Interesting. The only commercial speaker to capture my attention in recent times was the Sonus Faber Ellipsa and the B&Ws just do not capture me at all.
dave
dave
but I agree Jon that WAF constraint affect deeply even the flagship speakers of most companies, but not all.
Take JBL as a exemple, there Revel Salon or Studio is the home hifi TOTL offering which seem restrained by WAF. but the JBL side with their Line Arrays series, Everest series and the M2 is much less WAf. lets take JBL as a exemple, even them do not use in all their TOTL speakers DSP.
why? clearly not because DSP is more expensive to implement then analog xo, since you can find in their cheapest studio monitors DSP.
Take JBL as a exemple, there Revel Salon or Studio is the home hifi TOTL offering which seem restrained by WAF. but the JBL side with their Line Arrays series, Everest series and the M2 is much less WAf. lets take JBL as a exemple, even them do not use in all their TOTL speakers DSP.
why? clearly not because DSP is more expensive to implement then analog xo, since you can find in their cheapest studio monitors DSP.
You can have something pretty decent for a small room under 20k, that's sure.
But the second you need some SPL torque and bass extension for a bigger room, your credit card is doomed.
But the second you need some SPL torque and bass extension for a bigger room, your credit card is doomed.
B&W do not pelase anyone. I find sonus faber very coloured though.
it depends which companies. Revel, Harbeth, B&W, Canton, Geithain do not ask more then around 20k for their flagship speakers.
most def if you go with a fullrange speaker. but 2-way plus sub is often preffered for most domestic application
Last edited:
which serious speaker companies?
imo, the companies that ask 40k are not very serious and simply try to please people who think that paying more get you more.
Id add that theres very few good and serious companies in hifi, very few.
Last edited:
Wilson audio
MBL
Verity audio
Avalon
ATC
Sonus Faber
Dynaudio
TAD
Voxativ
Westlake
Goldmund
etc.. etc..
Go to Hifi shows, you'll see a lot of 100k+ speakers.
'not saying its worth it, but it seems to have a market for that.
Even the mass-market company KEF has a Flagship... how much do you think it costs ?
Seen it and heard it few years ago in Montreal show.
Beautiful. Sounds like s**t.
200,000$
Flagship Hi-Fi Speakers - Muon - Overview - KEF Canada (English)
Here is a flagship speaker system I'd be interested in hearing:
M3XE
They cost a not unreasonable $34k per pair.
They kinda compete with the BBCs current favourite which is also a flagship model but a bit more pricey:
PMC Loudspeakers BB5 XBD - Pair - Vintage King Audio
Anyway these are more the top-of-the-range jobs I would aspire to in my diy endeavours. There are a number of other interesting offers which pique my interest like Pelonis, Quested or ME Geithain.
Not much chance of hearing them at HiFi shows though.
M3XE
They cost a not unreasonable $34k per pair.
They kinda compete with the BBCs current favourite which is also a flagship model but a bit more pricey:
PMC Loudspeakers BB5 XBD - Pair - Vintage King Audio
Anyway these are more the top-of-the-range jobs I would aspire to in my diy endeavours. There are a number of other interesting offers which pique my interest like Pelonis, Quested or ME Geithain.
Not much chance of hearing them at HiFi shows though.
interesting you mention PMC. a ingeneer had a 65k PMC system. he replaced it with the 12k geithain.
hifi world is incane in general, but this is a generalisation.if you know what to look for, you can have a 15k speaker that is flagship and beyond material.
hifi world is incane in general, but this is a generalisation.if you know what to look for, you can have a 15k speaker that is flagship and beyond material.
Price is generally a very poor indicator of sound quality.
It does work a little bit better in the world of studio monitoring, possibly because they are selling to a generally better informed and educated audience, but in HiFi price is a completely useless guide.
In fact sometimes I think that in today's HiFi once you go above a certain price range SQ actually goes down in real terms. There is a lot of grotesquely priced junk out there.
