The Cost of Cables

John, I can't relate to the prices for cables you refer to. I start scratching at much less than 50%. :-) But I can't blame the manufacturers of any tweaks for getting as much money as they can, while they can. Its the old American free market in full bloom.

And I can't criticize someone who has already optimied his equipment and set up who finally takes the last step in fine tuning the system, regardless of cost. His choice, his preferrences, his ears, his wallet. I would imagine that his expectations would be to get the most neutral yet revealing wire available. I can't imagine him getting wire tone controls although I'm sure that happens.

The person who I do feel for is the wantabe/wantahave who, for example buys an inexpensive SS (or tubed, but I can't imagine it :-)) integrated based on 'user' or reviewer testimonials, matches it to high resolving speakers, and then tries to compensate for the tonal problems by chasing after cables, IC's, and PC's, instead of just investing in, very selectively, some higher quality goods in the first place. FWIW, I think this is what drives a great part of the demand (and prices) for wire, the more exotic appearing, or described, the higher the price.

FWIW

Well said Brian. Now you seem to grasp the situation.

I wouldn't say that I have now gotten a grasp of this situation, I already felt this way; I was open to being shown I am wrong.

Brian

I wouldn't say that I have now gotten a grasp of this situation, I already felt this way; I was open to being shown I am wrong.

Brian
Brianmgrarcom

Certainly the results could not have surprised you though Brian, could they? I would have been stunned to the point of disbelief if someone tried to validate/justify the cost of cables.

If they do, I bet you'll find the catch all phrase being R&D costs. The customer is expected to pay for the designer's cable/cord purchases from competitors and his hours of listening. You see, they 'have to' buy competing products to test against their own. They have to buy a reference system of three to use as 'synergestic testing lab equipment'. Then they 'have to' listen hours a day for years sometimes, to tune in their products. That's a lot of time and money spent on research and development. Now you may say 'hey, that's what I do for a hobby'. However, when you are selling products it is no longer your hobby, it is a job, and you can write this in as R&D costs.

There is simply no way to justify the material/labor costs, it's all in the 'R&D' department.
Some manufacturers could have HUGE R&D costs. Maybe they have a million dollars or more tied up in R&D assests alone. Someone has to pay for that, and it's certainly not going to be the manufacturer.

Nobody said it would be easy. You must have very expensive audio gear and comparison cables in your 'R&D lab'.

Does that help?

John

No, it does not surprise me John.

The only "problem" I have with your scenario about R&D costs is that it is the same for the rest of the industry.

Brian

The only "problem" I have with your scenario about R&D costs is that it is the same for the rest of the industry.

Brian

Believe me, I can't justify the cost of cables at all. I'm just saying that those that I have heard try to explain it, point to the ever elusive and inexplicable 'R&D', as a coverall expense.

Maybe, since they have the same 'R&D' as say a speaker manufacturer, the cable manufacturer feels the need to make the same net profit per unit sold to cover the costs for the same 'R&D' as the speaker manufacturer.

The only ones that know aren't talking, so we are left to surmise the reasons.

John