Most speakers costing $50,000+ use Seas, Scan Speak or Accuton.
In DIY forums most speakers designed use bargain drivers and usually are only 2.0 designs not bookshelf or center speakers to complete a surround system.
I’d love to have a Scan Speak 11 speaker system for atmos with 3 way bookshelves, center and floorstanders.
Why aren’t the designs out there and why are you guys pissing away all your money.
Personally I won’t get an upgrade from my speakers unless it’s of this caliber and neither can I afford nor want to donate money to these thieves.
A 3rd party 11 speaker atmos scan Speak system would be nice but I’m not spending $250,000.
Why on earth aren’t there designs out there for this and why do you all piss away your money?
I don’t get why hi fi isn’t all DIY even honest factory direct companies mark up 300%.
Unless you pull in $1+ million a year and don’t have any time I don’t get it.
Are you guys lazy?
Someone easily could design a great crossover and cabinets for everyone and the days of paying over $3,500 for a pair of loud speakers if you got some time or know a friend who could build cabinets would be over. I know of people who could design cabinets that rival $100,000 speakers and cost less than 1% than that. Someone with some experience could easily design a diamond, beryllium and soft dome and various versions for various tastes.
I don’t get it. Speakers are so simple. Crossovers cabinets and drivers.
You guys just throw your money away I don’t understand it why?
Darwinian theory is not poor science. It is actually very good observation and a theory formulated long before we had an understanding of DNA. However, with an understanding of DNA and viruses I think we now know today that Darwinian theory is not the complete story of evolution. We are now finding that the extensive amounts of DNA that everything carries can in certain circumstances be accessed or used - sometimes a virus can turn things on and sometimes DNA can jump from one thing to another. There is a deeper connection between all living things than Darwin realized and some of that useless DNA can be harnessed.
FYI Human DNA is very close to a banana! Looks can be highly deceiving - things are more alike than they appear and this may explain some of the more surprising things we see in nature that might not be possible in a traditional Darwinian view but suggest giant leaps!
Till 2010 most tests I did were in stereo. But in 2010 I started with acoustic measurement. And also tests in surround.
We use Audyssey, but at a totally different way then how Audyssey uses it. Because they make different mistakes in their way of measuring.
They do have little knowledge in how instruments and voices sound and how they are projected in real.
When you do a measurement with Audyssey you can create a better balance with all the speakers togheter. But there are still many mistakes they made.
I work with professional lasers, at 0.5mm precision and we measure at a totally different way. The results are superior in each single aspect you judge sound for.
We call it Statement Audio Pro measurement. In both stereo and surround it is a satement. Because the level in realism and details is so much higher than any level in sound possible.
It will bring surround and cinemas to a much higher level. Most speakers in cinemas are 2 dimensional, like the amps they are using are 2 dimensional.
They call Auro 3D and Dolby Atmos 3D. It has nothing to do with 3 dimensional sound. During a show of Auro 3D I explained the Auro people that they gave a 2 dimensional demo. When I explained it in details they understood.
When a speaker and amp cannot create stagte depth and width, the sound is still 2D. When you use hight speskers this will not change it.
By using lasers and measuring much more precise I created stealth low freqency. This means that the subwoofer is in phase with the speakers and the energy is exactly were it is of the recording.
Statement Audio Pro is the only reason why I and many of my clients got interested in surround. Without S.A.P.-measurement surround can be very exhausting. This is based on the unbalance in sound.
Audio in both stereo and surround need to be used based on properties. This creates a superior level in sound and emotion. Most systems are 2 dimensional, no single person in the world will be satisfied with any kind of 2 dimensional sound after time. This is based on our emotion.
Human ears do not hear it as such in that ear frequency response drops off at its extremes (remember loudness buttons and equalizers?) but if everything in the system needed is up to snuff to do it absolutely no doubt it does.
Ears have less issues when volume is louder.
So its either your ears that are hearing that or the system your are measuring otherwise is not up to snuff to do it or else your measurements are in error.
With S.A.P.-measurement I can get a subwoofer in phase with the speaker. But it is even more than that. You can use it to a much higher frequency. The energy is so much more perceivable.
I auditoned many big speakers in my life, when you play at low volume you miss the realism in the low frequencies. That is why they often play loud.
With a subwoofer with S.A.P. you go to u much higher level of realism. The energy of a double bass is not only what becomes fully free from the speakers. It is of each string you can feel the energy.
