The Snob Appeal Premium


I have learned that speakers are a typical victim of "Designer Label Syndrome".  Supposedly an $8 billion a year market (hard to believe) speakers are fairly simple beasts with little substantive improvements over the last 50 years. Ever since Paul Klipsch ( a character in his own right) read the Bell Labs 1934 papers and revolutionized speaker technology there have been few similar revolutionary improvements to the speaker. So- if you are an enterprising manufacturer of speakers (which are relatively cheap to build) how do you extract more and more money from the consumer ?  Answer: Synthetic demand driven by cachet' !  Like a pair of Louis Vuitton sneakers @ $650 a pair vs. New Balance runners @ 60/pr. It's snobby bragging rights stuff I'm describing here- perceived vs. actual value in a product. 

Here's an anecdotal example: 

I recently set out to build a high end mid-fi system (ARC preamp, power amp, Dac 9) for a large room "main house" (not a listening room) system. The goal was big, full, rich sound in a room full of furniture, chow dogs, kids and untreatable other things like 20 foot ceilings, multiple openings such as a balcony to the upstairs bedrooms, etc. Basically an audiophile's nightmare. 

I auditioned a number of speakers- Perlistens supported by JL Fathom subs, B&W Signatures, Bryston Model Ts, Vienna Acoustics Mahlers and Bethovens. IMO all of these are somewhat similar towers (except the Perlistens). The price point was not as important as the sound- given the limitations of the application. 

In the shopping for new or used I found a number of odd prices. The most unusual finding was a brand new set of Model Ts here in Audiogon advertised for $4K with a 20 year factory warranty. The dealer had one slide around of his hand truck and it put white paint smears on a corner of the Boston Cherry cabinet. Hmmm- 4 grand vs. 12 grand for a small fixable cosmetic flaw? I bought them. They sound fantastic. Some elbow grease and a furniture marker pen made the flaw vanish. 

I asked the dealer (Paul Kraft in Easton PA- great guy BTW) why the Audiogon Blue Book for a Model T was so low. His answer was "snob appeal". Apparently there is a big bragging rights  premium paid for having the UFO looking B&W Signatures vs what the snobs call the Bryston Model Ts "Axioms in a fancy suit".  I later learned that there are some prominent reviewers who refuse to listen to A/B speaker comparisons behind a silk curtain unless they know what brand is being scrutinized. To me that means "payola". 

Do the Model Ts sound better to me than the Mahlers, Bethovens, B&Ws? No. But they don't sound worse either (in my application). Do the above sound $8,000-$14,000 better than the Brystons in the listening rooms of the dealers? IMO NO WAY. To be fair price/value does color my perception much like a bottle of $40 Rumbauer Zin tastes better to me than $200 Silver Oak expense account wine. 

I'm guessing this post will anger brand snobs and garner snarky comments because their taste in sound is different than mine. Although this missive is really about personal perceptions of value v. sound I found my education on pricing fascinating and I feel great about finding amazing value in the brand new Model T's that needed 30 minutes of TLC to be at home in my family room. 

Moral of the story: Try em before you buy em, and look for value. It's fun and rewarding with no buyers remorse. 

128x128Ag insider logo xs@2xyesiam_a_pirate

@jtgofish

I wouldn't try to build a solid wood speaker cabinet - the kit or plan speakers are no doubt engineered from more uniform materials such as mdf or ply. However, I would perhaps use fine woods for corner accents. I do have some very good .75" thick cherry veneered mdf that is calling out for a speaker build.

I do remember a solid wood Klipsch speaker from the early 90's that was a Roy Delgado design - it was one the CF series and some of them were made from solid, clear quartersawn oak - a material uniform enough to work with predictably from an acoustic standpoint. The solid wood one was considered the best of the series. When I was looking for these on Ebay years ago I found one of the solid wood ones (I could see that from photo inside the cabinet,)  but it was more than I wanted to pay at the time.

https://www.audioasylum.com/reviews/Speakers/Klipsch/CF-4-EPIC-SERIES/HUG/48564.html

@bolong

Respectfully, I will have to disagree with you on this one. I have owned a pair of Klipsch CF 4 for almost 15 years and I feel pretty certain that none were produced from solid wood of any type, unless of course that was done by an owner as an aftermarket enhancement. The reason that you may have been led to think so is that the cabinets and braces (not including the front baffle and the back wall) are made from .75" plywood. Mine are the version I which was considered to be the best, and just as Roy Delgado wanted them to be. I’ve had plenty of opportunity to study them because I am currently having the crossovers redone and rewiring them as well as refinishing the cabinets.

I am not sure if it was the CF 4 or an earlier number. I was a professional high-end furniture maker for 15 years and know what I am looking at. The Ebay seller who had the CF listed provided a photo of the interior of the cabinet which showed more clearly than the exterior shot that the cabinet was made of strips of solid, quartersawn white oak about 3-4 inches wide. Some of the gluelines had not been throughly cleaned up of squeeze out. I should have bought it then - $1,300.00 as I recall.

I suspect there was a small run of these solid wood boxes as the CF series was not popular anyway with dedicated Klipsch fan because the series did not stick to the "original sound," and building a solid wood box would not have been economical at all.

In my view, we should be celebrating the efforts of those that have commited the talent and resources to produce cost-no-object examples of the best our industry can offer. There are ultra expensive products produced from a multitude of categories that appeal to those without financial or physical constraints. Having exquite examples of products within a catagory we are passionate about (high end audio) should put smiles on our faces that will take plastic surgery to remove.

Most "mortals" operate in a "this" OR "that" universe, where we need to make choices, and priorties need to be set up in accending order. Others want highly competant performance wrapped in a package that appeals esthetically accompanied by a stroke of industrial design genius. Then there are others who have a wherewithall to buy multiple copies of the (ultra expensive) item for each of their homes, and gift a pair (or, two) to friends and family. but still choose to apply a modest, high value competant to their purchase(s) because it is, well, who they are.

Mega expense products don’t always get it right. It could be a rigid design philopsy that leaves them short, or just plain gaps in their knowledge base. It is improper to assign less than admirable intent to a designer/manufacturer when we see (sometimes obvious) areas where resources were misapplied -- in our view.

As we seen in the past, "flagship" products have introduced "newer thinking" that has found its way into the mainstream. So, those "snob appeal" products do, in fact, provide a level of pragmatic injection for the "rest of us."

Lets raise our glasses (and cueing mechanisms?) to acknowledge those who put it all out there to produce the best of the best in our industry. While we’re not all better for it, some of us certainly are.

fyi- I was introduced to the concept of floating/balanced crossovers by a promenent speaker manufacturer years ago, and have never looked back.