Why pay $5000+ for speakers? - Page 2

speaker choice is subjective, so that's your call.
Personally, I use KEF Reference, and Martin Logan speakers, which both build their own drivers (and ESL panels) and have veneers and finishes that are a lot finer than a typical pair of $300 Polks. They also sound tremendously better to my ears.

It's what sounds good you you that matters.

The thing is that this argument could be made for every $1,000 you go up in price. Some people will say that their $1,000 speakers will either outperform or sound as good as a $2,000 pair of speakers. So for those people they see no reason to spend more than $1,000. I tend to find that people are far more outspoken about the speakers they own than other electronics. The thing is it is very possible to "one person" that a $1,000 pair of speakers sound as good or even better than a $10,000 pair of speakers. If they truly love the sound of that lower priced speaker, how is anyone else in a position to tell them any different, especially if they cannot hear a difference.

Some people will believe that a $10,000 pair of speakers will perform night and day difference to a $2,000 or $3,000 speaker, and nobody can tell that person any different. Like I said speakers tend to evoke an emotional connection more so than a TV does. With a TV people will look at the technology far more objectively. Either a TV has really good contrast or it doesn't. Either a TV can handle motion artifacts or it can't. Price may factor it into how a TV is regarded for more than speakers.

Even if two different speakers have largely different qualities of sound you would probably be able to find a close to equal amount of people that would prefer both speakers. Where as if a TV has lousy contrast, color, or motion blur issues, you will find less people willing to own those devices.

You have not visited the TV forums, have you?

It has been a while.

I guess it can heated in almost every sub-forum.

For off axis listeners, maybe.

Personally, I think the placebo affect comes into play with speakers more than any other item in the world. It costs more, so I must hear a difference. That said, I have pretty decent hearing and I've heard countless speakers and really, I don't notice a huge difference in most. Granted, I've never listened to a pair of $20,000 dollar speakers, but I have listened to $5,000-$10,000 dollar speakers, and to me, I'd be satisfied with a set of $1,000 dollar speakers.

I can understand the major differences in speakers. I agree with most people who think Klipsch sound bright due to their horn loaded technology. I can also agree with people who say some speakers sound more boomy, etc... But, when you get into super-high priced speakers and people start talking about, "Ahhh, the roll off was harsh, ohhh, the mids were so tight, they really started to sing around 90hz. I noticed the frequency response was a little weak for my taste and the ambisonics, electrostatic, inductance, linearity, presence band were all spot on". I mean, you start to sound like Chris Farley in Tommy Boy. "... I was checking the a ... specs on the end line, for the rotary, girder, I'm retarded, I ..." I just think there comes a point in speakers and people's assessment when it starts to become snake oil.

But, maybe that's just me.

I assume he means it gets the most content.

I'd put cables and amplifiers ahead of speakers if I was building a list...

For speakers it depends on use and environment, but in some cases there's often no reason to spend more.

I like to use the anology of headphones, when they're tight up against your head & ears they sound great and as soon as you move an earpiece an inch away they sound like crap.

I've heard $300 a pair speakers that were just as articulate as $3000 a pair ones when operating within their capabilities, but once the volume got turned up they simply couldn't keep up.

I don't think those $3000 speakers would loose any ground to similar sized $10k speakers in the same way though.

There certainly is validity in the value of cabinetry to a point, and that's no different than furniture really.

Sure... everyone knows speakers all sound the same.
(only on AVSforum).

Typically what you gain in more expensive speakers is less distortion (better drivers), more dynamic range (better drivers), less coloration (better cabinets), lower extension (better/bigger drivers, better/bigger cabinets).

And Bigger sound.

Well I don't know that they all "same the same", but I don't think he was saying they all sound the same as much as he was saying the differences are often over-hyped.

And an emptier wallet.

Look, any one of those objectives can met at various price points, it's not the exclusive domain of uber expensive speakers.

You can easily make an inert cabinet out of inexpensive material, and you can make an accurate driver at reasonable prices. In the end the performance will come from how they're engineered, not how their ads read.

No, they can't. Part of how a system is engineered is the materials and manufacturing processes chosen, both which usually improve the more you spend on them.

That's not saying all "uber" expensive speakers outperform all less expensive speakers, as they don't in all cases and in all areas.

We can debate the marginal improvements with marginal increase in cost and which parameters really make a speaker sound better...but I think it's silly to argue that a system that sells for 10x that of another won't sound noticeably better. That's certainly been my experience when I've heard "uber" expensive speakers.

The same point as there is in paying $25k for a watch. The bling won't keep better time or even look nicer than a $250 variety, but if you can afford it you may find the ego stroking worth the price.


I've heard many $3k speakers that sound better than $30k speakers. I haven't heard a higher than $10k speaker that sounds the least bit better for the added price.

No it's not silly at all, it's called technology and with advances in technology usually comes a reduction in price. If you doubt that, just have a look at your iPhone, it used to take a building full of machines to do what it does now.

As far as speaker technology (design) goes, well, by todays standards it's ancient, there's not a heck of a lot that's truly "new". The technology of the manufacturing processes has likely advanced far more than the audio reproduction technology.

It's more likely that the speaker selling for 10x the price of another sells 1/1000th less of that product and has to mark up its' cost to be able to justify low production. There's no logic to support automatically better performance because of price.

The bottom line is if someone has the cash to pay $100,000 for a speaker someone will build it. (And market it using whatever rhetoric the buyer wants to hear of course.)

DS-21,

Are you saying the JBL 6332 and Revel Studio2 are similar products in different cabinets since they are part of Harmon?