This level we never auditioned even with sets of over 500.000 euro. It is not about the money. It is being created by accuracy and timing.
My Pl-500 starts at 22hz, but with a PLW-15 (16hz) with S.A.P.-measurment you go to a different level and league in sound realism.
When I listen full range to my Pl-500 (8ohm) and my Pass (700 watts by 8ohm) you never will reach the level in realism in the lowest octaves. Especially at low freq. These days I seldom sell stereo without a subwoofer with S.A.P.
By using professional lasers and working at 0.5mm precision you reach a new level in timing and integration. Even in height the energy differs a lot more.
The stunning part of the Pl-500 is the diversity in the whole frequency. We compared it with the Wilson Audio Sasha. It was not a match, it outperforms it in each part. I hope to arrange blind shootouts in 2017 with many highend loudspeakers. Audio is all about shootout and may the best win.
When you listen your beloved music and instruments are played at the right height it brings you into another league. This league was not there with the Sasha. With the other Wilson Audio demos showed us the same level of diversity in height. It was very limited.
We have plans of giving demos using a big curtain. And also using conservatory students. The reason is that in real I can let people hear diversity and intimate focus of an instrument and voice.
In the last 6 months I have done a lot of research in diversity in sound. Now I can create a much higher level of diversity in the whole frequency response. Beside this we can create a stunning level in intimate sound with the best blacklevel you ever auditioned.
" Human ears do not hear it as such in that ear frequency response drops off at its extremes (remember loudness buttons and equalizers?) but if everything in the system needed is up to snuff to do it absolutely no doubt it does."
I'm not sure what you mean by up to snuff. Are you fixing the roll off at the extremes with some type of processing? If so, it seems like the system would have to be adjusted for each person.
Ok fine you can do it with a subwoofer and adjust it as needed flat or otherwise. So can anyone else. It's a perfectly fine way to do it. Your original assertion is still not correct though.
It's very difficult for a small company to set the right retail price by properly balancing inventory, sales volume, distributor terms, and a myriad of internal costs. There are probably as many good, small companies buried in the audio graveyard for charging too little as those who charged too much. DIYers don't have these nightmares to worry about, and they're not supporting family and employees.
That said, it's probably a safe bet that some cable purveyors will burn in hell, but then a class of audiophile probably demands they exist to address the needs created by obsession, paranoia and exclusivity.
High-end audio is kinda like poker--exciting, calculating, and fun until the cost to bet gets so high that we fold an walk away.
Mb1 you can adjust or not to personal preference but I was talking about flat response to 20 hz. If response is flat level will be heard as lower. A boost is needed to make it sound flat. Check out the audio frequency spectrum chart that shows sensitivity of the ear at various frequencies. System may measure flat but in that case what our ears hear is not.
I own a pair of Wilson Audio Duette 2's that cost $23k. Don't ask me why I bought them I just did. Before I did I was really looking at Tekton Pendragon for $2k. I think there are plenty of boutique speaker makers out there that you can find and produce sound that could rival the high end. Before it is all said and done I can see myself buying a set of Tekton speakers an selling the Wilson's. It is crazy to think that a pair of speakers cost more than an automobile.
" Mb1 you can adjust or not to personal preference but I was talking about flat response to 20 hz. If response is flat level will be heard as lower. A boost is needed to make it sound flat. Check out the audio frequency spectrum chart that shows sensitivity of the ear at various frequencies. System may measure flat but in that case what our ears hear is not. "
That's what I thought you meant, and I believe you're right. I could be mistaken, but I think bo is saying something similar regarding his comments on bass. If some type of correction isn't done in the low frequencies, I can see where this could be an issue at low volumes. Powered subs set up properly can go a long way in this regard. I wouldn't consider myself an expert in this area, but from what I can see, subs are best used with full range speakers.
MB, the only place I have heard multichannel done right is in my system. That's not bragging, because it's quite easy to do, and I'll tell you how.
Begin with a good two channel system, like ESL's. Double the Left and Right speakers, mounting them at an angle dictated by your room. Right angles are a good place to start. Right away one hears something like an MBL with clean, fast bass.
Now add two more ESL's in the back, for surround. Best is to blend the Right and Left signals, but that's not absolutely necessary. What is necessary is a volume control. Set the volume control to the highest level which cannot be discerned in the listening position. That provides the concert hall ambiance without the source confusion.
