Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

Audio Discussions
Topic: The "reviewers" are trying to act as they're Market Makers

Page 1 of 2 (28 items) 1 2 »


Posted by Romy the Cat on 07-04-2005

buy prozac online

buy prozac online

This subject of prices in High-End Audio is obviously endless. We can complain for years blaming the $80.000 for a pair of amplifiers,  $42.000 for DACs, $29.000 for phonocorrector, 125.000 for pair of loudspeakers,  $17.000 for CD transports, $16.000 for single interconnect, $50.000 turntables or $10.0000 for a cartridge. The most revolting in all that story that all those super expansive items do not deliver any superior result and anyone who have even very remote acquaintance about audio industry knows that there is no relations between the price tags in audio and the benefits that a consumer get from his/her audio equipment.

The myth and the practice of ultra high prices for NOTHING SPECIAL in High-End Audio have own resosns, own history and own rules of the engagement. I would like to initiate this thread and let myself (or whoever wish) to look at the pricing in High-End Audio slightly deeper, objectively and perhaps more realistically then a typical Hi-Fi bitching. I will upload more context in here when I get more time…

Rgs,
Romy the caT


Posted by Romy the Cat on 07-08-2005

15mg mirtazapine

mirtazapine 15mg tablets volkanatasever.com

There are few evil things within the mechanism of High-End pricing. I will start form the beginning of my list:

1) Disassociation of manufacturers from consumers

The High-End audio manufacturers do not target their efforts to provide “service” to the consumers. Rather they conceive a notion, concept or more frequently a pile of BS and then they design/manufacture/market “something” (or “anything”) the backups this concept. Theoretically there is nothing wrong in this scenarios but it is only theoretically. In the real world the concepts themselves become the domination forces of the manufacturer’s thinking and perception and this completely arrests/paralyzes the manufacturer’s/designers’, abilities (presumably they had any). As the result a manufactures do not serve the “interest of the results” but she/he concentrates all his/her efforts to support the live-cycle of the concept. The propagation of the concept, it’s ornamentation, embellishment and cashing the concept out become a self-consuming task for the manufactures and their consciousness totally block itself out from the reality of sound reproduction. I have seen it many-many times with all level of manufactures: they are comfortably numb and almost absurdly senseless in their ability to get the imperative and irrelevant aspects of Sound -I do not practically blame them I juts present the facts. Ironically but the manufactures melt with the consumers might bring them back to reality as a reference. Unfortunately it does not exist. The times when you had an “old Jew” on a basement and to whom you might go, talk with him, explain your needs, pay to him and ask him to delivery the result that YOU demand…. are gone. In place of the “old Jew” came a Moron who has no knowledge, not abilities and no even aptitude to differentiate the results. This Moron has a bumper-sticker intelligence and the pop-corn skills, however he visualize himself as a chef -designer of Jet-Propulsion Lab and he feels that he blesses humanity if he decided to manufacture Audio. I mean the person who places himself/herself at the position of providing any professional service for others should have some advance skills or knowledge in the field. So, the tight association between the manufacturers and consumers would help to the consumers to monitor who was that person behind that manufacture curtain.  Yes, in very many cases (my estimate 80%) the individual who market their products / services as “industry professionals” should NOT be there. Therefore, the bringing the spot light back to the person who does audio would let us, the consumers,  to filter out 80% of all audio products …. before even listening to them.

If we Americans nowadays are demanding a mandatory IQ teats for an individual who ran for the office of US President then why we do not demand the Audio IQ test for an individual who make for us our loudspeakers of amplifier taking from us our $70.000?

How all of that relates to the prices? It affects very directly the second reason of Hi-Fi prices absurdly:

2) Deficiency in of real and objective evaluation methods that would objective place the High-End products in a hierarchy of the consumer benefits.


To be continue...
The cat


Posted by Romy the Cat on 08-03-2005

buy amoxicillin from canada

amoxicillin prescription no insurance

buy abortion pill espana

buy abortion pill espana miconsoladoryyo.com

Today’s prices in Hi-Fi do not base upon any other principle then “whatever market bears”. The luck of objective evaluation methods and the completely un-liberated market of Hi-Fi consumers make the “market bearing” principles being completely not applicable in Hi-Fi. 99.9% of consumers in audio do not make their purchasing decisions based upon the realistic and factual performance of products. Do you want to argue my “foolish accusation”? Over the years, coming to the different listening rooms and listening different quite terrible Sound form those installations I kept asking what motivated those people to buy into one or another hobble performing component or idea. Interestingly that they practically never replied that it was due to their financial considerations but rather due to their compliance or conformation to some specific BS that THEY HEARD ABOUT THE GIVEN PRODUCT.

