When one plunks down $10,000 $50,000 and more for a speaker you’re paying for awesome sound, perhaps an elegant or outlandish style, some prestige ... but what makes the price what it is?
Are the materials in a $95,000 set of speakers really that expensive? Or are you paying a designer who has determined he can make more by selling a few at a really high price as compared to a lot at a low price?
And at what point do you stop using price as a gauge to the quality? Would you be surprised to see $30,000 speakers "outperform" $150,000 speakers?
Hi Ctsooner, We can definitely agree that listening impressions are simply subjective and personal. In this case Analoguvr posted comments that I could truly relate to. Coincidentally he and I also prefer SET amplifiers so we certainly hear in a similar manner it seems. We're all fortunate that the High End audio market has products to suit a multitude of tastes. Charles,
I have had this discussion recently with a lot of my audio friends. I asked them about paper cones and the cost of speakers that use them. It's funny, but to a person, they feel that some of the top name companies who are still using paper in drivers that are not costly, are just charging a lot due to their name. I brought up the fact that the cases can be expensive. I'm personally on the side of not loving paper as I hear the distortion they have as they break up a ton. I fully respect folks who love them, but they aren't for me. I tried to take up the cause of the cost of a specific brand that utilize soft domes and paper drivers. Even a couple of dealers I'm friends with have joked about the true cost of the drivers in the 50k plus speakers. The bottom line is that there is a market for speakers that are costly or the companies would probably just go under and thats not happening in most cases. We all like different sounds and there are plenty of companies who give us all what we want.
Hi analoguvr, Despite having the privilege to hear speakers that utilize various types of "exotic" materials for their drivers, paper implemented properly is still preferable to many listeners. High quality paper cones sound exceptionally natural. Personally I’d choose this option compared to an ultra detailed analytical sound. Paper cones and tubes for example never measure as good as their alternatives but they sure sound very much natural and realistic when done correctly. There are non paper driver speakers that sound very well without question, I just do not find them superior to top quality paper drivers. Of course YMMV as is always the case. Charles,
I would tend to agree with ricred1. Some folks may not be in the US and understand the free market system though. I full understand that part of the equation, but I'd think if you were on a board like this, you would understand it.
I personally can and will never be able to afford a speaker over 25K, however making that statement that nothing is worth it is dead wrong. It's proven to be wrong as we live in a society where folks control the market. Plenty of folks are purchasing these and feel they are worth it, so they must be. Maybe to you they are overpriced and maybe to you over 50k isn't worth it, but the market sure thinks they are and personally I am happy as the trickle down has helped speakers in MY price range of under 15k sound THAT much better.
This is a discussion as to why speakers cost what they do not if they are worth it or not.
Paper cones can sound very good, but that does not change the fact that they are in total break-up at nearly all frequencies and therefore not an accurate diaphragm to excite the air in the room. Subsequently, the ear drum can't preserve an instrument's waveform. Most people think Bose speakers sound great and are totally adequate, but those who listen know they are not
It's a personal thing and I get that. I won't be able to change your mind and that's cool. It's what makes the hobby part fun. Most of the major and respected designers are working hard finding newer materials to make a pure pistonic moving driver.
Ctsooner I agree with most of what you have said except for your comment about an expensive speaker using paper drivers. Paper is a great cone material and most of the speakers using paper cones always seem to sound more natural to my ears. And just because it is paper doesn't mean it's not high tech. People who have a Coral 10 that needs a recone can attest to that, it can't be done. And as far as the folks who are saying part of the high cost is R and D, give your head a shake, there are no new developments in speaker technology!! The best speakers I have heard are still older efficient designs with paper drivers. Just like 99% of high end audio megabuck speakers are a huge ripoff! When I go to the shows I invariably never enjoy the high dollar rooms with the megabuck SS electronics. They are very detailed and some of them are impressive sounding but they never sound like proper music to me. And ctsooner don't take this as a slight against vandersteen, I think they are one of the few that actually do R and D and try to give you something for your money. I enjoy them and used to own a pair.
Erik, I thought we had discussed that earlier in this thread. Maybe not. Yes of course it's what people will pay. I would say that most speakers costing X amount are priced up from what a companies normal pricing is. I will say that we do pay for R&D. You have to as that's part of the pricing as you know. Do we pay a premium on top of costs with normal retail channels? of course we do. Each company has a different way to pricing obviously.
One thing that keeps coming up is that we are paying for R&D. Wrong. If a speaker maker sold speakers for the sum cost of their expenses it would be almost like loosing money.