I absolutely agree with you about components. Every cap has a sonic signature, and so does every resistor. Active devices more so. Building the best is an expensive proposition, and few people have ever heard an amp, say, with all VAR resistors and polystyrene caps for power supply auxiliaries. But when you hear it, you don't want to go back.
To be fair (and believe me, I do try...in my way), if you can afford The Quest, your predilections and tastes, carry on. 'State of the Art' is up to those who can appreciate it and afford it. Bluntly, I can't the latter. The bulk of my time, energy, and what it generates goes into the business that my spouse and I own. I tinker in what spare time I can steal with what interests and amuses me on what perhaps might be viewed as Quixotic, making what one acquaintance called 'steampunk speakers'....which I thought was rather apt. Considering that they sprung from 'cast-offs', this 'n that, a small investment of capital, and a larger investment of time, study, and thought....
Like a parent with a child with 'difficulties', I'm still rather proud of them. Even with their known and obvious flaws and shortcomings, They Work. With some selections and a tad of eq, I'd bet I could make some of you pause, if only for the moment. Working on improving them beats hanging out in a bar, watching sports that don't appeal, or attending 'functions' with people I have nothing in common with. I 'hang out' Here because we Do have something in common in a general way, the love of music of various sorts, and the reproduction of it in a fashion that agrees with our tastes.
mb1audio, if you don't like surround, OK. If class A is your thing and D stands for Dull, Dumb, or a Disaster, cool. If that cart in your TT costs more than my entire system, well...that's your call and your cash and go forth. IMHO 'extremism' in audio beats the 'ell out of a lot of other 'tastes' that seem to be prevalent of late. Y'all can fill in that blank with what may bother you personally...
Do what you want to do. I do. I realize that one's posts arise from their opinions and observations, their tastes and preferences, and their situations. Some may consider me some odd version of a troll, and that's fine. I don't come around to pester or make fur fly for the frivolity of it. I lurk mostly, getting some 'education', and noting that price still doesn't guarantee 'perfection', pretty baubles can still be ultimately be polished rocks, and hopes still get dashed...although that realization can sometimes take awhile to dawn.
Please do carry on. *S* I'll just step back into the shadows again....and watch the show.... ;)
" Begin with a good two channel system, like ESL's. Double the Left and Right speakers, mounting them at an angle dictated by your room. Right angles are a good place to start. Right away one hears something like an MBL with clean, fast bass.
Now add two more ESL's in the back, for surround. Best is to blend the Right and Left signals, but that's not absolutely necessary. What is necessary is a volume control. Set the volume control to the highest level which cannot be discerned in the listening position. That provides the concert hall ambiance without the source confusion."
As it stands, I'm pretty happy with my current system. I've had several pairs of ESL's so I'm familiar with how they sound. The issue I have with surround, is that I don't think its necessary.
This is how I see it. If you play a recording of an instrument on a 2 channel system (piano, sax, whatever), your system puts the image between the speakers. Now, lets say you have someone play the same instrument live in your listening room. They would be placed in the same spot where your stereo put the image. We all know the room will have an impact on SQ. Whatever effect the room has on the live instrument, it should have on the reproduced instrument. If you now through surround into the mix, you're forcing a different type of interaction than what you had with the live instrument. Unless I'm missing something, it would appear that surround takes you further away from the recording, than closer to it.
As somebody who plays instruments and runs live sound for small venue shows, I beg to differ on some points bandied about here (are they being bandied? I'm not sure but whatEVER). Speakers project sound through drivers pointed someplace (remedies for this notwithstanding for this particular rant) while instruments project sound all over the place and vary infinitely in output, let alone direction. Stand in the middle of my listening room and play guitar, then play my speakers playing that guitar (I can and have recorded live "house concerts" in my listening room using expensive and arguably accurate mics). Utterly different, both good, and both musical. Since I can't get Vijay Iyer to play in my house, or fit an entire orchestra in here, my system does the job well enough for me to really enjoy this stuff anyway.
" Speakers project sound through drivers pointed someplace (remedies for this notwithstanding for this particular rant) while instruments project sound all over the place and vary infinitely in output, let alone direction. "
I don't see that much of a difference. If you stand behind a pair of speakers you can still hear them just like you can stand behind someone playing an instrument. In either case, if you want the best sound, you need be in front.
Also, I assume you're talking about traditional box speakers. Bipolar speakers, like my old Mirage M1's will most likely project more sound from behind than is realistic.