As the result, Audio form the contest of results got converted into contest of audio propaganda where the most filthy, most greediest, gluttonous, ignorant and the most disqualified representatives of audio industry – the marketing hoodlums, including their clan of the audio-reviewers, run the show in audio and consume the highest percentage of retail price, kipping you - the consumers to pick up the tab and satisfy yours with the residue well-oiled audio commerce.

In this environment the price structuring is not only bogus (as there is no OPEN market to make the “whatever market bears” principle possible) but the price is very much fraudulently deceptive. The prices in Hi-Fi do not relate to ANYTHING valuable or beneficially quantifiable but ON LY to the amount of marketing superstructure that was built around the given product.

Over the years I accumulated many stories illustration how bogus and idiotic the marketing BS might be in audio. For instance a few years ago when Harmonic Technologies Company was juts a green newcomer to the cable world their president (or whoever was at that time in-charge) was trying to convince me to try their cables. He told me (buckle up!!!!) that Bill Gates decided to build his own playback system and the he already spent 1 million dollars and the only thing that hold him is the fact the he frustrated that there is no good sounding cable around (I wonder why it was Bill Gates but not Mahatma Ghandi :-) . Then he told me that all manufactures sent to Bill Gates their cables for evaluation and Bill Gates personally spent night after night to listening them. As the result, he ordered to make his system to be wired explicitly with Harmonic Technologies cables. When I hear THAT BS I did not know if I have to light or to cry… Accidentally or not, but Harmonic Technologies is the cable company that manufactures the most fraudulent sounding cables in audio industry. Another example would be Kharma Loudspeakers from Holland. Years after year Kharma manufacture an army of very expansive but consistently very poor sounding loudspeakers and no one seriously paid attention to their existence. Kharma had a model – Ceramic 3 – that was small 2 ways monitors with a pair of drivers of total cost of $300. They were selling this speaker for ~5.5K with the street price of $3-$4K. No mater how good or bad the Ceramic 3 was but that model was still way better then any other loudspeakers they produce including their $90.000 models and all-toogether it was OK solution for $3K, particularly if one has a very small room and do not listen louder then 80dB.  So, no one was buying the Kharma until the Kharma’s Ceramic 3 made the marketing step up. The new distributors were plugged into the game, the new reviewers were appointed and commanded: “Fetch” and the new marketing BS was speeded across to the Kharma’s polish baffle. The price was multiplied by 4 times (!!!) for the very same loudspeaker and immediately the armies of audio-zombie begin to place that $22.000 audio-disaster in there listing rooms. Stop by in ANY single audio room where any of Kharma products installed, listened THAT  miserable sound and ask the owners what made them to go for THAT sound. You will see and … hear….

Still, what make the consistently horribly performing audio products to have a consistent popularity among the audio consumers-Morons? Everyone knows how objectively bad performing some products are, even the people who manufacture those products are secretly laughing how crappy some of their products are (I’m not kidding), but still, those products are the bestsellers of industry and they keep holding the very high price tags. Any single person who has ears or a brain with IQ higher then a size of his shoe realize how horrible Krell electronics and loudspeakers are and still the dealers move the Krell boxes with the phenomenal speed, like nothing else in the industry. The very same is taking peace with very many others insultingly performing and fundamental faulty elements of high-end audio universe, just to name the few: Conrad-Johnson, Atmosphere and VTL preamplifiers; Clearaudio analog, Boulder, Maks Levinson, Krell, Macintosh and  Linn amplifiers; Kharma, Martin-Logan, Dynaudio and loudspeakers; MIT, Transparent, Nordost cables and many many other names… Do I have to bring up the price tag for those manufactures to make the point or you know the prices?

