Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
Well---a stereo system is like a woman. I like big tubes, tall speakers and tight bass.
Some audio companies, such as Bang & Olufsen, concentrate just as many resources into their products' appearance as into their sound. Does this matter to you?
I prefer the more traditional speaker design. I have a pair of Springwood Custom Dominator floor standing speakers which were made by Les Johnston in the Blue Mts, Sydney NSW Australia. He uses Dynaudio drive units and mid range plus Esotar tweeters. These speakers he made me have 2 x 300mm Dynaudio 30W - 100XL Woofers, 2 x 175mm Dynaudio Soft Dome D - 76AF mid ranges and one Esotar T - 330D 28mm tweeter. Size H1540mm, W340mm and D600mm. Both midranges and tweeter are offset to the left and right of each speaker as you look at them and they are finished in real wood Jarrah. Quite simply they are in my opinion better sounding than the Duntech Marquis and JMLab Altera and Antera's both of which I auditioned prior to deciding on these Springwood's. My previous speakers in order were B&W DM580 and B&W 640i.
First its the looks that catches the eyes. Then I will want to know more about the component. I'll read about it and will also want to audition it. If two components are at par on sonics I'll go for the prettier one even if it costs a little bit more.
This is a ridiculous question! Of course, looks are important, but there aren't any hideously ugly components in the hi-fi category. The only consistently ugly components are Sony and Pioneer receivers. Bang & Olufsen, along with Bose, are only for dilettantes. Anyone in the market for a hi-fi components who places form before function is foolish, as is the manufacturer that wastes product-development dollars on such.
This question is dealing with testosterone levels. Based on looks alone, would you rather drive a ford contour or a C class mercedes? Ultimately, sound and price determine what equipment you will take home with you, but if it doesn't look quite right, you won't be as happy with it. I would love to have equipment that sounds wonderful and can disappear, integrate, or enhance my listening environment.
Visual design is most important, as the product in most cases resides in people's living rooms and therefore should be aesthetically pleasing. I cant understand why quality visual design and quality electronics cannot go hand in hand. That's why I am a Bang & Olufsen fan.
Good looks are achievable without a dramatic incremental cost. However, when they make up a large portion of the cost, something is wrong. Nevertheless, people, including myself, hate to pay $10,000 for a product with an unimpressive appearance.
as i stand i have no restriction as to the spousal acceptance factor (read: single) and i'm not trying to impress the ladys with my system. therefore aesthetics has little relevence. on top of that my components are off to the side, hardly seen. Its the sound that counts.
I care about sonics first and foremost. Many elements of industrial design that are frequently touted in reviews, such as the thickness of the faceplate, I really don't care about. However, the overall look of the product is, I must admit, a factor---possibly a significant factor---in my feelings about it.
We can't lose sight of the fact that our hobby is essentially about aesthetics, music and sound being just two of them. Furthermore, I don't care how many times you can print "the sound is all that matters," the fact is that there is a certain amount of pride of ownership associated with high-end audio.