Supporting Local Audio Stores are we?

RE Vandy's big gun

There are, amazingly enough, other models in that ionisphereic range from which to pick. Certainly, 'got rocks loyalists' will be all over them. I'd feign placing a number on units being moved short term. < 50 pairs in a year? More?

I wonder just how many of the top tiered units from any makers line up are sold on average, annually. On these shores or others.

I do tend to agree also that the greatest majority of 'high end audio' devices tend to reflect performance to expense of ownership more often than not. Amps, preamps, sources and cabling usually do reflect and validate their promises of performance to cost... and there are exceptions to the rule in each genre of course.

With speakers though, it does seem otherwise a bit more often. Overachievers there do continue to spring up to public attention more readily. Like as not it's a mere attribute of their portion of the system's overall performance, and how integral or impactful they can be to it.

I sure would love, for just one time to hear some $40 or $50K speakers all set up right... AND then hear some of lesser expense in the exact same setup. Or vice versa... just to hear what's what on that level. Just once.

BTW.... just how much total cost should be in a rig whose speakers are right at $50K, anyway? $50K? $100K $200K?

... and would they use 'em for HT? I bet someone would.

Blindjim,

Several years ago, when I WAS involved in retail, I put a $30K pair of speakers, as LR, a $9K center voice, and a pair of $18K rear speakers in a home theater set up. The amps were excellent quality too, with the total system coming in at WAY more than $150K.

The system that Rich was using for his debut of the 7's was, I believe in the $300K range.
One of the ezines reporting on this said so anyway.

As to how many pair, I wondered that about the Alexandras. Their Asian market is most likely much larger than the US market. It really is a pride of ownership mindset, with regard to owning expensive audio in the PAC rim. I would think that Vandersteen will sell several pairs there. Now, I also believe that the Alexandras as well as the 7's will only be made to order, with no stocking. Could be wrong on that, but letting $100K on the Wilsons, or even the $40K for the Vantersteens sit is suicide for a manufacturer.

Larry

Larry

Re "...letting $100K sit around is suicide..."

Probably. but it would sure seem one pair at least needs to be 'show ponies', huh? Maybe even two pairs.

Hmmmm. There's a demo deal for someone, down the road. Step right up folks... pristine shape, near no use and only with top eschelon gear... now only $39,999.

so what then is the big diff when going from say 10K speakers to 40K speakers, sonicly? Is it really a night and day thing, with all else being equal in the rig? By gosh it sure oughta be.

First and foremost, this is my first post after reading these forums for six years! So, hello to all…

I must be upfront and say that I own an audio store that began back in 1972. While I was not alive when the store opened, I was brought up to enjoy the benefits of the local audio stores and the people who work in them… oh, and the equipment too!

In my honest opinion, you are all correct. Prices are high, quality is down and the stores are less knowledgeable. But the question on my mind is, why?

The “audio store” used to be the forum location, not the Internet. People used to spend their free time checking out the new equipment, sharing what they know and just talking with others; face-to-face. That doesn’t happen anymore. It is more convenient to have a debate online than face-to-face. It is more convenient to spend a couple minutes on the computer than drive to the local store. It is less expensive to buy online than at the store.

For those dealers out there, we should be focusing on what made the audio stores successful in the past and adapt them to the present. The past offered us the “community”, the service (with technicians onsite), the experience of the sales staff and the equipment. Are we providing that to our clients? If not, I urge you to try and see what happens. Our store re-evaluated what we were doing two years ago and started putting more focus on the “old ways” and I can say we just finished the best year of sales in a ten year history. People are looking for a “community” and we all used to offer that. When we lost sight of that, our patrons moved to another source… the Internet.

To those of you who are not dealers… I urge you to give the local store another look. There are some of us who are trying to improve the industry and we need the support. So, support the local shops! If we, as a “community”, do not figure out how to balance the trade, then the “community” will die. Simple as that.