So, what make this price dissociation form the results so blossoming in audio? I feel that it is about an absent of any civilized objective assessment mechanism and a very none-discriminative or juts plain ultra-low level of demands from the audio consumers. Regarding the last one it is very simple - most of the audio people are very accidental in audio and it is pretty much irrelevant for them: would they “do audio”, sniff cocaine or make up little toy animals from clay. For them Audio - is juts another hobby – another obsession of males lost in the misery of own gender. As far as the first reason – the absent of objective audio assessment mechanisms - it is more complicated and it is kind of not the subject of this thread.

Anyhow, the absurdly high, irrelevant prices in high-end audio do derive from all that was said above. Interesting that there are some very narrow audio fields (drivers market, some separate parts and so on…) that was not yet reaped by audio industry marketing yet and as the result those fields DO follow the “whatever market bears” principle and in there you can observe some relations between the price and the deliverable results.

Rgs,
Romy the Cat

Posted by AnonymousUser on 08-27-2005
I agree with some of what you said but there is a lot in here that doesn't make sense.  Here's an example:

"another obsession of males lost in the misery of own gender"

Are you saying that you are not happy that you are a male?
Why are you miserable with your gender and what does that
have to do with hi-fi?  Would you rather be a woman because
that's what I get out of that. 

But yeah, high-end audio is a huge ripoff.

Yago From Yuma

Posted by Romy the Cat on 08-27-2005

melatonin pregnancy safety

melatonin pregnancy first trimester region2.herbzinser03.com

abortion pill cost

abortion pill reversal link

Yago,

This is your third post at this forum and the third time you only care to yank my tail juts because “something doesn't make sense” to you. I have no problems to chew up to you what I meant but following my pedagogical inclinations I think I’ll let you to learn to accept your own limitations, and to live with them.  If you wish somebody to educate you on the subjects of your interests then try to ignite somebody‘s at least interest. So far you was not successful.

You see, I presume that at this forum each post presents a result of the poster’s thinking or actions. So far none of your post present any thinking or introduction anything of your own on the subjects. How your curiosity about my gender relates to the subject of “Prices in High-End Audio”? Was it all that you got from the posts above?

Anyhow, frankly sparking, so far you sound like the few individuals whom the idiot Eric Brutten “strategically” sent a few month ago to this forum and who desperately wanted to convert this site into a locker room – the intellectual state that fully relates to Eric Brutten persoanlay and the lightweight-cretins with whom he befriended. If it so and if you will not able to post any valuable content then I will leave you where I left all those Ali Hassans and the other Brutten’s aliases….

This is last time I reply to you if your post is not subject-bound.

Be careful,
Romy the Cat

Posted by Romy the Cat on 12-19-2007
What I found fascinating in relationship between high-end audio and prices that price high-end is not a subject of “benefit of purpose” but the subject of believing in values. Without cognitive understanding this simple difference the industry stupid cheerleaders instead of demanding from various manufacturer better satisfaction of purpose spin the wheels propaganda, convincing customers that the product’s proposed values are justifiable.

There is nothing wrong using price as a sale tool, particularly in America where people use “acquireing” as an act of entertainment, however it “works” when the Benefit of Purpose is ALSO plugged into formulation of reasons. I had a conversation a year or so ago with one Moron who is considered by the Industry as a “famous reviewer”. I asked him if he ever considered writing his reviews without any bind to any specific products. He told me that I proposed was idiotic…

The Cat

Posted by Romy the Cat on 04-10-2008

In the Bidat there was a question about the possible price for off the wall DAC that performs well.

http://www.GoodSoundClub.com/TreeItem.aspx?PostID=7159 

That lead me to think wider – why do not we base our pricing policies and strategies ONLY upon the performance of the audio. It sound ridicules but is it how it must be?

Well, let me introduce you with my own ridicules world. A couple years ago a guy approached me as asked me to sell him my very first original full range Melquiades since I built another one. I felt kind of strange.  I did not needed to sell it but I did not need those amps to collect dust as well, so how much should I ask for it?

I did spend a substantial amount of efforts to convince the guy do not buy Melquiades. The Milq circuitry was public at that time; I told how much the parts cost for that amp and was willing to give him all sources to get them and assist to him or his builders to build a pair of Milqs. The guy refused and he what my specific amp. I was kind of intrigues and it was a nice gratification, so I proposed him to borrow my unused Milqs amps and try it for a few weeks. The guy sopped by, pick them up and in few weeks he told that he would like to keep it. Interning that up to that time we had no definitive conversation about price. They I found a solution. I told him that he need to sell him current SETs and if he feel that my Milqs are better then I should get all money that he will be getting for his current amps.  It was the deal.

