Most overrated audio manufacturers?

Hi Chriswil, you make some excellent points. How we do we truthfully determine, each for ourselves, which makers are overrated?...when the truth of the matter is that because of what you say (rightfully) about manufacturing, material and development costs making up such a small portion of the final cost to customer, that the answer to that question, all things considered, might well be "just about any of them" - and as you consider that to be the lay of the land to begin with, then "just about none of them" might serve just as well...it all tends to end up pretty relative, since for any one maker you could think of as being overrated, by the same yardstick, you could probably name another and yet another, ad infinitum...until the original distinction becomes lost.

Any company that supposedly produces high end equipment but provides poor service would in my opinion be overated.

+1
The whole "overrated" thing is in the ear of the beholder, as indicated in the "high value DAC" example by Chriswil. However, his "poor service" definition of overrated makes the most sense of anything I have so far read in this thread.

Judyazblues,

I don't know about Atma-Sphere amps only being suitable for 5% of speakers. The odds were not on my side when I bought my Raidho C1.1 speakers. But my Atma-Sphere S-30 drives my Raidho speakers to perfection -- with the Paul Speltz auto-transformers added. I have at least 50 db. headroom on most recordings with my PS Audio DirectStream DAC that has a gain of at least 10 db. If you add the Paul Speltz auto-transformers to your system the Atma-Sphere amp should have enough power to drive most mid to low sensitivity speakers, IMHO. There are 3 settings on the auto-transformer and I use the lowest setting.

But I do agree with you about Synergistic Research cables. IMO, they should limit themselves to the tweak business, which looks like the direction they are heading.

I would add a number of other cables makers to Synergistic Research in the the BIG CABLE YAWN category: ASI Liveline, Cardas, Gabriel Gold, Grover Huffman, HiDiamond, Kimber, Mogami and Pangea -- among others.

"Anybody who has amassed a bankroll like That is probably not on the "leading edge" of value."

I think they probably started out as perceived to be offering something which others didn't at the price. Once success takes off then of course like any company they will use the name as currency. Then it is a case of at least doing just enough and paying the advertising fees.

So I would probably have to agree.

"I do hate to slam the big name manufactures. Please some one else do it and I need a laugh."

- Yes, that's a laugh. Don't you represent them? I do love to see dealers using sites like this for their own amusement. "sounds real audio" yet they carry various speakers and amps and stuff. If you had something that sounded real you would only need one, and you would chose the cheapest that could do it. How about a more honest name: "Sounds quite good audio" (Yes, how much honesty is there in Audio?)

"How we do we truthfully determine, each for ourselves, which makers are overrated? "

- As you say Ivan_nosnibor, its all relative. What are your preferences? How big is your listening room? How does it sound compared to another? Also how much disposable income you have> If you have millions then you're not going to be hunting around in the budget end of the components market, and the cost of the component is not then that important (but I bet those people still haggle).

But as a rule I would start by "questioning the hype".

For example, on the "Sounds Real Audio" site, if you look at the bottom of the Wilson Benesch page it talks about the speed of sound in Carbon fibre and that its higher than diamond. But you don't use carbon fibre in isolation, you use it in a matrix with resin. Also you not only have speed of sound along the fibre but also across the fibre. A paper on a related subject can be read here: http://www.escm.eu.org/eccm15/data/assets/424.pdf

According to these findings speed of sound along the fibre is 10763 m/s (not 18350 as quoted on the "sounds real audio" site), and accross the fibre 3042 m/s. So if propogation of sound was the deciding factor for using carbon then Berilyum would be a better alternative at 12900 m/s as it will be the same in all directions and would be cheaper than diamond. So it looks like irrelevent information posing as something vital and necessary (and also justifies the expense, which carbon doesn't these days) and would make me suspect this manufacturer to be a candidate for being "overated".

Now it suggests later, on the same page, by the reference to converting energy to heat, that the function of the carbon is to provide damping.

Yet if you look at Vectran, surely this would be a better alternative to carbon fibre? http://www.vectranfiber.com/BrochureProductInformation/VibrationDamping.aspx

So to me what is being presented is a lot of technobable which raises doubts rather than confidence in the people publishing such hype (as well as those happily propogating it).