" Stand in the middle of my listening room and play guitar, then play my speakers playing that guitar (I can and have recorded live "house concerts" in my listening room using expensive and arguably accurate mics). Utterly different, both good, and both musical."
I understand what you're saying, but I think you missed the point I was trying to make. If you were to switch back and forth between someone playing a live instrument and a recording, would stereo be a better choice, or surround? We all know that no one is going to mistake a live instrument for reproduced. I just don't see where surround would be a better choice.
@mb1audio I kind of had this discussion in a thread with Kal Rubenstein of Stereophile.
To my ears the biggest benefit to multi-channel sound is the addition of the center channel. It fixes a problem of your head blocking certain frequencies. Have you ever noticed that a violin will sound bright on the sides, but duller near the center? This is exactly that problem. I don't really care about surround content though. :) Try listening with headphones and you'll hear this problem goes away.
If you have an Oppo or similar try Neo6 music mode.
As I recall, a lot of the early classical "stereo" recordings were actually 3 channel, so there's some interesting reading to do on the attitudes and recording practices as well.
Well mbl, I don't have a performance in my music room, ever. Even a string quartet with continuo would be a little tight.
With my system, I try to simulate a concert, with the listener (me) positioned in the middle of the dress circle. That means performers in front, and reflections from the sides and back. I don't think that two speakers do that as well as six. I explained how I do it. YMMD.
Two great speakers with an equally great amp and front end in an acoustically treated room will always have a more natural and musical soundstage (among other things) than a 3+ speaker system with mediocre speakers and componentry.
]Those that have a top-notch two channel system/room and/or a top-notch 3+ channel system are invited to agree or argue.
No argument from me, DL. I am suggesting that top notch 6 channel is better than top notch 2 channel, and by that I mean the same electronics driving the same speakers.
Got it Terry. I have friends that spend the same amount of money on a mid-fi surround system with a crappy sub that a good hi-end starter system would have cost and then ask me for advice because they quickly begin to notice the issues with muffled, chesty, boxy, or overly-bright vocals on their cheap center channel, discontinuous motion from left-to-right and front-to-rear, one-note muddy bass from the sub, etc. and want a miracle cure. My advice always is: get the room and the front L/R right and then, if you have funds remaining, consider judiciously adding channels of like quality. Of course, it is too late for them at that point.
Good question from the original poster. I like to buy the expensive speakers for health reasons. I started to have some real lung/respiratory issues from burning piles of my money in a bonfire in the middle of the living room floor. I found that if I bought expensive stereo speakers from thieves I have less smoke in the house and breath easier. The only real problem is that with less money smoke my health improved and my medical costs went down. I fixed that by starting to smoke 3 packs a day at $10 a pack. So, it all works out.
" Well mbl, I don't have a performance in my music room, ever. Even a string quartet with continuo would be a little tight.
With my system, I try to simulate a concert, with the listener (me) positioned in the middle of the dress circle. That means performers in front, and reflections from the sides and back. I don't think that two speakers do that as well as six. I explained how I do it. YMMD."
You'll have to bear with me because I'm not the best at explaining things. The reason I used a live performance as an example was to show, at least to me, that a 2 channel system seems to be better equipped to replicate the performance than a surround system. Your quote above shows where we differ. With surround, you try to replicate side and rear reflections with information coming from speakers. My opinion is that if you have an instrument play live, it will use the acoustics of the room. If you then set up a 2 channel system so that the instrument is at the same spot in the room as the live instrument, why not let the recording use the same characteristics of the room, just like what happens live?
I also want to be clear that I'm not trying to start an argument here. This is just how I see the issue, and if others are getting results using other methods, that's perfectly fine. It would be foolish for anyone to do things any other way than what works best for them.
mbl, you state, "if you have an instrument play live ..."
I think that’s the point of difference, mbl. I don’t often listen to a single instrument or any other small source of music; usually it’s a group of musicians who can be playing substantial instruments. That group extends over space. A few square inches of speaker is no substitute for 30 square feet of sound board, for example.
To reproduce this sound requires square feet of speaker, extended over some significant space.
The whole point was is that it doesn’t take all that much time or effort to build high quality speakers that someone has designed for you. Either that or you have a friend who can build you cabinets because most Americans do. Making a crossover is incredibly easy and soldering is actually pretty fun. Building cabinets is actually fun too for a lot of people.
Time is not an exscuse. That’s just a random thought you guys come up with on a spot because I don’t know you’re afraid you’re wasting your money?