Now, that opens a very interesting concussion. The price of high-end equipment shell be: the prices of competitor that the equipment defeat + the extrapolative value of sonic advantages and benefits that the component has over it’s competitor.

I think this is the only way how audio should be priced. What is interning is that using this guidance we would very soon learn that there are very few truly high-end audio performers. If tennis plays have rating that they need constantly support by actual performance on court then why high-end audio equipment can’t compete in the same way for the higher price?

Rgs, Romy the Cat

Posted by Paul S on 04-11-2008

But I thought the entire bassis of Western "Society" is PROFIT?

So, how does "VALUE" fit here, other than percieved?

As it happens, I only buy audio gear that I actually want to hear/use, and I only sell it if I tire of it and/or I want or need the money back.

But I have been known to sell some of the wine I did "well" on at the time I bought it (vis, hindsight).

Maybe hi-fi "reviewers" feel this way? (and maybe they have the added twist of helping to create their own "value" structure?)

But i think the "reviewer" valuations are more like the Stock Market, where "value'" is literally nothing more than whatever people will pay at any given moment.

Paul S


Posted by Romy the Cat on 04-11-2008
 Paul S wrote:
But i think the "reviewer" valuations are more like the Stock Market, where "value'" is literally nothing more than whatever people will pay at any given moment.
Well, if you know the shadow mechanisms that run stock market, the dark pools, the unregulated betting (in which invested 4 times more than in the actual stock), the institutions destroying the market with naked shorts and about many other things then the "reviewers" are more trying to act as the Stock Market Makers. The criminal assholes running Hedge Found (and how many we have of them out there) are perfectly cable to destroy a company or an entire sector - how many stores like this out there. Anyhow, I am not against people stealing money from another people. However, I do not accept the prices that the steal ceremony dictates as something that describes anything or being indicative to anything.

Posted by Romy the Cat on 03-18-2011
fiogf49gjkf0d

The fact that cost in audio does not mean sound quality knows everyone and everyone, particularly whose sell expensive audio, love to pitch it. However, we all understand the cost/sound misbalance but we very seldom take it personally. 

At my site I try to keep cost of audio out of logical language and if I use cost then only as a tool of topological application – like this it that solution is not rational for this or that cost. The method is accurate in my view but it also serves a subliminal purpose associating price with result. So, I asked myself why do not accept the premise of the implication and do not take price of audio very personally. If we drop the fear of associating price with quality and will use ONLY price without any fear then some very interesting horizons will open for us.

The punch to think this way gave me a recent visit of a local friend of my mine. He is not an audio friend, he is a regular civilian who do not know about audio too much. He listened my playback and was very much fascinated by the fact the audio might cost too much. Since he did not know audio he did not understand that my audio is not expensive at all. I use relatively expensive topological methods sometimes but if to project my costs to the cost of many other audio people them my playback is very non-expensive. He did not recognize that and he was very much using ONLY absolute cost as some kind of absolute measurements.

Arguing with him I realized that there is power in this view of his. The power is to reverse the accents, to take the prices personally and to equate price and quality. I think that method is very powerful if to keep the eyes very firmly at the ball.

This week I spoke with a cable manufacture – I do need one good 1M cable. We are accustomed that those audio cables have no sensible cost and that we pay as much for cables as much we can afford. In conversation with the manufacture I reversed the position – I run the price game. This gave me a surprising power. The manufacture said that the cable that he can let me to try will cost $850.  I proposed $1300 and asked him what sonic benefits I will have for extra $500. He said that he has his upper echelon cable that he might sell for $1300. I asked what kind sonic benefits I will have for extra $500. He did give me a standard set of believes why a cable for $500 extra will sound better. I did debate the claim. Further I asked why he feels that the set of alleged “improvements” has $500 price tag and why the same $850 cable shall not have the same set of alleged sonic features. A asked him many other questions. He did felt the he was talking with an idiot and perhaps he was correct. However, there was a brilliant moment in this conversation – he got confused with his own theory that he is in position to stratify quality of sound per cost. As soon his confusion was evident I asked him that I need a cable with defined sonic characteristics, I did explicitly enumerate those characteristics and I asked him to put a price tag on this hypothetical cable of mine. He pretty much sent me to hell, which is fine. We hanged up in firm mutual believe that we were taking with ignorant person.

