Why pay so much for super high end?

" This is obserd. "I don’t have time"? Figuring most of you are paid $100 an hour or less with designs in hand, in a couple of hours you can basically earn $10,000 an hour being a speaker builder saving yourself tons of money.

And you guys are all defending these mark ups? Why? What do you owe them? Many people don’t realize they’re just buying 3rd party drivers and a moderately easily (with the knowledge in hand) designed cabinet and crossovers. I didn’t know that and when I found out I was pissed. I never stopped to think about it. People are commenting on mark ups aren’t taking in to account that while you need a lot of knowledge to design crossovers and cabinets, you need beyond amateur skill to replicate it. beyond amateur.

So go on saying you "don’t have time" or "every other industry marks up" which is ridiculous rebuttals. Keep feeding this crooked industry the one that I’ve grown to hate with a serious passion."

You do a lot of talking. Now put your money where your mouth is. I'll give you 2 weeks to build a speaker that sounds as good as a pair of $2500 Vandersteen Model 2's.  You can have a max budget of $5000. That's 2x full list price. The only requirements are that the speakers need to be time and phase correct like the Vandersteen's, and they have to measure at least as well. Mere child's play for someone with your verbal skills.

Do that and I'll reimburse you for the cost of materials up to 5k, and give you an additional 25k. You can show us all how easy it is to make 10k an hour. I pay cash and have no problem coming up with the money.

What I don't want, is a ridiculous debate. Either take me up on my offer and build the speakers, or not. Its up to you. I won't waste anymore time responding to your BS claims when I can have meaningful conversations the other members here. They have something real to contribute. 

MB, I have to say it again, twice in the same thread. "Seldom have I heard of a more logical, compelling solution". I salute you.

Hi gdhal,

More channels than four seems to me like the manufacturers’ pushing 1080p TVs to those that already owned 720p with screen sizes 50" and under. If you sit the proper distance from the two different resolution 50" TVs of the same quality otherwise, you will not see any improvement in the picture unless the you have eyesight like an eagle.

The 1080’s improved resolution is visible with 60" and larger TVs, but they put crappy motion processors in the standard (affordable) TVs to meet competitive average-consumer price points so you live with a picture with higher-definition motion slur ( the worst) unless you buy the best. The old Panasonic 720p plasma’s kill the newer 1080p sets for blacks, depth, and natural picture rendition unless you go to the ultra-expensive Oled sets. Same with multi-channel audio vs 2 channel IMO.

I sold my Martin Logan Stage center channel speaker and mono Marantz MA700 center channel amp after trying just my two-channel system with my processor in "phantom center" mode along with 2 rear channels. The continuity of motion, tone, and height is much better to my ears. Much more realistic sound in every way than trying to integrate a center channel above or below my screen.

I run the L/R out of the processor to my hi-end 2-channel preamp’s balanced inputs via long XLR ICs and set the preamp’s volume at unity gain, so those two channels get the best possible source quality. Of course, the processor is not in the loop for two-channel music listening, which is 99% of the time for me. I confess that when I do use the processor for movies or multi-channel music, I set the processor to "Pure Audio" mode, bypassing the Audyssey room correction and any other circuitry possible inside the processor. Possible and preferable because my room and my 2-channel rig are right.

Best to you gdhal,
Dave

Stand facing one direction and have somebody play guitar while running around you. This proves nothing, but I thought it was an interesting image anyway.