2. speakers
  3. 124200-79517

What makes an expensive speaker expensive

When one plunks down $10,000 $50,000 and more for a speaker you’re paying for awesome sound, perhaps an elegant or outlandish style, some prestige ... but what makes the price what it is?

Are the materials in a $95,000 set of speakers really that expensive? Or are you paying a designer who has determined he can make more by selling a few at a really high price as compared to a lot at a low price?

And at what point do you stop using price as a gauge to the quality? Would you be surprised to see $30,000 speakers "outperform" $150,000 speakers?

Too much time on my hands today I guess.
128x128jimspov
oros's avatar
oros
43 posts
 
The Brand it is all about the Brand you are being sold on the brand and it's perceived quality.

Looks good well made and well finished all Bling, a great piece of furniture.
Must be good, it costs a small fortune right.

Have heard DIY efforts that absolutely out shine (sound wise) expensive well regarded speakers. In the Same Room.
But we are not talking sound vs value, are we.
The good DIY's cost half the price, but are nevertheless still expensive.
The biggest and most time consuming and expensive thing, is getting the finish right.
Sorry guys paying more for speakers than a Car is just no within my budget.  If it was; then OK, no problem.
Like everything out there it's worth is only dependent on  how much someone is willing to pay for it.
Good components are not cheap making a fine speaker with a superb finish is not cheap.  Lots of time goes into development, made in small quantities.
Got to pay for  all that. 

ctsooner
2,480 posts
 
Well put Oros.  You and I seem to be in a similar camp.  

phusis's avatar
phusis
1,210 posts
 
analogluvr --

[...] Paper is a great cone material and most of the speakers using paper cones always seem to sound more natural to my ears. And just because it is paper doesn't mean it's not high tech. People who have a Coral 10 that needs a recone can attest to that, it can't be done.
And as far as the folks who are saying part of the high cost is R and D, give your head a shake, there are no new developments in speaker technology!! The best speakers I have heard are still older efficient designs with paper drivers.
Just like 99% of high end audio megabuck speakers are a huge ripoff! When I go to the shows I invariably never enjoy the high dollar rooms with the megabuck SS electronics. They are very detailed and some of them are impressive sounding but they never sound like proper music to me.
And ctsooner don't take this as a slight against vandersteen, I think they are one of the few that actually do R and D and try to give you something for your money. I enjoy them and used to own a pair.

I would have to agree both on your statements regarding paper cones and the general lack of advance in speaker technology. I believe many of the older designs can be refined, but this is without changing the basics. Paper cones may break up more prominently than more modern "exotic" diaphragms, but given their natural sonic imprinting (at least to some ears) I'd wager the mode of their break-up as well as the general properties of the diaphragm has significant impact; "pistonic behavior" may come at a cost in other areas. The same in a sense seems to apply to the enclosures where most modern designs strive for an inert structural behavior (as the equivalent to pistonic ditto), contrary to older designs that may even use the cabinets as an integral part of the sonic signature. "Signature," or lack thereof, is a popular go-to phrase for newer designs, but where sought often leads to robbing the life and vibrancy of live acoustic music. Paper cones to my ears often has the more relaxed, vibrant, true-to-tone and naturally detailed (as opposed to "analytical") imprinting. More modern cones, like those of Raidho speakers, are exceptionally balanced and well-behaved, but to my ears are ever so slightly "dead" or even dull sounding. I used to own a pair of C1's, and they were wonderful in their own right, but ultimately that rather indescribable "something" was missing. Actually my first speakers were a pair of Coral 8..  
bwaslo
51 posts
 
One thing to keep in mind is that the selling price is very rarely decided by the engineering or design department. The marketing department is in charge of deciding the list price and the allowed dealer markup. Much has to do with perceived value -- particularly in an industry like high-end audio, a product simply will not sell profitably unless it is priced at a high enough level (how could something be seen as "high end" unless it is expensive?).

But you could take that knowledge and think you can ’win’ by not paying the high prices, go for some newly introduced speakers that are well designed and sound good but don’t cost crazy money (and made by a company that probably won’t be around long since they just don’t get viewed as being "high end" and get zero attention). Maybe, but only if you choose correctly, and are sure those are the speakers you will want for a long time. Because when you try to sell your speakers to get something else, the ’perceived value’ effect is still there and you may find it difficult to find anyone interested in your older wise choice!
timlub
2,040 posts
 

I've read this thread,  its  been an interesting read. Building speakers for so many years,  I've experimented with many cone materials.... a lot of what has been said about cone break up on paper cones is valid to a degree, but in so many ways, quite far off....

Everyone knows that paper is ground up wood pulp in some form or fashion.  Thin paper resonates at a higher frequency than heavy paper and does show break up quite easily, but through the years many things have been done to help solve this... One is layers,  a layer of paper over the next helps dampen the first layer and each layers adds dampening... Next, as paper is made,  the binding material will also change the frequency that the paper resonates at and its breakup frequency... Not entirely, but basically,  the stiffer the material,  the higher frequency that it resonates. So a heavy stiff cone, won't break up anything like a thinner cone. One process that has been used for years is to paint a dampening coat on paper. I have used a couple of types of latex.  I have also blended latex with other materials,  i.e.  glues, epoxies, silicone mixtures and other things, which helps to stiffen paper as well as dampen the cones all at once. A stiff material can extend the frequency response of a cone,  while a softer material will simply dampen the cone and help control break up and change the frequency roll off.

 Sure, this is an elementary explanation, but it holds true... Paper has been around for along time and I'd be quite surprised if it went away anytime soon. 

I hope this helps,  Tim

More to discover