How important is component “aesthetics” to you?


Obviously, performance, sound, etc is what matters most. However, some super fine, high performance products are just plain ugly. Aesthetcs does play an important role for me since we have placed a lot of emphasis on furnishing our home. 

Anyway, my search for a preamp has led me to the conclusion that ugly is more the norm. I love the look of glowing tubes with the Primalunas, mystere, Atma-sphere, Rogers, Decware, mapletree etc. In the solid state world, the macs have those famous blue meters. Even the “fake tube” older Peachtree components looked really nice. 

Just curious how “ looks” play a role when choosing components?
aberyclark
If you’re still looking for preamp, I would recommend checking out the ARC Foundation series.  

Aesthetix Claypso is not bad looking either. And yes, I do believe aesthetics should be the 2nd most consideration after the sound quality, IMHO. 
I think the models (of major brands) will market and sell often audio gear that is more aesthetically pleasing to Europeans than what is offered to Americans. Much depends on the culture. Many Americans go to Best Buy to purchase audio, an awful excuse for architecture and aesthetics and they get even worse electronics with ugly designs. They don’t care, maybe the WAF to some degree.
I tend to think smart design can look good and sound good too. I would not buy the majority of Wilson speakers and very expensive@. Mac gear is classic and I like the entire Vandersteen line, except for the Model 7. Devore, Audio Note and Volti audio make nice looking speakers. I would get the Volti Audio Vittora: http://voltiaudio.com/vittora/ and the Border Patrol mono amps before I would ever buy Wilson WAMM Master Chronosonic. I would have $500k leftover.....
Aesthetics is a subjective thing. Generally speaking, I don't care when it comes to equipment. I do care when it comes to wives, though.
Post removed