No product, good or service should be sold at cost. You always pay for more than what it costs, you pay for the perceived and relative value. That perceived value is complicated, but that's what product managers get paid to calculate.
Mind you, I buy and sell services and goods, so I'm not saying this practice is wrong. I just want to make sure readers and posters understand this.
But...if you have a very big room and listen to orchestra and want great sound - cost of the speakers and amps will be much higher. Other than that, $100k for the entire system is more than enough, in my opinion. In used prices this would be, say, $55k. Still a lot of money but within the reach of many.
Personally even if I had that kind of money, I'd never spend it. The best speakers I've ever heard in a system are the Tidal (the big ones at well over 100k) and the Vandersteen 7 Mk 2's at 62k. The only reason I can say the Vandy's to me are a great value is that they sound better (to me) than anything over their cost AND for only 15k more (or so) you can now get their dedicated high pass matching subs to make even bigger sound in your room if that's what you feel you need. That's still only 77k total. To me, that's paying off a huge chunk of my mortgage so that's never happening, lol. For folks who can afford it, I'm very happy for them and don't blame them one bit for spending what they want. They earned, or stole it so....;)
Having said that, I do think that really good speakers should and have the right to be quite expensive. But $100k ? Give me a break. You can buy a sure path to American citizenship for a little over $500k, and you won't lose anything in the end, it's investment. Now that's cheap. Going to be a million soon, as I heard.
Lot's of ideas and in the end every company is very different. Many companies are not that expensive to make, but they are large structures and priced accordingly. Some give you a LOT of high quality components and hand made drivers with tons of R&D. I know of two companies like this and both sound GREAT to me. Every company has a different way to price. The other thing I've mentioned earlier is that every company has a different points for the dealers. I've heard numbers from 30% to over 50%. That's HUGE. When you hear of a dealer or manufacture selling for steep discounts, those are obviously the ones at or near 50% I would assume. When you get a company where you can't get much if anything off, then they are probably much closer to the 30% profit margin to the dealer. There is no right or wrong answer to this question, but it's a great thing to discuss and think about.
Not really. The R&D, and design costs are fixed, but the number of units sold is not. If you double the units sold, you cut your R&D investment per unit in half. Now whether that investment actually produces "better" sounding equipment is another story altogether.
Bose used to have (may still) massive R&D spends, but they were laser focused on what consumers would pay the most for while spending the least. It wasn't just about selling units, but about getting the ratio of price to cost as wide as possible. Not a bad strategy to make a company successful. The Bose Wave radio didn't just come out of a garage, it was tested and retested by consumer interest groups many many times. Focal and other companies do the same, to various degrees.
Well, I guess latest smartphones that sell for $800 cost no more than $50 to make. Most things are way overpriced, but then again many people are overpaid or simply make money by doing virtually nothing. Sad but not really surprising. For some $100k is almost a pocket change, and there is quite a number of people like that.
The real answer, is in the slide from Focal. Modernity, brand, perceived advancement. All of these contribute to what consumers perceive as value. I’m sure there’s more. However, there’s no real connection between cost or quality of the parts and the perception of the value of the finished product. That is an entirely subjective thing which good product managers milk for all they can.
What I can say is that most of the high end speakers come in around 20 to 30 times the driver cost for a single speaker. Mind you, I used the term "most" so for sure there are outliers. However as an investor, builder you want to be on the top of that range. For _most_ that is the math they seem to use. The latest Sterephile has yet another example of this, the Marten Coltrane 3. On the upper end of that range, and like the Sony AR1, has a very lukewarm review. The review, like the AR1 concludes they are worth their price. Hah.
I'm not saying they don't make good speakers. They just aren't my cup of tea and never have been. That's all. I've had the discussion with someone from Wilson on two occasions and they laughed. One agreed with me as to what I don't like. They have done the best job of the old time speaker companies in advertising. That's a real positive and I'm giving them a ton of credit for it. I wish Richard and others had done the same thing as I feel that this industry could have grown bigger than it has. I see that Alon is doing a great job advertising also. I think that these post fit into this thread because it shows where some of your money goes into their overhead. My second favorite speaker/system that I've heard (I LOVE Vandersteens new AMP. that thing makes the 7's a powered speaker, but not internally. When you can build the amp around a specific speaker you can really make it sound better than other amps I feel.) are both made by Tidal. I have heard their system twice in my life and was really impressed. Again, it was also with their own amplification along with analog and the Aurender W20 server. Perfectly set up room too. What a treat that was. That's even using their black diamond tweeter that isn't quite pistonic, in movement, but they've done a great job voicing them I feel (again, for MY ears).