If you have time to listen to your speakers AND rant and rave with me on Audiogon you got some time to build some cabinets and crossovers. It takes a day or two. And if someone designed a sophisticated enough cabinet and crossover for you, which is entirely in the realm of reality, you could get $100,000+ speakers for a couple of grand. You could build Focal Grand Utopia BEs if someone with some experience took some time to make designs for just a fraction of the price probably save $170,000 off their $180,000 price.
And this isn’t a constant hobby that requires constant attention. You build them in one or two days and you’re done.
This is obserd. "I don’t have time"? Figuring most of you are paid $100 an hour or less with designs in hand, in a couple of hours you can basically earn $10,000 an hour being a speaker builder saving yourself tons of money.
And you guys are all defending these mark ups? Why? What do you owe them? Many people don’t realize they’re just buying 3rd party drivers and a moderately easily (with the knowledge in hand) designed cabinet and crossovers. I didn’t know that and when I found out I was pissed. I never stopped to think about it. People are commenting on mark ups aren’t taking in to account that while you need a lot of knowledge to design crossovers and cabinets, you need beyond amateur skill to replicate it. beyond amateur.
So go on saying you "don’t have time" or "every other industry marks up" which is ridiculous rebuttals. Keep feeding this crooked industry the one that I’ve grown to hate with a serious passion.
This thread has seemingly strayed off topic, nevertheless, I’ll add my opinion. "Music", as performed by a band with live instruments, sounds best and can be more accurately reproduced with 2 channel stereo. "Noise" as in everything other than "music" such as movies with helicopters, bomb blasts, etc. can be more accurately reproduced with "surround" sound. Curious with surround sound though is where does it end? The original surround sound was 5.1. Latest technology is 22.1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/22.2_surround_sound I suppose theoretically there is infinite dimension to where sound could emanate from. This is one reason why the Grateful Dead knew what they were doing from, among other things, a sound reproduction perspective. https://www.google.com/search?q=wall+of+sound+grateful+dead&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&a...
" This is obserd. "I don’t have time"? Figuring most of you are paid $100 an hour or less with designs in hand, in a couple of hours you can basically earn $10,000 an hour being a speaker builder saving yourself tons of money.
And you guys are all defending these mark ups? Why? What do you owe them? Many people don’t realize they’re just buying 3rd party drivers and a moderately easily (with the knowledge in hand) designed cabinet and crossovers. I didn’t know that and when I found out I was pissed. I never stopped to think about it. People are commenting on mark ups aren’t taking in to account that while you need a lot of knowledge to design crossovers and cabinets, you need beyond amateur skill to replicate it. beyond amateur.
So go on saying you "don’t have time" or "every other industry marks up" which is ridiculous rebuttals. Keep feeding this crooked industry the one that I’ve grown to hate with a serious passion."
You do a lot of talking. Now put your money where your mouth is. I'll give you 2 weeks to build a speaker that sounds as good as a pair of $2500 Vandersteen Model 2's. You can have a max budget of $5000. That's 2x full list price. The only requirements are that the speakers need to be time and phase correct like the Vandersteen's, and they have to measure at least as well. Mere child's play for someone with your verbal skills.
Do that and I'll reimburse you for the cost of materials up to 5k, and give you an additional 25k. You can show us all how easy it is to make 10k an hour. I pay cash and have no problem coming up with the money.
What I don't want, is a ridiculous debate. Either take me up on my offer and build the speakers, or not. Its up to you. I won't waste anymore time responding to your BS claims when I can have meaningful conversations the other members here. They have something real to contribute.
More channels than four seems to me like the manufacturers’ pushing 1080p TVs to those that already owned 720p with screen sizes 50" and under. If you sit the proper distance from the two different resolution 50" TVs of the same quality otherwise, you will not see any improvement in the picture unless the you have eyesight like an eagle.
The 1080’s improved resolution is visible with 60" and larger TVs, but they put crappy motion processors in the standard (affordable) TVs to meet competitive average-consumer price points so you live with a picture with higher-definition motion slur ( the worst) unless you buy the best. The old Panasonic 720p plasma’s kill the newer 1080p sets for blacks, depth, and natural picture rendition unless you go to the ultra-expensive Oled sets. Same with multi-channel audio vs 2 channel IMO.
