| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
February 22, 2009 - 10:40am
#1
Here it is in a nutshell: Price vs. quality
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
I want to point out that in a recent article, an exhaustive comparison of the ayre C5 ($6000) and C7 ($3000) was done.
My take on the two players is that the C5 IS better...but IF you are not absolutely determined to have SACD capability, you don't give up a whole lot by getting the C7...for half the money.
Maybe that would be his best way to go?
Personally, I would recommend the NAD 372 at $1000, the AYRE C7 at $3000, and the Vandersteen 2CE's at $2300 as a really wonderful system to start out with, if those prices are in range. One could get very close to excellent sound for under $7000, and I think that to get much of an improvement you ARE talking about spending somewhere in the $15,000 to $20,000 range.
The reason I chose those components is as follows:
1) The Ayre C7 IS excellent, and to eventually upgrade you want a really good source so you can hear the differences in the downstream gear you might consider; you might never need to upgrade there!
2) The NAD is one heck of a deal at the price and gets a Class B rating at a very reasonable price. The first thing I would consider upgrading in the system (if and when the decision is made to do so) would be here, and you would probably want to spend maybe $4000-8000 on a FULLY BALANCED preamp and amp at that time (It should be pointed out that the Ayre HAS balanced outputs, so you have that upgrade when you need it).
3) The Vandersteens are excellent; their only weakness is that they do not have killer low bass. An eventual upgrade would be the Vandersteen 2W subwoofer, for $1500 or so, but the speakers are very very good.
P.S.- A local place that has the Vandersteens and the Ayre available for your listening evaluation is Optimal Enchantment in Santa Monica. The NAD is available from Audio Advisor and many others. You might even consider investing $1000 in the NAD immediately, and then taking it with you to shops to listen to various combinations with it in the middle; that would eliminate a big variable and let you compare much better.
Rich
Apart from another plug for Emotiva ( do you work for them ) What is your point ?
Everybody on the forum is aware that the laws of diminishing return apply greatly to audio systems, the bottom line though is that a $5000 system will to 99.9% of the population sound fantastic. If you are one of the 0.1% who populate these forums then it is just as much a hobby as anything else.
If your friend is just looking for a good hifi and has no interest in tweaking and playing as people here do then send him to a reputable dealer with a budget in mind and let him select what he thinks sounds and looks good to him at a price he is comfortable with. It could be that a basic $2,000 system will be more than sufficient, by putting a Marantz CD/Amp combo with a nice set of speakers you can easily do this.
Alan
X2. Great response. I started out with about a $2000 system and was totally jazzed about it (and it is still mostly what I have now)
Well, to get a decent starter system you would need a Marantz PM8003 Integrated and SA8003 CD Player at $999 each; the cheaper marantz stuff ain't gonna cut it. You could probably get some fairly decent speakers for $1000, and have a decent starter system for $3000, but I don't know how you get it for $2000...lol.
My point is that there seem to be two schools of belief here: one that higher priced components are worth the money and others that feel that anyone who pays that kind of money had a brain fart.
What I am saying to all is that (1) Yes there is a relationship between price and quality (2) that if you cannot afford to spend that kind of money it's no big deal you can still get a great system at any price point !
No I don't work for Emotiva I just really believe in their products and have become a brand advocate. We all want the best we can get for the money we invest (given) but not only is this a subjective measurement there is a good chance that as we get more into this hobby we will be upgrading. For example: should someone invest $1500 in a very good CD player NOW and maybe get another one in 3-4 years or save and scrape for the Ayre 5 which could be a lifetime player? (well maybe not a lifetime but a keeper for a long long while)
When new customers enter the "audiophile arena" they are convinced, as my friend was, that you need to spend a lot of money to get great sound and that for say $5K you can get decent sound but not great. Now granted he went to two audio dealers who tried to sell him without asking some basic information but if high end audio is going to get more advocates people need to not be as confused as much. Does that make sense??
nope. past a certain point, there is not. anyone that says one has to spend X amount of dollars to get a decent system is talking out the side of their head. you know pro audio?
theres that price point i am talking about.