I however very much like the experience. So, what I am offering to you is trying to think about price in reversed terms. Take a sheet of paper and write down the aspects of your sound that you do not like in your playback – call it The List. Then go to you playback and place a price tags on what you have. Let for instance it will be $30K, then tell to yourself that you do not mind to spend another let say $5K to the cost of your playback. Then give your list to your audio dealer, right with with the set of the improvements that you would like to accomplish. I would like you to see how your audio dealer would price the sonic benefits that you outlined with the need of additional investments. I can give to you 80% change that to get what you would like to hear as a result you would need not to buy audio but to sell your existing audio. Do not buy anything that does not serve The List. Get rid of everything from your playback that does not serve The List. Let the magnitude of price that you pay for your audio to be in direct proportion with fulfillment of your List.

In most cases your manufactures and your deals will not have language to support your attitude. That is fine but for a second imagine yourself that everyone in high-end audio has own List and force the entire industry to work for the benefit of your own List.  Suddenly the empty industry will collapse as it has no mechanism to serve somebody benefits but one it has a mechanism to furnish high price SCUs as a satisfaction of non-exiting or fake concepts.

Yesterday I asked an audio guy that I know what he would do with his playback of he won $20K in lottery and decided to spend all of them on his playback.  The guy was super enthusiastic with the ideas but the more he spoke the more it was obvious to both of us that he has nothing to do with his extra $20K. It is not the he has no wholes to patch in his sound, he does. He however has no price tags to the sonic problems that he acknowledges.

I do challenge this standing and I do feel that audio people need to fight price in audio with using price as a tool of intelligence not a tool of a cow that is being led to a butcher. Remember, the price in audio is something that we, consumers own, not something that the industry imposes to you. If you feel different then you read wrong site.  So, take a $1000, show it to your audio supplier and ask him what he can do for you and for your List for this money. See the result.

Rgs, Romy the Cat

Posted by Romy the Cat on 01-15-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
Somebody at AA posted a typical post: “Stop the overabundance of high$$$ reviews and get into the real world.”

http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/critics/messages/7/74050.html

The criticism is kind of “standard” but unfortunately the perception is very superficial, which is also very standard for the audio sewers.  I would like to expend a little the subject.

I do not bitch that the prices are too high in high end audio. They are very high but it is supply demands – if the maker and sellers extend those prices then there is market out there to support them. What does very much disappoint me is not the amplitude of the prices but decoupling of prices from the actual results. Only in audio you might have let say loudspeakers that would cost $200 or $20.000 or $200.000 and the loudspeakers with price tag 1000 times (!!!) higher might or might not offer better sound quality then the dirt cheap model.

You will not frequently find the situation like this anywhere else. Yes, $9 screwdriver might be not as good as $5 screwdriver but I bet   that if you find a $90.000 screwdriver then it will way over perform the cheap one. This however very seldom, if ever happens in high end audio. Did you ever see any let say audio reviewer who turn down a let say DAC with price tag of $15.000 just because it delivers $500 sound? I am sure it would be appropriate in automobile, cigar or screwdriver reviewing but it absolutely unspeakable in audio reviewing.

For sure, some of the things might or even need to be expensive. There are some expensive methodologies and in context of limited market it is no surprise that the price tag is high. However, how frequently you have seen in high end audio that expense was invested to accomplish specific advanced sonic result? In most of the cases it very seldom happens. In most cases the expense in high end audio used mostly just because the industry can get away from anything.

Posted by steverino on 01-15-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
This is an interesting thread. Romy is correct that the hifi industry is not user defined or driven really. Manufacturers have a standard vocabulary that they are able to use indiscriminately to describe the sonics produced by a given product (detail, soundstage, liquidity, balance, dynamics etc).Absent an extended in-home audition, the user has no way to accurately assess the claims. A big part of the problem is that hifi dealers don't sell complete systems anymore, only components. If people had to buy cars in the same manner there would be similar confusion. Which of 25 different brakes should I put in my custom car??   The performance is also greatly affected by the in-home placement. A car/truck is meant to operate on particular road/surface conditions. The general public is familiar with the set of driving surfaces and which type of vehicle is appropriate. Most people have no clue or can't afford the expense of creating the appropriate sonic environment for the system.

