What makes an expensive speaker expensive

Hi Pete, 
You make some good points which I accept as opinion but not fact.  I don't equate micro detail with emotion as you do. Emotion can be elicited by a variety of sonic or musical parameters.  For example in my case it's triggered by authentic and natural tone, timbre and harmonic overtones.  Another listener would have yet different triggers to spark an emotional response. One could make the argument that many modern speakers in the quest for Uber detail can sound analytical and even sterile. This type of presentation would be considered "accurate" by some. The point is this is guided by personal preference rather than some agreed upon absolute standard of right sound, wrong sound. If your benchmark ideal is say Vandersteen with carbon fiber drivers that's excellent for you. Other ears may prefer something different. 
Charles, 

When I said I'd love to see your designs, I meant the speakers that you are building, not the designs.  Not an engineer.  I can read a schematic, but not building anything anymore, lol.  The one great thing about our hobby is that all the folks like to get to know each other and that includes the manufacturers etc...  I always felt that was a nice thing.  I'm made a lot of close personal friends as well as close enemies in audio (and sports where I'm much more involved).  

I usually put that sound is subjective and I believe I have said that in this thread.  The only thing that I have said that is fact is the break up of paper drivers.  I do agree that things can and are done to make them better.  There is distortion everywhere in audio and some of it sounds fine.  Yes, folks get their emotion from audio in different ways.  I do believe that. I've learned to listen differently over the years as have most folks as we hear new and different things (not always better, lol).  Personally I can listen to an Audio Note system and enjoy what I hear just like I do FM radio or a CD in the car.   Personally (personally), I wouldn't want that system in my home as it lacks so many things for me.  Even some of their dealers I've gotten to know say similar things.  

As for detail, to me if the 'detail' is actually distortion, or a tipped up tweeter (we all know a few high end manufacturer's tip the highs 1 or 2db to make them sound more 'open' than that's not for me.  I know a couple of these companies who do this, sell the crap out of their speakers.  Folks rave and rave and buy them like candy.  Even their very expensive ones.  

I probably am posting too much for this thread and I get that, but It's more of a discussion over beers than an argument.  Richard's speakers are not the only ones I enjoy and can live with.  I typically can't handle ribbons or even many of the panels out there as they aren't set up properly, are run with the wrong front ends and amps and seem way too 'hot' for my tastes.  Again, my tastes and no one else's.  

I didn't love the older Vandersteen's. Was going to get a pair of 2's in the 90's after my first stint on active duty (Navy), but went to a store in RI who carried them and was talked into a pair of Proac Superpowers.  It's only recently since he went to carbon fiber that I have fallen in love with his speakers.  I did love the older Avalons and they too were first order cross over and time and phase aligned I believe. Also love Charlie Hansen's speakers years ago.  

I'm sure you guys all have your favorites as we all do.  Again, it's all good stuff here and I do really like this thread and how it's evolved.  Wish others liked it as much and posted, lol.

"It's more of a discussion over beers than an argument "
Agree completely with this sentiment.  Just exchanging points of view,  that's what these forums are meant for. 
Charles, 

I think the quality-price issue also arises at entry level. For example,  consider the Vandersteen Classics (specifically 1ci) and Totem Arros. They're about the same price and both are well regarded in the forums. The Vandersteen's have survived longer, so they can be said to have stood the test of time.

Yet the Vandersteen's don't have expensive parts as far as I can tell. The Arros do - the interlocking cabinet, the veneer both inside and out, the crossover and the borosilicate  damping.

On the other hand, the Vandersteen's don't need most of the expensive materials because they've done away with the cabinet. (Hard not to be impressed with the application of  Occam's Razor).

Vandersteen's claim to fame is their first order crossover providing time and phase accuracy. Yet the Totem Arro's also claim to be phase coherent (which I thought wasn't possible with a 2nd order crossover?).

How is the price similarity explained? I guess because the sound quality is on an equal plane