we have placed a lot of emphasis on furnishing our home.
Anyway, my search for a preamp has led me to the conclusion that ugly is more the norm. I love the look of glowing tubes with the Primalunas, mystere, Atma-sphere, Rogers, Decware, mapletree etc. In the solid state world, the macs have those famous blue meters. Even the “fake tube” older Peachtree components looked really nice.
Just curious how “ looks” play a role when choosing components?
Anyway, my search for a preamp has led me to the conclusion that ugly is more the norm. I love the look of glowing tubes with the Primalunas, mystere, Atma-sphere, Rogers, Decware, mapletree etc. In the solid state world, the macs have those famous blue meters. Even the “fake tube” older Peachtree components looked really nice.
Just curious how “ looks” play a role when choosing components?