Second, people have more trouble describing auditory sensations than they do visual objects.  Odors are the most difficult to describe to another person except by shared experience (it's like X). Since there is no set of complete systems which are generally known, it is difficult to even put sonics in those terms.

Third, there is no standard criterion or recording that we can use to assess a hifi system or component. Recordings even good ones are all over the place in terms of their sonic character since we are unable to capture completely accurately even simple auditory tones.

Fourth, in cases such as these it is very hard to proceed deductively and you end up inductively sifting through large amounts of discussion to find some general consensus. Another approach is to see what products more frequently show up in the used market at a given price level and how quickly given used components sell. But these are very coarse methods forced on people because of the above factors.

Posted by Paul S on 01-15-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
Getting OT, but: Another important sub-set is that many or even most who put together a system do not have any sort of well-developed personal references. Many simply hope to get "better sound" from their next purchase, and in these cases purchasing decisions may be made based on myriad "extraneous" criteria. It appears that the simple desire for better sound can morph when the seeker makes the quest social, and the desire for inclusion or the hope to have or achieve what others claim become important, as well. All these factors can be observed at work from DIY forums right on up to What's the Best, or GSC.

Of course all the above can apply to any sort of buying decision, not just hi-fi. And hi-fi is not alone in being a matter of the "inverted" subjective/objective decision making. I don't blame marketers for understanding their market; I just wish it was profitable enough for Music and the Sound of Music to be the drivers in our hobby. Hell, I'd be happy if someone still made decent speaker cones!


Paul S

Posted by Telus on 01-15-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:

You will not frequently find the situation like this anywhere else. Yes, $9 screwdriver might be not as good as $5 screwdriver but I bet   that if you find a $90.000 screwdriver then it will way over perform the cheap one.


I'd take that bet.

Too, I'd raise you this--that is the dumbest analogy I've read in the last 365 days.  Congratulations.

Posted by steverino on 01-15-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
The Makita FS6200 Drywall Screwdriver ($89.99) (0-6,000 rpm) delivers speed, power, and ergonomics. It is ideal for hanging sheet rock on wood frame.





FS6200 Features
POWER - Powerful 6 amp motor with 0-6,000 rpm designed to handle all framing and hanging applications

INNOVATION - Ergonomically designed rubberized pistol grip for increased comfort and control

CONVENIENCE - Built-in L.E.D. illuminates the work surface

PERFORMANCE - Lightest drywall gun in its class at only 3 pounds

INCLUDES - #2 Phillips insert bit and magnetic bit holder














6 AMP Motor Delivers 6,000 RPM
The FS6200 is powered by a 6 amp motor that delivers 0-6000 rpm and includes a large variable speed trigger with lock-on button for continuous use. The adjustable depth locator assembly with Makita's Sure-Lock feature is engineered for consistent screw depth.

Comfort and Ease-of-Use Features
The FS6200 has an ergonomic grip for increased comfort and a cast aluminum gear housing for less weight (only 3 pounds) and increased durability. Other features include a depth locator holder for convenient storage during framing applications, a bit storage on the base of the grip to reduce downtime, and an L.E.D. light to illuminate the work surface.

Versatile Design for a Range of Applications
The FS6200 is engineered for hanging applications, and is ideal for drywall contractors, acoustical contractors, carpenters, plaster contractors, maintenance, and general contractors seeking a best-in-class drywall screwdriver. The FS6200 is just another example of Makita's commitment to innovative technology and best-in-class engineering.

About Makita Drywall Screwdrivers
Makita drywall screwdrivers deliver speed, power and ergonomics for framing and drywall applications. Makita's drywall screwdrivers are powered by Makita-built motors with a range of rpm capabilities. Features include adjustable depth locator assembly with Sure-Lock engineered for consistent screw depth, and a large variable speed trigger with lock-on button designed for continuous use. Makita drywall screwdrivers are ergonomically-designed with less weight for increased comfort. Convenience features include L.E.D. lights to illuminate the work surface, depth locator holder for storage during framing applications, and bit storage on the base of the grip.