That said PMC is generally overpriced.
It does work a little bit better in the world of studio monitoring, possibly because they are selling to a generally better informed and educated audience, but in HiFi price is a completely useless guide.
In fact sometimes I think that in today's HiFi once you go above a certain price range SQ actually goes down in real terms. There is a lot of grotesquely priced junk out there.
That said PMC is generally overpriced.
Last edited:
pmc is good but overpriced in studio realm
i dont claim to know everything in the hifi world, but i absolutely agree that most stuff is overpriced. not everything though and u need to audition a lot to know the very few companies from the plethora of overpriced speakers. same for amps, dac, ect
That is true.
But it proves absolutely nothing. For the reasons mentionned earlier.
That market is sailing in a parallel reality, were vendors still try to push expensive turntables, exotic cables, and all kind of dinosaurs technologies or mumbo-jumbo.
How do you explain to your customer that his 30k analogue source (he just bought last year) will now go through a DSP... or worst: that newest speakers are now powered by Class D amps ?
That's brutal for this market.
The reality denial is much safer.
$13,850 buys you one of the best: Magnepan 20.7
I agree that +$100k for a pair of speakers is just proof of the sad development seen lately in audio. The inflation in the high-end has been crazy for as long as I've been active (30 years). Compare the price development of e.g. B&W's flagship throughout the years:
1979: 801 Matrix @ €2,370
1988: 801 Matrix S2 @ €3,590
1992: 801 Matrix S3 @ €4,580
1999: 801 Nautilus @ 12,900
2005: 801D Nautilus @ €16,500
2011: 800 Diamond @ €22,000
DIY efforts of today should probably be compared to the new generation of "value-restoring" manufacturers who's founders themselves have a background in the DIY community, e.g. Salk Sound, Volent Audio etc.
It's well-known among speaker builders/professionals that drivers cost/speakers retail price ratio is between 1:10 and 1:20
Which means a pair of speakers can retail 10,000$ but made of 250$ worth of drivers on each side.
That not a lot, if you ask me...
Last edited:
That is sure not to anyone's taste.
Some qualities but the lack of energy and dynamics is a major turn-off.
You'd be better off buying some main monitors then.
Questeds largest offering, the HM415, costs around £65k a pair here.
The parts (drivers, amps, digital xover) are all available individually and would cost you about £22 000. Wood and labour not included.
I know of one guy in Mexico who bought a pair. Roger Quested himself flew out to oversee installation and set up, this was included in the price.
Last edited:
I wonder why studio monitors (JBL etc) get mixed in this discussion of top home speakers... And as far as I now, is high-class studios speakers will be equalized in the sound table anyway.
Ironically they usually need less eq'ing since they tend to be installed in well-treated and purpose designed rooms.
Other than that I find that one usually gets a better speaker for less cash than if one were to buy HiFi speakers.
Other than that I find that one usually gets a better speaker for less cash than if one were to buy HiFi speakers.
source? what's the ratio of DIY driver prices to wholesale?
at the other end of the spectrum I see lots of very good complete speakers for less than the cost of DIY components. bespoke Vs economies of scale.
The KEFs no doubt measure like champs and probably sound very uninspiring next to the bling that some hifi stuff can be balanced to sound like. The KEFs are more speakers that you'd appreciate over the long term rather than would instantly impress in any kind of way.
They are being offered as complete systems and this is what people want studio monitors to be. B&O and Meridian make DSP based audiophile components. Linn might too although I don't know. I know Linn make active speakers, or have in the past, they might have used a DSP at some point with their products.
And yes, it IS cost based.
Imagine for a second the audiophiles who are going to be purchasing the top line $100,000 loudspeaker from the usual brands. They are going to want nothing less than the best DACs in their systems from DCS/Moon/Bricasti etc. Parts that cost a small fortune in and of themselves. If they were to go fully DSP active then they would need 3x or 4x DACs like that. Or looked at another way, if Wilson released a 4 way active DSP based loudspeaker with a DSP/DAC box would audiophiles really feel comfortable replacing their Bricasti M1 with it? Probably not. They would only do so if it was absolutely necessary.