I've also never and would never call the buyer of a component stupid....at least not in person or online, lol. j/k. I'm just glad we are all passionate for what we like and are willing to post about it and argue about it. Healthy, all of it IMHO. I try to be respectful to all and sometimes I'm not in the way I post, but I don't mean ill will towards folks.
When I make a post about paper woofers breaking up at 250HZ, it's proven and it has to effect the quality of the sound. That's just physics and no way around it. That said, some companies who use paper cones can try to do other things to lessen the effect, but to me it's very noticeable. that does mean I can't listen to hard rock and not enjoy it. Mikey Fremer had a great ear and loves him some hard pounding LOUD rock. Nothing wrong there at all and it's a big reason he loves his Wilson's. Again, that's awesome for him and others. I'm just happy that we all have wonderful choices that make us all happy. Wilson's are beautiful to look at and I can listen to rock on them, but I'd never be able to live with them. Plenty of you guys have them and are happy. All is positive.
Tom, sorry forgot to answer. 1) Wilson margin allows a much better price than Vandersteen could.
2) MF has in many reviews including the Quatro Fabric review mentioned not needing a speaker that images in fact said the Quatro out imaged his Wilsons.
3)Has said he believes a speaker can have TMI so the paper cones being low resolution is not a deal breaker.
4)Speakers with powered sub-woofer are not the best tool for a reviewer especially when reviewing amplifiers.
5) listens very loud and likes a big sound for his love rock and roll.
Hope this answers your questions about why he used Wilson's. I also know of MANY within the industry from reviewers to other manufacturer's who swear by Vandersteens (Quatro's on up) and pay for them without getting a large discount. Plenty of people listen and enjoy a huge sound and don't care about things that time aligned speaker can provide. If you love Wilson's, then that's awesome. Plenty of folks love Bose too (not not saying Wilson's sound like Bose). We are so lucky to have the choices that we have now days.
cstooner, you never answered my question about why Michael Fremer, one of the people most obsessed with sound quality in the world, has upgraded his speakers twice and stayed with Wilsons (Maxx2 to Maxx 3 to Alexandria XLF)?
I'm sure he gets a great deal on them, but why would he keep upgrading up the Wilson line if the speakers aren't that good? I'm sure Vandersteen would give him a nice discount too.
Here's a couple of things he had to say about the Wilsons and, by chance, the Vandersteen Sevens in his review of the Marten Coltrane 3s:
"The Coltrane 3s also produced holographic, pinpoint images, both in front of and behind the baffles, as appropriate—but as I said of the original Coltranes, the sizes of these aural pictures were "more about bringing the event to you than about bringing you to the event." I wrote that last observation a few years before I heard the largest loudspeaker models from Wilson Audio Specialties in my room, after which that distinction became more obvious. As with the similarly sized (42.5" tall) Vandersteen Model Sevens, the overall width and height of the Martens' soundstages didn't compare with the Wilson Alexandria XLFs' widescreen, floor-to-ceiling presentation.
"However, the driver outputs of the Wilson Alexandrias and, to a lesser extent, the Vandersteen Sevens are physically time-aligned by means of stepped enclosures. In my opinion, in terms of sound, this allows for instrumental layering and an apparent bafflelessness that no "slab" speaker can duplicate, regardless of degree of baffle rake or meticulousness of crossover design."
There are exceptions to the rule. I'm just saying that in general, this is how they seem to line up, the blanket reason being business, marketing and making money. Not that I'm against any of that. I'm against low value, juiced speakers being touted as the best we can have.
As I wrote, making your own drivers is often a way to reduce the costs, and going way past the 30:1 mark.
The real loss in my mind is that the industry tries to promote the idea that only the richest can have good sounding music. This puts a huge barrier to music and culture for most consumers. The more of the middle class can afford great sounding speakers, the better off our society will be. :)
I've seen this effect in person. Introduce a person with little musical education to great sounding speaker system and bam, they are suddenly interested in a lot more types of music than they were before. The entry level for this should not be $20,000.
I roughly know the cost of the drivers of Vandersteen speakers and I can promise you that it's nowhere near 20X the cost of them. I totally agree on many other of the top manufacturer's. I've pointed that out about Wilson in earlier posts I'm sure. The other thing that no one thinks about is speaker matching. Many top line producers have to find drivers that match within certain specs and then they have all those other drivers that they need to make up the cost of. There are various ways to do so, however part of it is the cost of making speaker A. Ton's of reasons and many should cost what they do. Not saying the sound quality is worth it by any means. I haven't like most of the TOL speakers from so many makers. Some just sound bigger, but not better. There really is no blanket reason as each maker has their own reasons. I know many manufacturers and have for years and most don't really care about following anyone else's graphs. They just care to make music the way they feel is best for the majority of buyers out there. Not saying they don't do what they can to get a great review, but honestly, it's nearly impossible to get a poor one these days.
