They should charge more for it…

Thx cleeds for taking interest in my post. I will never comment on political, economic, social or religious(etc). theories on an Audio site. It all started with Stereo Review and Audio magazine that all amplifiers that measure the same sound the same. Basically the only difference is parts quality and cosmetics in higher priced amps which unfortunately many still believe. Then in the 1980’s (AHC) Tony Cordesman claimed Adcom a real "Giant Killer" As a naive 19 year old I fell victim with a 545 stack that had a treble similar to peanut brittle, within 6 months traded that junk in for an Amber Series 70 and FF 17 preamp kept the tuner. Currently we have a plethora of budget pushing Youtubers claiming true HEA sound from palm sized amps, rebadged Chi-Fi and DIY speaker kits. 

Can we imagine the US Government funding any kind of consumer audio product development?  What I find interesting about this happening in the UK is the fact that their government is subsidizing product development for something only elites can afford.  They have been dumbing down the proms and other cultural programs that are deemed insuffiently popular, yet they fund this

dayglow

Diminishing returns is a marketing/sales pitch created by the audio industry to keep budget conscious Audiophiles content ...

That is simply not true. The law of diminishing returns is a well known economic principle, also known as the law of diminishing marginal returns.

I do agree with @ghdprentice that it's really not part of the equation for those into high end audio. We're already well into that curve because "reward function is not linear at all."

If you are into high end audio the "law of diminishing returns" is not in the equation. Getting closer to the music mid-fi is creeping ever closer to the goal of better sounding music with greater investments of time and money. There reward function is not linear at all. 

The law of dminishing return applies to the frugal mid-fi music person. 

Fortunately, it has a remote control so you can settle comfortably back in your chair during the 20 seconds spin-up time, before commanding the stylus to drop.

As I read it, this is the result of a series of university research projects mainly funded by Government R & D grants, and centered on the foremost specialty steel city of yore, Sheffield. Competitors not switched into this environment may well feel that they are at a disadvantage, pricewise. 

It could be a plot to make me think $50-k for an Aussie Dohmann table is exceptional value for money

Well if The Absolute Sound says its a wonderful turntable we all should get one! ....O boy! The Obsolete Sound as i like to call it is not very neutral when it comes to these reviews, in fact they are quite biased toward the advertisers, and any maker they deem viable. So get out and listen! Don't just read about it! 

Matt M

Diminishing returns is a marketing/sales pitch created by the audio industry to keep budget conscious Audiophiles content and willing to buy the entry level gear. Many still don't understand you judge a complete system over one individual component. Yes, you can evaluate a single component but it has to be placed with similar performing gear to accurately judge it. If a component can scale up in a higher level system makes it a good value purchase until it becomes the weak link. Building a balanced system without a weak link is the key to this hobby not debating whether a $250k turntable is 10x better than a $25k table which makes for a useless formula. The system where the $250k deck is implemented in could be an infinite # superior to the system with the $25k table. 

one very obvious justification to charging more for the Wilson Benesch GMT One turntable is that the development was somewhat funded by UK Government. if WB had to amortize all that funding into the development expense the price would have been higher considering the projected volume.

surely Mr. Fremer/Absolute Sound were well aware of that.

scroll down a little on this link for details.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilson_Benesch

we are not speaking about value here, that is purely a personal question. just the way a product is priced to allow development to proceed and for a reasonable return on the cost/risk.

The Ultra high end seems to exist to make some of the other overpriced items look like a steal.

You need to really buy 3 of them just incase one breaks you have a back up

@gkelly No disrespect but I don't think a $300k turntable is using a manufacturing formula for that price. The parts are the parts. Luxury items basically pull a price out of thin air as far as I can tell.

There is the concept of diminishing returns.

I don't buy into diminishing returns. That assumes solid objective evaluation criteria, and also paints the picture of a nice clean horizontal asymptote where performance NEVER decreases as price increases infinitely to the right. Reality is a LOT more random than that.

I think Einstein was referring to a hypothesis, not to audio gear. A hypothesis should be as simple as possible to explain the data, but not simpler.

