Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
If a manufacturer is so out of ideas for making a product to sell, they should ask themselves why they're in the business at all.
Recently, there has been a on-line furor over an audio manufacturer having supposedly re-badged another manufacturer's component as its own (with a sweeping price increase). This <A HREF="http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=80790">prac... has been going on for years: Some high-end audio manufacturers have always taken mass-market components and used them as the basis for their own products. How do you feel about this?
They make a lot more money this way. And money is good, isn't it? Banks, insurance companies, GM, etc, got big money from Uncle Sam. Poor hi-fi re-badgers, sorry, manufacturers, don't have that kind of lobby or leverage. We the consumers must bail them out from our own pockets. It's our patriotic audiophile duty. Seriously, this kind of scam is disgusting and deserves to be exposed.
If I am supposedly buying into a high-end piece, I want all the aspects of its performance to be custom. Otherwise, I would be overpaying for subtle modifications. I'm paying for a Ferrari, not a Ferrari-modified Ford Focus. I guess it's why I tend to stick with Meridian.
It depends. In the case you mentioned, they added literally nothing to the design, other than a case and a serial port—which was already available as an upgrade. However, other companies are taking the same source component, removing everything except for the tray and video section (as it's cheaper to do this than get a Blu-ray license), and then totally re-engineering the audio and power sections of the component. That's a very different comparison: To start with something great and improve what surrounds it, than to slap your name it on and charge a ton more.
My biggest problem is going to shows and seeing high-priced CD players with cheap plastic DVD trays. Linn introduced the Karik in the '90s and, while they used Hitachi laser assemblies, they built their own transport. That showed quality. Use others' products but re-engineer and make an effort at quality, don't expect us to pay money for buying off the shelf and then charging an arm and a leg for it.
Doesn't bother me, provided that they make genuine changes, hopefully for the better. During the Lexicon debacle, I learned that the licensing fees for digital players are very high. Turns out that few, in any, high-end manufacturers could build their own players from scratch just because of this hurdle.
Due to the huge mark-up over the mass-market orginal and the minor (if any) improvements, one has to wonder if their other more original products are worth their cost. It casts an ugly shadow over the whole high-end industry, the people who buy high-end, and the potential resale value of high-end. Greater costs should reflect greater products, not just vanity labels
Maybe in the early days of CD players, high-end companies could add meaningful upgrades at a reasonable cost. OTOH, I have had two Philips SACD playes die on me outright, an SACD 1000 and a 963, so I would avoid any high-end component based on cheap made-in-China underpinnings.
Pretty lame to the extent that the high-end product is simply another product in a new fancy case. However, these small manufacturers don't have the R&D money to build everything from scratch, so to some extent, borrowing makes sense.
I don't like it because, more often than not, they simply tweak a power supply and/or change an output device and slap it into a very expensive chassis. I think that there is a certain obligation to the consumer if you are charging a monumental upcharge to offer a tweak, yet position yourself as a company who "manufactures" and "engineers" a product. If you pose as this type of company, then something proprietary should be brought to the table other than a slick chassis. I do get that there should be a quest for "better," but with no cost of real R&D, I am unsure as to how these price points are brought forth. This is one of the many reasons why the audiophile market shrinks, as too many people get bitten for too much money for too little value.
The brand using re-badged components should disclose this if they otherwise use advertising that states that they develop or make their own components. If they don't disclose it, then they are falsely marketing at least part of their market line. In the long run, it will only hurt their own business because no audiophile is faithful to an unfaithful brand and high-end manufacturers live thanks to their faithful fans.