I sold my Martin Logan Stage center channel speaker and mono Marantz MA700 center channel amp after trying just my two-channel system with my processor in "phantom center" mode along with 2 rear channels. The continuity of motion, tone, and height is much better to my ears. Much more realistic sound in every way than trying to integrate a center channel above or below my screen.
I run the L/R out of the processor to my hi-end 2-channel preamp’s balanced inputs via long XLR ICs and set the preamp’s volume at unity gain, so those two channels get the best possible source quality. Of course, the processor is not in the loop for two-channel music listening, which is 99% of the time for me. I confess that when I do use the processor for movies or multi-channel music, I set the processor to "Pure Audio" mode, bypassing the Audyssey room correction and any other circuitry possible inside the processor. Possible and preferable because my room and my 2-channel rig are right.
Stand facing one direction and have somebody play guitar while running around you. This proves nothing, but I thought it was an interesting image anyway.
Shadorne, I appreciate your thoughtful, respectful reply, which is what should happen on this site, not rude dismissal. :)
We will be at odds on this topic, and I do not see the article you referenced as very strong evidence for the idea that creatures have the capacity to morph over time. Research conducted in labs for decades on tens of thousands of generations of fruit flies, for example, attempting directed, forced change to the DNA shows that DNA is extremely stubbornly resistive to change, not amenable to change. Imo, the search for a mechanism to drive DNA change via viruses is a desperate one to save a failing theory.
As you linked to a resource, I'll share one as well. A good introductory book on Intelligent Design is "It Couldn't Just Happen" by Lawrence O Richards. It shows some of the phenomenal challenges scientifically which stand against Darwinism.
Anyway, I did not intend to commandeer the thread or throw it off entirely. Feel free to reply and we can let it be. I invite you to open discussion with me on the topic, and we may find it an enjoyable cordial discussion in private. :)
you could get $100,000+ speakers for a couple of grand.
@funtrollfun, every DIY guy I know who has $2K in his speakers claim they are as good as $100K+ speakers. That's part of the DIY fun, just imagining how much money you are saving. Pride of doing it yourself. I can't say that I would mistake their speakers for $100K+ speakers, but they were worth at least $2K, well mostly, sorry Rick.
If they are happy with their DIY gear, God Bless 'em. I wouldn't lecture a DIYer on how to live his life, and I don't expect some DIYer to lecture anyone else on how to live their life. Only a pompous fool believes they have the right to educate the rest of the world on how to live life properly.
Much of audio is ridiculously priced, and could be done much cheaper. The prices are so high because some folks WANT them to be high, for elitist status purposes. In the last 10 years every major audio manufacturer has come out with a new top of the line model which is at least double in price. If you don't want to chase the spiraling absolute sound, that's your business, and no one else. If others do decide to chase the spiraling absolute sound, that's their business, and not yours.
in a couple of hours you can basically earn $10,000 an hour being a speaker builder saving yourself tons of money.
Hahahaha....now that's good comedy there. If that is your actual thought process, there is sense talking logic or reason with you.
it is one thing to buy some cone based drivers and build an enclosure by copying the R&D of an established and eminent manf.
it is something else to hire a bunch of engineers and acousticians, but them test gear, including laser interferometers, and spend years to improve on an existing design of cones in a box
and something else again to create speaker based on ribbons, electrostatics, or a gas plasma
choose your level and how much time you want to invest for the $$ you will save (I suggest the cones in a box for any single individual)
" Much of audio is ridiculously priced, and could be done much cheaper. The prices are so high because some folks WANT them to be high, for elitist status purposes. In the last 10 years every major audio manufacturer has come out with a new top of the line model which is at least double in price. "
I've heard statements like that many times over the years, and for the most part, I just don't buy it. There are some products out there that are overpriced, but I've never seen anyone buy them as a status symbol. They're just trying to get better sound, and are willing to pay for it. Not only that, but when expensive products don't sound as good as expected, those status symbols go right out the door.
As for the doubling of prices over the last 10 years, I think its also worth mentioning that price increases go far beyond the audio industry. Everything is more expensive these days, not just audio components. Besides, no one is putting a gun to your head and forcing you to buy something. A decision like that can only be made by you.
I am a dealer of high end audio and have been for about 12 years. In my twenties I worked for a hi fi shop in Denver that did sell a few hi fi items, Kef, ADS, Luxman but that was in the 70's. So one would think that things would improve at a pretty good clip. I have yet to see it loudspeakers. It is almost like hobbyists that enjoy music systems say to themselves, " I think I could make a loud speaker better the these. Then they are off and running. Big MDF boxes with three drivers. WOW isn't that special. You hire a cabinet guy to go to work, you buy drivers, none are as good as you would like them to be but latter you will order direct from the factory and have them add a couple of windings and call them custom, then you play around with crossovers and settle for one, then late you will upgrade the parts and say what a huge improvement that makes.