      

Pink Power PP481 4.8V Cordless Electric Screwdriver

by Pink Power 
List Price:$34.99
Price:$17.49
You Save:$17.50 (50%)
Only 11 left in stock. Ships from and sold by Sunbelt Products.
  • Voltage: 4.8V Weight: 12oz LED: Yes RPM: 150
  • Bits Included: 12 + Bit Holder
  • Battery: Internal
  • Forward/Reverse: Yes
  • Warranty: Full 1 Year warranty on the tool


Posted by Romy the Cat on 01-15-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Telus wrote:
I'd take that bet.

Too, I'd raise you this--that is the dumbest analogy I've read in the last 365 days.  Congratulations.
 Hm,… and how many $90.000 screwdrivers that do not perform as good as $9 screwdrivers you think you will be able to sell? In the audio industry however it works wonderfully. There were many examples when audio products begin to sell ONLY price went up many times over.  So, effectively the audio industry converted high end audio concept into high end price point.  The fact that you find my analogy as dumbest makes me very proud – you have learns something important over the last 365 days of your life.

Posted by Stitch on 01-19-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:

 Hm,… and how many $90.000 screwdrivers that do not perform as good as $9 screwdrivers you think you will be able to sell? In the audio industry however it works wonderfully. There were many examples when audio products begin to sell ONLY price went up many times over.  So, effectively the audio industry converted high end audio concept into high end price point.  The fact that you find my analogy as dumbest makes me very proud – you have learns something important over the last 365 days of your life.

The best example is analog. Expensive Digital is no longer interesting (especially Transports) and I can see much more new Turntables / Arms / Phonostages in every show. That's ok, but when you check them (the customer, but most are even too stupid for that) you can detect that most turntables are not able to hold proper speed, 33,3 or 45 rpm. They drift seriously. No reviewer checks these items for that (or rumble, or measuring the belts for specs and so on and on and on). Instead you see, there are endless customers out there who want to spend 30k, they want to spend so much be get acceptance as an serious audiophile or they do it because their cheapest cable is 8K..... and when someone writes about that, he will be shot at once from the audiophile Fangroup who found a place in the Importers / Dealers backside in the hope to get a better pricing or because they like each other so much... but the real reason at the end of the day is of course, they are afraid that the public will get that information which ruins their resale. And it hurts their Ego of course.

Posted by jeff1225 on 01-22-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
Another hobby that I'm involved with is saltwater aquariums. People used to enter the hobby as children when they would get their first 10 gallon aquarium as gift or hand me down. Now kids would rather play video games then actually mess with a hobby. Instead of making products that are attractive to the current crop of kids, manufactures have taken the easy route and are making more and more expensive and esoteric items to capture the few dollars of the last people that actually have a fish tank.
This is exactly what is happening in audio. It's more difficult to creatively market to the masses and sell 10,000 speakers than just sell 5 $100K speakers a year. Even Vandersteen, who has sold many 1000's of Model 2's) now makes $50K speakers.
Go to an audio show, there is no one younger than 55 at the show.


Posted by steverino on 01-23-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
Well, Oppo, Emotiva and Gallo to name a few have provided components within the reach of many more people without being dirt cheap admittedly. I think the real problem is the disappearance of the complete system. I visit a few other music forums from time and a recurring complaint/question is "what component X will work in my system?" I go back to the example of cars. If people had to assemble their car from a series of component parts at the dealer there would be rampant confusion and unhappiness. Unfortunately there aren't manufacturers who can assemble an integrated system and sell it as such for a moderate price. The hifi industry has become more and more specialized and few companies can make source components, amplifiers and speakers and fit them together so they are optimized. This model would only have to work at the bottom end of the market but in describing this, it seems obvious that only bigger companies have the muscle to be able to assemble and market such things these days. However, as with Sony you either get throwaway or you get "entry-level" hifi that starts at $1000 a component. I will say though that the just issued Sony HAP-S1 is a step in the right direction as an integrated file player, preamp and amp for a list of $1000.

Posted by jeff1225 on 01-25-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
Cars are a poor analogy as they are a virtual necessity in everyday life. Music systems are the definition of nonessential expenditures, people must see listening to music as essential to their happiness and well being to begin to purchase again. That all starts with consumer accessibility and affordability. 