I did a lot of research on this subject. The answer is, roughly, driver prices and gimmicks.
For most high end speakers (and I use the term pejoratively) the final cost is between 20 and 30x the cost of the DRIVERS of one speaker. I know, you’d think it was something else, but it’s usually not. This formula explains about 85% to 95% of these speakers. In addition, to be rated highly at Stereophile at any price-point it usually must follow the "Stereophile Curve."
For more details and some examples, please visit my blog on the subjects:
That is generally what I am talking about, but more to the point: if the manufacturer is doing the analysis correctly they should estimate the demand across various price points and choose the prices that maximizes ROE. Often this is well in excess of underling costs including development (i.e., they realize a positive fully loaded gross margin).
Watts, everything is involved. All the the topics we covered so far are a huge part of it. Yes, market price matters, however what Richard said about going from 600k to 100k is a huge determinant. If a manufacturer wants to do R&D that they will trickle down to their other lower lines, then they can make the assumption that at 600k, they'll sell only 3 for the year, but if they go 100k, then they can sell 50 for the year. That would be what you are talking about I assume? The market at 600k will relate to 3 sales and that's what the market allows, but at 100k for the same thing (economy of scale) then you sell 50.
I would have to say the single biggest determinant of speaker price is price the market will pay which maximizes the rate of return on the capital of the speakers builder. If it is not, it should be. This does not necessarily have any correlation to R&D, distribution or material costs.
true, it depends on the speaker and it's design. I asked Richard Vandersteen about this yesterday and he said that another reason a speaker can go from 600k to 100k is the amount sold. If you have a speaker that you design and you will only be able to sell a handful, then you have to make up the R&D, overhead and marketing costs on fewer speakers, so the price will go up accordingly. He had much more to say, but this was one of the big things I took away.
I think most would agree that you can get some great sound for under say 5k or 10k, but you can get better to much better sound if you can afford to. Bass....clean and true is what costs the most. Once you start adding built in subs and carbon fiber or other exotic materials, plus the labor as well as the R&D, then the price goes up accordingly. Many companies will just set a price point that is way more than the speaker is worth or costs to make just because they can. They will market the heck out of them until they get a cult following. Then they just use that to market and grow their base. Great business if you can get away with it and there are plenty of companies who do this. I think the real test though are the ones who have been around for ages and ages and have a great rep for giving you more than you expect in whatever your price range is. There are a handful out there still who continue to do this, even as they hand the keys over to their kids. I personally love to support those companies be it speakers or electronics. JMHO
TAD to me sounds more like a Studio Speaker. Yes they are brilliant but does it make music? or are you trying to find faults into the recordings?
When I heard tad being paired with MSB Dacs, first thing came to my mind was......this sounds very much like the Quested Studio Speakers Accurate and brutal to the source. How much of this can you stand? 20 mins 1 hour 2 hours. I love the TAD Horns they can be very musical with the right OTL AMPS.
Hi gdhal, The Golden Ear, specifically the Triton line are a perfect example of this entire conversation.... To be fair to The Alta Statements, they appear by my feeble eyes to be Morel and Raal. The Morel Midrange and the Raal Tweeters alone cost more than most of the entire Titan One to manufacture... But, just as we discussed, quality parts, in combination with a great design can produce a huge value in comparison.
You should be biased or it's time for a new pair of speakers, lol. Once you get to a certain price point, there is not diminishing return. It become all about what someone is willing and can pay. This is why the companies can do so much R&D and we are all rewarded with the trickle down tec (if you don't have the TOL from your manufacturer).
Even if I don't personally love someone's components, I do love hearing folks push what they own are want to own. That's part of what has always made this fun for me. Nice post thanks
timlub is correct in that it certainly is possible (paraphrasing) to achieve remarkable value at a $5K price point. This is why Golden Ear Technologies is so successful. It is absolutely true that they have somehow bridged the gap between very high end and pricey speakers with just as good sound - if not better - sound and affordability. Besides the fact that I own the Triton One's so am naturally biased, I have listened to a handful (admittedly only around 10 or so) of other manufacturers that cost WAY more and in my opinion would be more than hard pressed to justify the cost. Case in point, Alta Statement Towers. They retail at $200,000 a pair. In my view the only thing about them that made them superior to my Tritons was the incredible cabinetry material (yes that does improve sound of course). But a $195,000 more? I don't think so. There has to be a realistic trade off. Kind of like diminishing returns. Listen to and/or GET the Golden Ear Triton One's and you'll hear what I mean. Your wallet will thank you.
