Originally Posted by Varrius
Brandon, your very perceptive. There is indeed a little more to it, hopefully I can clear everything up with just one more post (*fingers crossed*). I can see why this appears off topic, HOWEVER the Salk's resale value WAS being discussed (to answer your question Dennis, as to what the topic was) at the time, and I don't think it can be argued that their original purchase price greatly effects resale value.
I took some liberty extrapolating that discussion to their original purchase price, no doubt. Perhaps I'm guilty of being a troll in this case, but I have been reviewing (and occasionally posting and contributing to) these forums for almost a year now, and I've not been guilty of that yet, so perhaps a little slack can be cut on my behalf.
First off, I'll be the first to admit that I'm long winded. My posts are overly verbose, and for that I do appologize. I'm not a forum regular (at any forum), by any stretch, and I don't seem to have grasped the "one-two sentence" response and out method yet. Perhaps my teachers in my youth, which required a 2 page essay when I could explain myself in 2 paragraphs, are haunting me.
To clear this up first, Brandon, I have auditioned the ST's. You've made several mentions about how I should listen to them before saying some of the things I've said, we'll I have, I wouldn't have said what I've said otherwise. See my (very unprofessional) review about 50 pages ago. I also posted a quick bit about 2 pages ago about why I wasn't going to be purchasing the ST's, but that I still felt they were an exceptional speaker, better than what I did purchase (Aperion 6T). To me, that is the highest form of compliment. Why else would I bother touting a speaker I don't own.
I don't know that I will even argue that they are worth the $2k to $2.5k that most people have paid to put them in their home. I suspect that their quality does warrent that price tag (and so now, most of you are saying "what the heck IS this guy getting at?"). Well, as I've mentioned, my PERCEPTION was that they were intended to compete with other ID brands such as those that have been mentioned. I quote from the Salk website "This design is the end result of a year-long project to develop a very affordable (under $2000) speaker that..". In addition to that, my emails with Jim led me to believe that this speaker was "cheaper" than he really wanted to deal with, initially.
I guess my point is, I consider the other ID brands very affordable for an entry into "audiophile" grade loudspeakers. But, I don't really consider the ST's "very affordable", relatively speaking. There is an abundance of competition in the $1k to $1.5k price range (all of which are very well regarded FOR THEIR PRICE RANGE), and the ST's are not in that price range, IMO. Shipped to your door, I suspect most people have paid over $2k for their ST's, recently. This makes them close to 2x the cost of the other ID's (and more than 2x in some cases). So again, back to my F150 vs EXT example. Twice the cost is substantial. Add in the cost of matching a center and surrounds (if your going 5.1 or 7.1 as I am) and your talking several thousands of dollars more than the competition.
Just to toss this in, I do recall reading a review of a GTG involving both the 850's and ST's (which I believe you were at Brandon), and the 850's reviewed very comparably to the ST's, with some people even preferring them.
So back to what my deal is, and why I've even brought this up. I merely wanted to point out that, for one potential shopper, the ST's are not in competition with many of the other well regarded brands (especially the ID's that have been mentioned) on these forums in terms of price. I don't dispute that they are superior in many ways, and may even be well worth their price tag. I simply wanted to point out that if I were going to spend what I'd spend on a Salk 7.1, I would be auditioning and considering many other brands in higher price ranges than the "mainstream" brands which are normally discussed here for the "average" price range shopper. The Salks are often mentioned in conjuction with these other ID brands as recommendations.
Why do I bring this up? Because of the statement I took right off the Salk webpage. My personal opinion is that they really aren't all that affordable, relative to other "entry" (YES, the ST's are ENTRY Salk's) level speakers. So the real truth. I was very set on Salk's being in my home theater room. The downturn of the economy (which any business owner in their right mind cannot ignore), the fact that my wife had 20k on her CC that I didnt' know about, and the fact that I've got many expenses related to owning a new home, have helped me determine that it simply would not make sense for me to spend that much on speakers, given my personal value of good sound. So, no doubt much of my dissapointment is more with my personal situation than with Salk Sound. When shopping, I typically search for the item(s) that are of exceptional value, thereby getting the most for my money. Salk's may indeed be that for most of you, but they simply didn't make sense for me in their price catagory. Hopefully that tells you what "more" there was to my posts that you couldn't figure out Brandon.
The real reason I'm dissapointed isn't necessarily the fault of Salk Sound, it's that I was led to believe (by my own doing or not), that the Salk's were in direct competition with the others mentioned. I derived, from the quote from Salk's website above, to mean that they *should* be in competition with the other *affordable* ID "audiophile" speakers available, but in reality I don't feel that they are.
I realize Salk's are a far cry from Wilson's in term of price. However, if you believe Jim is living in poverty so we can all have good sounding speakers, I'm sorry your sadly mistaken. Last I checked (I didn't), Salk is not a non-profit organization. As a business owner, I can assure you Salk Sound is in business to make money, and as much as they can. ST's WILL increase in price again this year (or at least relatively soon), economic downturn or not, so long as they continue to get rave reviews by owners and Jim's shop stays busy, regardless of their parts expenses. I don't fault Jim for getting what he can for his speakers. I'm sure it is my own fault that I'm bitter that they don't really compete with what I was looking for, misled by my own interpretations or not.