Are more expensive speakers better?


Recently, I found out an interesting thing while reviewing audiogon threads. Many people were not satisfied with their current speakers and were trying to "upgrade" their system, seeking other people's opinions/advices/recommendations. And most people used the phrases like "best bang for the buck" or "at that price range". Does that mean more expentive speakers are better?
ddhpark
Doesn't the baseball analogy fall apart by looking at the Yankees? I know they didn't quite win this year, but they were darn good and basically win every year by spending a lot more than everybody else.

I once read that beyond $4k for speakers, you were buying the bottom few Hz and the top several db. That has always seemed about right to me - there are many speakers in the <$4k range that to things REALLY well but are not the last word in bottom end extension, and would not necessarily fill a large room or play AC/DC at concert levels. Examples that come quickly to mind are the Dunlavy SC-III and Dynaudio Contour 1.8. There are many others to be sure.

I think it is also safe to say that to achieve "the ultimate", you're going to have to spend more. It is not safe to say the reverse - that is, that if you spend more, you'll get closer to the ultimate. -Kirk

To achieve greater quality in ANYTHING typically requires more money and research. Whether or not the money and research are used wisely or in the most worthwhile or productive manner is another story. As you know, some things in high end are STRICTLY cosmetic based, which can add DRASTICALLY to the cost without doing anything for performance.

Bottom line: More expensive speakers ( or components for that matter ) SHOULD sound and measure better, but that is not necessarily the case. Every design involves trade-offs. Which trade-offs you can live with or can't live with is a personal thing. That is why audio is so "subjective". What you hear and like may be different than what i hear and like. Regardless of price. Sean
>
Pbb; you say calling any component/speaker "mid-fi" is the ultimate insult. And you go on to state that Vandersteen 5 (my speaker), Thiel CS 7.2, and MG 3.6 are "mid-fi". Are you *&%@&8%*^$# serious??? And yes, I'm insulted. If you stand by such assertions, you're an insensitive and really out of touch ass, or maybe you just have so much money that $10-15K is pocket change to you.

What do other A'gon members and readers think of Pbb's remarks/conclusions. No cheers here.
I'd just add that in Robert Harley's TAS review of The Vandersteen 5s, he put them sonically in a class with much more expensive speakers such as the Avalon Eidolons and some other highly regarded speakers, and declared them "world class". I had enough guts to actually state what kind of speakers I own. Perhaps you'd care to tell us about YOUR system, or at least your speakers. Do you use Bose? CRAIG.
You go, Craig!!! I wasn't going to rise to the bait on this one, but I have to agree that the speakers listed as "mid-fi" are anything but. Infact, the Vandy 5's, Thiel 7.2's, and Maggie 3.6's will run rings around many far more expensive speakers. This is one very clear case where spending more often on speakers does NOT result in better sound quality.