Is the distributor the only one who sells these amps or does he sell them via B&M and or online stores? If so, what he's done is back door them and ruined his product for the future. It's a terrible business practice and one that partly got Dan D let go at Krell. It's ruined so many top lines in the past. I only will deal with reputable companies in audio as I concern myself with the future value of my products as I do sell eventually. Not a slam at you at all, so please don't take it that way. We customers are always trying to get a great value etc.... The markup on some great lines is only in the 30% range so they don't have that much room to move at all. Personally I like that as I feel I'm getting value for my money and I know that no one is getting it for less than I am.
Devaluing someone's product just isn't good business sense on their part. I just never understood that personally. Again, not a slam against you, just against any dealer or distributor who devalues their products. If it's only worth 7,500, then just offer them at 8k if you feel you need to sell them for less. JMHO and not preaching. Thanks.
@swampwalker ...Great question. I can tell you that in January I called the US distributer of a famous tube amp vendor and asked a few questions about a few of their amps.
The distributer quoted me $9000+ for a specific model. ME: I balked and said I was currently on sabbatical. DISTRIBUTER: $7500. ME: Sold.
...Street price way below 15k manufacturer's suggested price.
Guys, some products will be made in China. As long as the company controls the manufacturing, the quality can be fine. That said, I personally don't think I have anything in my system that is made outside the US from cables, to all digital to phone and electronics. TV I can't help.
I believe my previous(Aerial 7T) and current speakers(Monitor Audio PL500) were made in China. I submit both of them are very well made and offer outstanding value.
Audioman. I agree with much of what you have posted. I have even posted earlier that the Wilson drivers and crossovers are very inexpensive in the scheme of things. They dress is up and spend money on paint and cabinets but so do others like VANDERSTEEN and some others. I was sold on the Vandys a few years ago for the sound but didn't understand why the Treos cost 8k or so. Then I found out what the cost of the drivers was as well as the double cabinets and the crossover parts and all of a sudden when you add r&d, too veneer and overhead plus some profit and I got it. That's why his 1,2&3 are still such great values. The cabinets do add thousands when done properly. Not all manufacturers are marking things up Judy because they can. Richard was working on the 9's as there is a demand for 125k speakers that have large cabinets but he couldn't get the bass to integrate properly and rather than take it to market he dropped the idea at least until better components come out that would make it work the way he wanted them to. I wish others followed suit. For those who have heard some companies 100k plus offerings, you often like the same company's 60k offering much better as there is often better coherency and integration. My buddy just got a lower prices pair of Dynaudios as he didn't even like their 100k pair. We had a long conversation about this very topic. This has become a fun thread. Thanks for letting me play.
Replacing x/o parts for higher quality ones is a high-return-for-money-spent tactic. But there’s a further step that can be taken: Danny Richie of GR Research, well known for his x/o designs, not only makes cross-overs with improved parts, but offers x/o corrections for basically well designed but budget-compromised speakers such as the new line from Elac, to improve frequency and waterfall plot (time domain)performance. The simple addition of one part corrects the falling high frequency output of the Elac tweeter, and another simple change to the x/o frequency improves the speaker’s midrange. A little bit of money yields large improvements!
More times yhen not the cabinet can cost more then the drivers And Xover which it should not. Companies like Harbeths Not much to the cabinet, or that expensive of drivers.they have a excellent patented midrange material ,that being said the xover vs The big names that use premium parts like Mundorf silver gold oil And top resiryors,inductors top quality wiring harbeths uses nothing even close but charges a high premium vs actual build cost like a garage build,with quality veneer. Open baffles if using Top drivers ard a Superb bsrgsin, as is new Martin logan,Maggi Even Electric with engineer Jones forgot first name builds great Speaker for thd money .most big $$ speakers are a hyped up scam I have worked with loudspeaker design and cost they add all $$ Per hour in what they want maybe $200 a hour in R &D time plus 5x in cost for material s thrn overhead. There is the price Look at Magico, Wilson Radho, YG Acoustics. Sure they sound excellent $100 -to $200 k for s pair of speakers give me a break . Evrn 50k. $20'k should bd absolute max plus 20% off. TheRe are a lot of quality speakers even under $3 listen first z,!😆
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