What I want to know is......why the heck didn't Harman use 7 Revel Salon2 speakers, instead of 7 JBL6332!

It's been my experience that the more expensive a speaker is, the better it sounds.

You can buy a pair of speakers off amazon for under $100. I've done it because I needed something where sound quality didn't matter much. I.e listening to music while running on a treadmill. Nothing can sound good in that situation. Believe me, there are some inexpensive speakers that sound really bad. They distort at 0.01 watts. I would say the worst speakers you can get are also the least expensive.

I've never bought speakers that cost over $1,000 each so there may be a cutoff at a particular price point. But, pretty much every time i've auditioned speakers, the ones I liked the best also cost the most.

That is one of the silliest statements I've ever heard.
If that's true, like echen1024, earlier in this thread, you really need to get out more and hear more high-end speakers.

I will say this, after this weekend I find it it quite amazing what you can get today for a small amount of money.

I posted earlier about my living room set-up and it did become an obsession from the Simaudio Titan amp, Classe pre-pro, conditioning, cables and Dynaudio Confidence speakers and REL subs. It was a long journey to build that set-up and I love it for HT and stereo.

but...

I wanted a small footprint little 2.0 system for my bedroom. I moved a nice display in there after an upgrade and didn't want to use the tv speakers.

Compared to my living room set-up I spent peanuts. I picked up the small Bowers and Wilkins CM1 monitors for a $1k and an even smaller Marantz AVR for $350. I am blown away by the sound from this little set-up. The Marantz is handling the load although at 75% volume during a movie (showtime HD) haven't even tried blu-ray or cd from the Arcam blu-ray player yet. I must say for a system from the complete opposite of the spectrum of cost and careful matching of components etc this is truly a kick-ass little system. I am getting plenty of bass (for a bedroom) and don't think I will need a center either. Just sounds great so far for such a small set-up. I am going to return the Marantz and spend just a bit more and get a little additional juice to be safe but really, this little Marantz 1402 slim is doing a pretty good job for such an entry level piece.

I guess the point is I now am running two seperate systems and two complete different spectrums of cost and I am impressed with what I picked up for the money.

I really think if I were locked into a budget of $1k for speakers I would dump it all into the L/R and build. You get a fantastic movie experience from L/R only (in a small or medium room like my bedroom). Those CM1s sound really great for HT (stereo thoughts forthcoming).

You really can get a great little set-up for not a lot of money. But I still would not trade by Dynaudio Confidence speakers for anything except for Focal Diablo or Dynaudio Consequence.

Rick

Sensitivity
(lower compression/greater dynamics peak SPL capability).
Note it's their REF HT(mch), not their REF 2ch in your living room setup. In which case it may well have been the Revels.

cheers,

AJ

In my line of work I hear far more high end speakers than most people, even afficionados, are even aware exist.

I see.

I still hate Harman for not putting grills on their "reference HT room speakers".

Much of the cost of the high dollar speakers goes to testing, design and cabinet cost. Materials and tooling (in house or not) is expensive since they are making a few hundred or so not a million units.

When you start designing/building speakers for a living you might gain a smidge of credibility. Until then I'll listen and take seriously what Bill says.

Sorta/kinda/not really.

I'm saying they're similar products from a reproduction standpoint because both voiced for flat on-axis response/declining sound power, are similar in directivity (5" midrange, tweeter loaded in a small EOS-shaped waveguide to directivity-match the mid at the crossover), with bleeding-edge technology drivers (IMO, the 6332 actually edges out the Revel in that respect) of similar radiating area from top to bottom (2 8" woofers ~ 1 12" woofer).

The fact that they both come from Harman is interesting trivia, but inconsequential. If the Studio2 had been a Gradient and the 6332 a Genelec (for example) the same points would hold.

It's not a perfect match, as AJ noted, because the Revel is less efficient and goes lower. (IMO, for a modern system employing multiple subwoofers, the "pro" speaker actually makes the smarter compromise. Though it would be better still as a closed box. But many people seem to fine with low-fidelity upper bass, so multiple sub systems are a minority.) But it's a great illustration of the difference between a speaker designed for sound and just sound, and a speaker designed for sound and to look good in a ritzy home. The latter is inevitably going to be more expensive for all sorts or reasons. One significant one is that the actual cost to make is difference, due to industrial design and expected quality of finish. Another, as you correctly note, is simply production volume. I don't even want to hazard the ratio of JBL 6332s sold to Revel Studio2's solid, except to say that I doubt the ratio is not near 1:1. And production volume is to some degree to create scarcity, sure, but it's also a factor of the time required to make the cabinetry, etc.

DS, thanks for the insight. I'd bet more 6332s are sold on eBay in a month than Revel Studio2 in a year. This is not a knock on Revel I like the sound.


Fit and finish are about 40-60% off the cost of speakers so I have told by insiders.

People scoff when I use and spec Tannoy Definition Install series. They sure ain't pretty...

That is a reality that some can't or won't admit, and sadly the more one spends the harder it becomes to do so.

So now one has to be a 'professional' speaker designer/builder to judge whether or not a $1K msrp pair of speakers won't outshine a pair of speakers costing... say $50K?

Whatever... some of you guys are simply delusional or on crack.

I tell you what; go ahead and name this 'giant-killing' $1K pair of speakers that will blow away say, a pair of Wilson Alexandria X-2, YG Acoustics Anat III Signatures, Evolution Acoustics MMThree, or Hanson Grand Master II (to name a few true high-end speakers, all costing well over of $20K).

(Sarcastic remark removed due to people not understanding that it was sarcasm.)