Pulsars and the Mythical Armchair Speaker Maker


There’s another thread going about Joseph Audio Pulsar speakers which I did not want to derail, but it is showing up some common logical fallacies and dead ends I wanted to talk about.


As anyone who has read my posts knows, I’m a huge proponent of DIY for speakers and cables especially. Not that I think you should only go with DIY but because the more audiophiles who can build their own we have in the community the less snake oil gets spread around as fact and there’s less worshipping of the price tag as the almighty determiner of speaker performance.


The myth I want to talk about is kind of related. It is the idea that we should value speakers based purely on driver cost. JA’s Pulsars suffer from this because they seem to use off the shelf components, in very nice cabinets, with perfectly executed crossovers. The thing that I don’t understand are buyers who look at driver cost, and say "well, these speakers should cost no more than x amount, so I’m not buying them... "


I call hogwash. Speakers are more than a collection of parts. They are curated components brought together by a designer and manufacturer. Those same people who are likely to engage in this behavior:

  • Can’t actually design a speaker themselves
  • Would NEVER build a DIY speaker even as a complete kit because it doesn’t have a brand, nor would they buy an assembled DIY speaker.
  • Would probably go with a speaker with in-house drivers which have an even higher markup
  • May not have very good ears anyway


My point is, knowing the price of the parts does not make you at all qualified to judge what the final price should be. That is, fairly, in the hands of the market, and it doesn’t actually make you a better listener or more informed buyer. I would argue you end up buying speakers for brands with even more of a markup and more likely to have questionable performance.


It’s perfectly reasonable for a manufacturer to charge for parts, and skill. So, yes, talking tech and drivers and crossover components is always fun, but please stop evaluating the price of finished goods until you’ve attempted at least designing one pair yourself.

And again, DIY is a lot of fun, and if you want to go that way, you should, but let’s not denigrate high value, high quality manufacturers and delers by reducing them to part assemblers any more than you'd judge a restaurant based on the cost per pound of chicken.


Thank you,

E
erik_squires
Some people find overpriced restaurant meals or expensive clothing objectionable. Why should overpriced high end speakers be any different?

It isn’t, totally different argument.


Judging the price of the meal by the cost of chicken at the store is a horrible way to judge a restaurant. Judging a shirt by the cost of a bale of cotton is a terrible way to judge the value of clothing.


Most commercial speakers are actually worse than diy since they use passive crossovers that have no advantages over active.

Most DIY speakers are passive, so this statement makes no sense.


In addition, I disagree with the statement I think I can discern, which is : "Active crossovers are universally better than passive." Dear lord do I disagree with that for home use.


Based on kenjit’s argument, homes, cars, restaurant food, and most every other item should be valued solely on the cost of component parts. That scenario is unrealistic since most folks do not have the skills to roll their own.
When Art Dudley comments upon the quality of parts in a piece of electronics, I take notice. Herb Reichert who evidently had a history of repairing electronics does this too. 
I understand your point with loudspeakers and cables. I particularly shake my head at people who buy loudspeakers with their eyeyballs-looking for futuristic driver materials and cabinet shapes. But at the other extreme-call me what you will-but I reject certain speakers with my eyeballs too-Tektons in particular. Even if they sound as great as reported, I don't want those ugly things in my house. 
We all make value judgments. A Rolex and an IWC may have the same cost and virtually every horology enthusiast will tell you that the IWC has the more costly movement contained inside, and yet the Rolex has more cache' and some take more joy out of having a well-known status symbol whereas the IWC is not going to be noticed for what it is except by watch enthusiasts. 
As a Garrard 301 owner, let's talk about plinths. That is a DIY type of thing. But even a pretty handy guy like Art Dudley's can't build a plinth for his Thorens and Garrard that looks nearly as nice as some specialists. Does it sound just as good? That is an open question. Plinths need to be tuned (IMHO) to the motor unit. A Thorens TD124 will sound best in an open plinth-again IMHO-whereas a Garrard 301 needs a very dense-but not too dense-plinth, preferably of cherry wood. You can spend $4000 with an Artisan Fidelity plinth, 3200 on a plinth by Steve Dobbins, and $400 on a nice looking plinth from Hungary. The cost of the wood is not much. It is the labor and expertise you pay for-and you pretty much get what you pay for. 
I agree about the Tektons. I've written at length here defending their technical execution (mostly) but no way would I allow one in my home! It's just too ugly.
@erik_squires I think some people who are more price conscious might do some internal calculus and decide to go with speakers from say selah audio or salk or GR or some other speaker builder that would be happy to build you a speaker with the same drivers at a fraction of the cost, and nobody would question Dennis Murphy or RIck Craig's bonafides.