and again, if you buy used, especially cables, you can often sell in a few years for no/little loss...People almost never sell our cables. They keep them. Very rare on the used market. Everything else in the system goes, and repeatedly...but not the cables. There’s no where else to go...
why do people feel the need to buy expensive cable
I have tried expensive cables and one's moderately priced. I would say there were some differences but I can't actually say the expensive cables were better. IMHO I believe a lot of people buy expensive cables because they don't actual trust their ears and are afraid of making a mistake. They figure the expensive cables are better for the fact they cost more. If you have a difference of opinion or share the same thoughts, I would like to hear about it.
- ...
- 1088 posts total
| Post removed |
Why do people buy into expensive cables? They do give you more of resolution, frequency extension, etc., but while you get more of this and that, sometimes the balance taken a back seat, but then there is another important reason people feel the urge to buy expensive cables: *Marketing tactics by cable manufacturers* Case in point: The LessLoss C-MARC power cable was press reviewed by 6 moons in May 2017, and by Mono and Stereo in August 2017. Note that in both reviews, the price of the power cords was alleged to the respective reviewers as USD 735 /2m. Shortly after the reviews, the price of the LessLoss C-MARC power cable went up by a significant 56% to USD 1148 /2m within a couple of months. LessLoss’s website has a description of the technologies for making this cable, which is essentially the same as that quoted by Mono and Stereo in its press review, word for word. The external appearance and picture illustration of the cables geometry also seems unchanged between the time the review was published and latest. What is happening, that a 56% price jump shortly after the press reviews? Wouldn’t a reviewer comments have been changed if he knows the product is going to sell at much higher price level, or at least have his enthusiastic tone tempered if he knows this is going to happen? Now here is a new formula for marketing audiophile cables that all audio manufacturers need to acquit themselves of:
The standard reply from a cable manufacturer would goes along the lines like “we introduce some new design elements after the press reviews that makes our cable much better, and we want our customers to have the best, but it also means our production cost runs up as well…”. That may well be true, in some cases. That said, what would be the reasonable level of wages paid by LessLoss to their workers for making these cables? Mercedes-Benz announced some time ago that it already sold more than 2 million units before reaching end of 2017. Our engineering and modernization has reached a point where, with few exceptions, making a cable is pretty much a semi-automated process, however fanciful claim a cable manufacturer may postulate that justify significant jump in price level within a short time. Other than that such self-justifications failed the law of diminishing returns, it begs the question that if it is true the new version is much better than the one submitted to the reviewers, wouldn’t it be sensible to launch to the market and, for that matter, submit to the reviewer the final version rather than some sort of early prototype? Everyone can see it would make more sense to do it the other way around, as all manufacturers would want a rave review of their products in order to sell more, so it would be in their interest to submit to the reviewers the final version, which presumably would be the better product than the prototype – why otherwise would you not launched the original prototype to the market? If LessLoss somehow come up with a new fanciful formula to make a significantly better product within a couple of months, what would be the reason for that seemingly sudden revelation that makes the substantial technology advancement possible? Even if such epiphany from God do happen to LessLoss’s president Louis Motek and his team, you would expect the manufacturer will name the subsequent much better product differently (“performance series”, “signature series,”, etc.). Diligent audio manufactures do this in order to distinguish the performance parameters between different series. Why would a manufacturer stick to the prevailing product name now associated with some rave reviewers, if the new product is really that much better? While I commend LessLoss for its marketing genius, I can see few of their practices as doing service to the audio industry. |
- 1088 posts total