Now you are in business. Marketing comes next.
So I wish I did't have to say this but I agree with you.
Maybe not about the other stuff you said regarding the people who buy them.
Can you give more details and some examples? There's always going to be a mix of good and bad speakers in the market. But if you look at most of the successful speaker companies that have an established brand, along with track record of repeat sales, they seem to be unique in that they're products are able to outperform DIY speakers. Of course, you'll have the ocassional exception, but for the most part, DIY has a difficult time competing with established brands.
I'm diying a classic design with an nod to the German Physiks model. The sound of the former with an 'update', with my own 'take' on the concept. I can't buy what's in my mind's eye at any price. That, and a champagne taste with a cold water budget. If I'm going to 'tilt windmills', dammit, I'm going to pick a Big One and have @ it. *L* If I come up a good one, I'll obviously share that. And a vid with better sound in the effort. If it sucks, I share that too. "Don't go there with That." It requires commitment. I can do that. Thought. Planning. Execution. Yup. I'm not building a cabinet, it's a speaker. Well, half of one, anyway. Not that I've not thought of that, though....one could...but I digress...a lot. While some chase Nirvana 'that'away', I'm going 'this'away'. And the enjoyment of My chase vs. yours vs. anyone else's... ...is relatively the same to me, just a different POV.
I like 'surround'. I just want Really Good Surround. That's My itch. Scratching as fast as I can.... ;) Your scratch yours...I'm busy. *L*
Mb1 audio of course most diy speakers aren't as good as high end. a lot of them use budget bang for the buck drivers like Dayton etc and the cabinetsame while sophisticated could be improved.
My point is there should be a site like diyaudio.com where there are several designs that people with extensive building knowledge design 150-200+ lb cabinets with high end drivers and crossovers instead of budget designs that would actually put a dent in the scam market there is today.
I'd personally prefer to buy retail but hey I refuse to be scammed.
If enough people decided hey....I don't want to buy $25,000 speakers any more and pay a 1000% margin on cost to build...then they will drastically lower prices. There are too many speaker companies anyways there are thousands. There are only a hand full of car dealers, tv manufacturers and cell phone makers. These huge, huge margins allow 1000s of small companies to exist because they make a fortune when they sell 1 pair of speakers. People don't understand they're being scammed...if they did they wouldn't do it.
No amplifier should ever cost more than $5,000 to buy. No 10' 100% copper speaker cables should ever cost more than $150 to buy. No processor should ever cost more than $5,000 to buy. No Source player should ever cost more than $1,000 unless it's 500 disc capacity. No pair of speakers should ever cost over $10,000 unless it's something crazy like a line source or special circumstances.
If you guys keep paying the margins out of ignorance then they will keep reaping the fruits of it.
Even though the diy revolution will probably never happen I have a feeling a factory direct speaker company is going to off set the market in the next 10 years...
Someone is going to design a 150 lb well built cabinet with super high end drivers and an excellent crossover and you will get the highest end 11 channel atmos speaker set for like $12,500 and it will rival $500,000 systems but the placebo reviewers will gawk at its low price and say it's ok when in reality they'll be the top speakers on the market.
Can't wait for it.
Then another factory direct company will follow suit...and soon there will be a handfull of companies with flagship speakers rivaling speakers costing 100 times their asking prices. Super high end scan Speak, dynaudio oem and Seas designs and accuton ...all for pennies compared to the high end world.
It already started when SVS released the PB16-Ultra for $2,500...arguably the greatest commercial subwoofer on earth for $2,500.
If SVS or Aperion or Ascend Acoustics released a full scan Speak Illuminator speaker with excellent cabinets and good crossovers for 4 way full range floorstanders and $5,000 and a 3 way bookshelf for $2750 and 3 way center for $1,750 it would change things. The d3004 is considered by a great many as the best tweeter in the world same with their 4.5" midrange...and their woofers are considered of the best too. The amplifier market and processor and sources and cables will probably be that way until a 60 minutes episode comes out. Even then people have been used to the Idea that $20,000 for an amplifier is normal...they won't go away for a while.
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.