Alternatively they could release a DSP box that has a host of digital inputs and say 4x S/PDIF outputs for 4 identical DACs. This would work and the Audiophile would then be told that they need to use 4 identical DACs and nothing else, or the system wont work properly. (You need identical internal filtering within the DACs otherwise latency differences between the DACs will cause driver integration issues).
But then what do you do about controlling the volume. Use a multichannel analogue pre amp? That wouldn't go down well either. Not to mention using a DSP based xover means that audiophiles cannot use their precious record players without having to digitise first.
I mean with the current way that audiophile systems are put together DSP based systems do not fit in particularly well. A few have tried and haven't really been so successful.
I mean how many audiophiles would like it if I said I've got this awesome pair of loudspeakers for you but to make them work you're going to have to throw away your current DAC, if you are using an integrated amplifier then you're going to have to throw it away, if you're using a pre amp then you're going to have to throw it away. You are then going to also need to have 6 or 8 channels of identical power amplification. You will also need a digital source.
I don't think that would go down too well. The amplification could be included with the system too, so all you need to have besides my speakers is a digital source...That's not really how the audiophile world works.
Of course they are but they have to fit their designs into the constraints that the audiophile world is unfortunately bound to.
Cheaper systems ironically have more potential to include DSP because class D based ipod dock type things on the rise. Class D chip amps are also being baked into computer speakers and hifi mini systems. Many of these class D amplifiers now come with in built DSPs and cost peanuts.
They are being offered as complete systems and this is what people want studio monitors to be. B&O and Meridian make DSP based audiophile components. Linn might too although I don't know. I know Linn make active speakers, or have in the past, they might have used a DSP at some point with their products.
And yes, it IS cost based.
Imagine for a second the audiophiles who are going to be purchasing the top line $100,000 loudspeaker from the usual brands. They are going to want nothing less than the best DACs in their systems from DCS/Moon/Bricasti etc. Parts that cost a small fortune in and of themselves. If they were to go fully DSP active then they would need 3x or 4x DACs like that. Or looked at another way, if Wilson released a 4 way active DSP based loudspeaker with a DSP/DAC box would audiophiles really feel comfortable replacing their Bricasti M1 with it? Probably not. They would only do so if it was absolutely necessary.
Alternatively they could release a DSP box that has a host of digital inputs and say 4x S/PDIF outputs for 4 identical DACs. This would work and the Audiophile would then be told that they need to use 4 identical DACs and nothing else, or the system wont work properly. (You need identical internal filtering within the DACs otherwise latency differences between the DACs will cause driver integration issues).
But then what do you do about controlling the volume. Use a multichannel analogue pre amp? That wouldn't go down well either. Not to mention using a DSP based xover means that audiophiles cannot use their precious record players without having to digitise first.
I mean with the current way that audiophile systems are put together DSP based systems do not fit in particularly well. A few have tried and haven't really been so successful.
I mean how many audiophiles would like it if I said I've got this awesome pair of loudspeakers for you but to make them work you're going to have to throw away your current DAC, if you are using an integrated amplifier then you're going to have to throw it away, if you're using a pre amp then you're going to have to throw it away. You are then going to also need to have 6 or 8 channels of identical power amplification. You will also need a digital source.
I don't think that would go down too well. The amplification could be included with the system too, so all you need to have besides my speakers is a digital source...That's not really how the audiophile world works.
Of course they are but they have to fit their designs into the constraints that the audiophile world is unfortunately bound to.
Cheaper systems ironically have more potential to include DSP because class D based ipod dock type things on the rise. Class D chip amps are also being baked into computer speakers and hifi mini systems. Many of these class D amplifiers now come with in built DSPs and cost peanuts.