Posted by Paul S on 01-25-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
Yes, the reality of the Marketplace is stark: ~20% of the people have some money to spend after necessities are met, and 80% have little or no "extra" money. It seems obvious that more "free" money is available as one moves up the income slope, and in any case, this seems to be the preferred market for non-essentials that are offered at prices that will absorb start-up costs during the product life cycle. Business today has nothing to do with anything other than beating indexed stock trading returns. There is no "hi-fi business"; there is only business business. Good hi-fi is nothing more than navigating, assembling and developing a personalized system from parts that might or might not "work" in another context. IMO it is mostly dumb luck to find something that works, although the whole-system approach of Marantz, Meridian, Naim, et al, still "works" if you say it does.


Paul S

Posted by Romy the Cat on 03-11-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue71/skoff.htm

Posted by Romy the Cat on 03-12-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
Roger Skoff: “A cool half million dollars for a pair of speakers! Certainly impressive, but is it sustainable”

Well, the question about sustainability and reference to the Death Spiral is a good one. However I have more interesting question to ask: where is the money settle down in high-end audio?

Yes, we do have $150K turntables, $200K amplifiers and $300K loudspeakers but let remind to each other that no one pay those price tags and if they do then very few of those high price items are sold (with very minor exceptions)  Still, the prices are high, it means there are tone of cash change hands. Still, I do not think that the high-end audio makers here to blame as no one ever seen a reach high-end audio makers. Do not take me wrong- there are wealthy high-end audio makers but 1) they were mostly wealthy before they enter high-end audio scene 2) they do not necessary made money by selling high-end audio. Sure, there are some exceptions but generally if we take let say 100 high-end manufacturers and compare them with 100 business or professionals of the same vintage then it would be very obvious that high-end manufacturing is not so financially lucrative field.

The next state is dealers and distributors. They generally do much better then manufactures. This is true in any other business - salespeople do much better than the actual makers of the goods. Still, I did not see a lot of truly wealthy audio salespeople. They hustle for money but they in my view, dispute that they are leeches of the industry they do not accumulate or collect the industry dough.

The marketing folks, the reviewers, publishers, editors, web sites hosts and the rest industry dirt do not get any money at all. They skim some very immaterial favors from others. Some of them are some cheap, have so low self-respect and that they blow products trumpets for free or for buying discounts. For sure the damage that they inflict to the audio makers is factored into the product prices and eventually delegated to users but the marketing folks themselves do not touch any cash flow in the industry.

So, if the prices in high-end audio are so high then where all industry money eventually get settled?

I do not have an answer but I think I would propose an alternative version: the perpetual Roger Skoff’s Death Spiral. This would explain why the prices are high, why there are mostly no wealthy people in audio, why any product in audio has life-span of year or two and why industry keep entrenching in the audio consumers their brainless need to buy sub-mediocre products.

The Perpetual Sustaining Death Spiral – the PSDS… sound like a great name for $500 volume control knob.

Rgs, the Cat

Posted by Paul S on 03-13-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
One thing high-end audio may always have to offer is some sort of "ultimate solution". This might even be for a problem that is invented in order to address it; it doesn't matter, as long as the buyer thinks the solution and the sound are "the best" available, either at the price, or at any price. I also think that people who spend a lot are looking for the major problems to be already solved. That's what the money is for, right?

Perhaps the major problem for the high end today is convincing people that they need hi-fi at all. In fact, I think this is the major problem for the hi-fi industry, from top to bottom. Most people these days hardly consider sound quality; rather, it's all about features and convenience, portability, etc.

As far as pricing, who can afford to gear up, make an audio product, bring it to market, and then support the product? And of those who can do it, how long can they do it? Where and what is the market? The stupid prices may be initially tied to the idea of hanging in there, or they might be more of a quick hit approach, a get in , get the money, and get out business model. Hell, it works for banks, insurance companies, investment firms, etc, ad nauseum...


Paul S

Posted by rowuk on 03-13-2014
fiogf49gjkf0d
In order for something to die, it must be alive! In the case of the spiral of death, those companies were dead at birth and only modern technology feigned life. There is no spiral - only a comedy of errors!

What I am missing most of the time is a real business plan that makes a company sustainable. Clearly defined market, financing and product ideas that allow the offeror to be there afterwards even if there are quality issues.

There are of course success stories: Bose, JBL, hell even Lamm. They know what their market will bear, they know what to do once their market is saturated and they can even afford to play the reviewers as they please.

A brilliant idea is not enough.

Page 1 of 2 (28 items) 1 2 »