For some products maybe but I can say after hearing the Ayre 5 and other CD players going for $1000-$1500 that the Ayre is close to perfection. I have also had the chance to listen to a Rowland Concerto and was amazed at how good it sounded.
I gotta say I agree that there is definitely a price/quality curve, but it is obviously a curve, not linear.
We each get to decide where on the curve 'value' occurs.
In the modern world, I would agree that for a digital based system, "Hi Fi" can readily be accomplished for under 2,500 dineros.
I also agree that for mo' money, we get better sound.
We all exist on this continuum, so I do not see why we have arguments about where the point is that cost becomes excessive. (Especially when it is our free market conservative members who seem to whine the most about cost above a certain point!)
The place we actually all arrive at agreement is in trying to achieve the best possible sound per drop of cash!
Price never equates to quality. Rewind to the guy that paid thousands for a bunch of junk. Common sense equates to quality in your listening room. Not ignoring bargain basement prices for equipment that have been stored in a basement is much more enjoyable than buying happiness through a price tag.
exactly, ls..
Some very good points have been made. I especially liked the recommendation of a NAD C372 amp as being a good value, as that is one of the components I chose when buying a new value oriented system last summer.
I think the term quality can mean a number of things, reliability, appearance, robustness, performance, etc... to different people when they are deciding the price vs quality question. I doubt there are many people that buy on sound quality alone. I do think that in a low budget system, sound quality has to be the primary consideration, and as the budget rises, it allows the other considerations to become more important.
Back to the NAD C372. I don't know anyone that would say that it's good looking, or that is has robust construction, or better than average reliability. But I do think it offers very good sound quality for its price.
I get great satisfaction from the system I have, and consider each component offers good value to me, given my budget limitations. My hat is off to people with much more to spend on the top tier equipment, and assume they have to think they're getting a good deal on the price vs quality decision.
If I had way more money, I'd trade my Epos stand mount speakers in for a set of the Wilson Audio Maxx III's that I listened to a couple weeks ago. I was awed by the sense of immense controlled power I heard. But first I'd have to buy a larger house to put them in.
The NAD is an excellent product as are your speakers. I heard the Revel Studio speakers awhile back and was just floored by how good they sounded but alas $20,000 for the pair is a pipe dream for me.
The relationship of price vs. quality is one that I am sure will be debated for a long time. I think a lot of us will always be looking to trade up for something new but one of the reasons that I found for not being able to is the lack of product range at dealers. I wanted, for example, to hear a Rowland amp with Revel speakers and Ayre CD player and could not find one dealer who carried all three brands. I believe that sooner or later some super dealers are going to come along with a really broad range of brands and prices to satisfy us all
The problem is then the staff become Jack of all trades, master of none. For a dealer to be good he has to be committed to the brands and believe in them. Too many lines make dealers lose their focus, not to mention confuse customers.
I agree. From the beginning of time, no matter how expensive the components, they are simply "voiced" in the manufacturer's reference system during design. Therefore the component under test will only compensate for the weaknesses in the reference system, thus not truely accuracy. As a very simple example, if the system is thin sounding, the component under test will have to sound fuller in order to compensate for the rest of the system's thin sound. The farther off the reference system from true accuracy, the farther off the component under test will be from true accuracy.
Only the preamplifier and ICs (interconnect cables) can actually be tested, compared to absolute accuracy, to see how far off is. It is a complex procedure and requires time. Once the ICs/preamplifier is accurate, one can then work with the rest of the system, the variables left such as the source, amp, speakers, speaker cables etc. They can be tweeked for optimum accuracy. The end result is better, more accurate music.
Thus more expensive components are not necessarily better because they all use the same worn out flawed technique of being "voiced".
Hope this helps.