The design concept of the GMT is reminiscent of an older very high end turntable that was made in the Pacific Northwest and now may be out of production.  (I can see it in my mind's eye, but I cannot recall the name.) A very powerful 3-phase AC synchronous motor is driven by three separate and discrete amplifiers, one amp per phase and controlled by precise upstream circuitry to maintain stable speed without the need for a separate servo mechanism. The bling that you guys object to is not appealing to me, either, but the idea and its execution appear to be first rate. I like that part.

They are absolutely correct. If you think about it, anyone who could afford a $300k turntable can easily afford a $500k turntable. So maybe the manufacturer should have asked $500k for it. Why not? It would not make any less sense. If his audience is the billionaire class, we are talking about pennies for them. Money has become so highly concentrated that it’s hard to wrap your head around the meaning of wealthy anymore. There are around 800 billionaires in America alone. These products are not intended for regular working folks. Ponder this for a second: 1 billion is 1000 millions. 

There is the concept of diminishing returns. Improvement at the high end becomes exponentially more expensive. To most mere mortals, the ability to discern improvement lays far below the mega dollar prices that much of the uber high end pieces proport to offer. 

Is a $250K turntable 10 times as good as a 25K table? Not by a long shot (IMHO) I don't play in that league so a moot point. I guess if you have Bezos or Musk money, go for all the gusto or bragging rights.

Price has become THE main feature, at the top-end of market. I mean, it’s been that way for a while - just more so now. Just make sure your product uses enough visible "material" to "justify" its price level - minimalist philosophy like Rega’s doesn’t fly in this market segment!!

When a well-heeled customer's wishlist starts with "I want the BEST", and it's a subjective pursuit, this is the inevitable result (women, wine too).

I'll take two.

bimmerlover

I think most of these expensive turntables look like Frankenstein monstrosities.

I couldn’t agree more. Many of them are just fugly.

... it is much harder to build something that performs well that is of a simple and elegant design ...

Exactly!

"Make things as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Einstein)

Entering the luxury market is much about choosing a business model and/or battle for status, they may have indeed priced it too low if status important to purchaser. As for value and performance, that's for the actual purchaser to determine.

Besides the fact that I've stopped paying attention to the absolute sounds products of the year selections, I think most of these expensive turntables look like Frankenstein monstrosities.

Besides the fact that I've stopped paying attention to the Absolute Sounds products of the year selections, I think most of these expensive turntables look like Frankenstein monstrosities.

it is much harder to build something that performs well that is of a simple and elegant design, than something where you need to have all kinds of parts rotating and flying around to make it work the way you intend it to.

It's a personal reflection, of course, as are all my comments. :-)

WB has been around 36 years, so they must know something about pricing...I imagine they don't plan on selling too many of these, but there are many wealthy people for whom this isn't a major purchase...and there is lots of great low and mid cost gear for the rest of us...

I read the GMT white paper on the WB website. What they’ve done and the way they did it are impressive. I’m sure it’s superb. Whether it had to cost as much as it costs is a matter for someone else to decide. All manufactured products are about making money.

It doesn't take a great engineer to build a 500K turntable that sounds good. You're great if you can make one for $5,000.

Of course, IMO, these price-no-object products are about making money for the manufacturer.

I’d be curious to see how many units sell

I refrain from mocking equipment based on pricing alone, but one has to realize that the guy who spends the big bucks will always be limited by the quality of new and used LPs he must play on it. He’ll need a good imagination to even dream he’s hearing music on a much higher plane than the rest of us, because of the limitations set by the available source material.

@gkelly 

+1 Exactly

If I had the means, I am sure my system would cost... well commiserate with my wealth. The key is that it had do deliver the sonic quality. I would have researched and heard all the competition and would be absolutely sure it did. 

Just a few decades ago a $100K rig was thought obscene, so $320K isn’t shocking.

The gold accents make the aesthetic cheap looking/tacky. Those with gold accents in their room will love it!

Tech Das Zero is near $500K, so yeah GMT is a bargain considering the performance you can expect at this level.

Only those who can- buy whatever. Price isnt a concern.

@daveyf the disconnect is palpable but I've given up extolling the need to be realistic with pricing. Cos many of these veblen priced goods companies end up becoming bankrupt and selling for peanuts

Everything is built to a price point. I never could understand why people have a hard time understanding this concept. It is one of the most basic rules in manufacturing. 
I could never afford $1 million system, but if my passions for music led me down a path where I listened to many such systems. I think I would find myself being confident enough to give a judgment on a certain piece of equipment.