But don’t take my advice. Answer the questions yourselves… Where do you go to audition equipment? Where do you get your equipment repaired (especially the old stuff)? Where can you debate the tweaks? Etc…

This is a hobby. There is more to this than buying and selling equipment. When you play poker, you need the beer, peanuts, cigars and hot waitresses to make it fun. Same with audio… you need great service, good discussion and glowing tubes to make it complete.

All in all… if your local dealer is providing great service and knowledge, then give them your respect and help them stay alive. There is more to this “community” than a price.

Blindjim,

First, my perspective, so you'll know how flawed my interpretation is...and subjective.

I have heard everything from Wilson's best at $130K, to MBL's best, at I think, $119K, to the other mega priced speakers. When I heard these, on one occassion, I was at a dealer, (Wilson's), but heard them (his current best at the times) on numerous occassions, at the CES too. The MBL's only at the CES.
First, just comparing these megas,(I am sure others will pick from thousands of other megas) these two are very different speakers from one another, certainly design wise, as well as performance wise. To my ears, the each do different things well. The Wilsons are more dynamic, and have an obvious bass extention edge, both in terms of slam and frequency response. Yet, to my ears on the occassions that I have heard them, the Wilsons just don't seem to disappear completely. I asked my two cohorts and they both made that statement without prompting,(industry types) that they were not as transparent in terms of dissappearing as we might have thoughtthey would be. But you asked how megas differs from $10 to $40K speakers.
So, how are both different from the $10K--$40K speakers, of course leaving out diminishing returns because that should NOT be considered IMHO, because that brings in too many other thoughts, but we can discuss that off the site. They have more resolution at almost all levels of SPL, better micro dynamics, image density, front to back imaging, width of soundstage, (though the cabinet locations were, at least to my ears, again obvious on the Wilsons). Keep in mind that they are mind boggling good, by any standard, just this one issue of, I guess cabinet noise clues (?), and EVERYONE can have different thoughts, and I am sure they will. Maybe my samplings were both limited.
Down to earthly pricing,(ha)Let's compare them first to the THIEL CS5i, which I owned for several years, which cost about $12K in 1989 dollars. The Wilsons as you might expect have more resolution, so the clues as to 'where' things seem to happen in the sound stage become more well defined. Imagine a photo that is crystal clear, versus a polaroid. Though not a great example, telling nonetheless, the lesser speakers offer less resolution of the overall sound--same thing, different sense (hearing vs sight). The overall sense of realism is greater with the mega speakers, in terms of "Am I really there?" Real music, acoustic music for sure, to me, as an event, is sort of'unspectacular', its just, well, real music. Noone goes into a hotel lobby and hears a piano coming from the bar and says, "Oh my God, a real piano!" They can tell though, if they're careful listeners that it is a real piano and not a recording, because of the subtle, (think low level res) clues that they pick up on. So, with the Wilsons, those subtle clues are more abundant, therefore they sound more,'real'. This inspires a memory, which is, back during that era, I talked to JT about the 5's and told him that I thought that the CS5's had MUCH greater 'image density' than any of his previous models, and assumed it was because each driver was working more easily thoughout its frequency askance.
In the '90's I came to be very close to the Nearfield Acoustics, which cost up to $90K in those dollars. They too, (regardless of varying opinions) offered incredible dynamics and image density. (The largest had, I think 24, drivers operating from 65hz to 3Khz. Then 48 domes operating to above 35Khz. Then two 'depth charges' for subs, 2x18' subs times two. Whoa, bass extension.
People have faulted them for comb filter effects, (cancellations due to proximity)as well as various other perceived faults, but they did some things VERY well, and offered that incredible density, I mentioned. This is, to my ears absent in virtually all driver based speakers, with limited drivers. MORE IS BETTER?
God, I am going on like an idiot. Well, the differences, to me, is frequency extremes, (mostly bass) dynamic range, image density, soundstage, (width and depth). With these qualities comes greater tonal purity, at least on the better Mega priced speakers.
Like most engineering issues, there's nothing like throwing money into a solution. More, of course if done thoughtfull,should be better and better costs more.
Jim, I should have given you a three word answer, "Sense of realism."

Sorry to prattle....

Larry