|
High-End Values |
|
Commentary |
|
Constantine Soo |
|
25 September 2002 |
The
High-End audio industry
is resplendent with
value-oriented products
as well as
cost-no-object,
performance-oriented
ones. In the course of
reviewing, rather than
criticizing the
shortcomings of the
lesser products and
giving lavish praises to
the superior products, I
try to maintain a
balanced perspective of
the values of the
High-End. If an
expensive piece of
equipment did not
perform to my
satisfaction, I would
share my thoughts with
my readers as to what
the root cause is, so we
can all weigh my methods
and procedures. I am
doubly alarmed when a
product does perform
spectacularly, and
usually go to
extraordinary length in
my report, detailing the
conditions under which I
reached my conclusions.
Come to think of it, I
am in debt to my very
supportive publisher and
his very capable,
exacting, persistent and
tireless editor, who
work laboriously to keep
my writing sprees under
control.
Recently, a sentiment
was raised on Decware's
web-based Forum towards
my 15 March 2002 review
of the $499 SE84C Zen
Triode Amplifier, which
opined that more
expensive SET amplifiers
were "rip-offs." That
was not the first time
similar sentiments had
surfaced.
Although opinion
expressed on Decware's
Forum is undoubtedly a
form of peer support
among users of the same
product, "rip-off" can
be a strong term and can
mean different things to
different listeners. To
me, a product is a
"rip-off" when someone
copies, repackages and
re-labels an outstanding
original product, then
adds a price tag several
times the MSRP as set by
the original
manufacturer. Quite
differently, overpricing
describes the situation
in which a
manufacturer's sense of
the market and
competition is blinded
by visions of profit.
In a strict and fair
sense, in order for the
Zen amp to be able to
render more expensive
products as overpriced,
or even "rip-offs," it
has to possess identical
qualities. While I
considered the SE84C an
exceptional product and
encouraged readers to
audition it in their own
systems, I also noted in
my review that its
characteristics might
not meet everyone's
needs and preferences. I
never considered the Zen
amplifier as
indisputably superior,
and I doubt that view
would generate
disagreement from any
readers. Nevertheless, I
did consider the spirit
with which the SE84C is
designed as admirable
and express the wish
that more products be
made with the same
diligence. The fact that
Steve Deckert was able
to come up with a sound
design using inexpensive
parts and then priced it
accordingly should be a
cause for celebration
and purchase but nothing
else.
Personally, although I
believe it is a
legitimate curiosity to
want to understand the
justification for more
expensive products, and
that advanced designs
are prone to examination
and study by
competitions, I don't
believe high-end
products in general are
"rip-off's." Instead of
stereotyping
premium-priced products
as "rip-offs",
audiophiles should
recognize excellence of
products from both
sub-$1,000 and
beyond-$10,000
categories. If, in any
instance, a product
possesses property of
such value that one is
willing to pay more to
receive a unique
satisfaction not
attainable from more
affordable units, be it
of sonic or other
criteria, then the unit
is a qualified success.
In my personal
experience so far, under
equalized listening
conditions,
higher-priced premium
products from
well-established makers
still offer higher
fidelity than their
contemporary, more
affordable products. For
example, the $6,000
Audio Note M3
preamplifier is more
complete in its sonic
presentation to me than
the built-in digital
pre-amplification stage
of the $8,950 Wadia 27
Decoding Computer. The
$4,000 8 Wpc Audio Note
Quest 300B monoblocks
are more detailed than
the 15x more powerful
$3,450 Music Reference
RM9 II when mated to
compatible speakers like
my Genesis VI. Among CD
transports via the
coaxial digital outputs,
my $4,995 CEC TL1
belt-drive transport
still carries a higher
level of fidelity than
the transport section of
my $3,450 Sony SCD-777ES
SACD player. Among D/A
converters, the Wadia 27
is more detailed than
the less expensive,
$4,995 Sonic Frontiers
SFD-2 of the same era
that I once had. In
retrospect, despite the
6-year-old $14,000 CEC/Wadia
combo's many
incomparable qualities,
the $8,100 47 Laboratory
4713 Flatfish CD
Transport and 4705
Progression DAC digital
system that I
reviewed in May 2002
surpassed the CEC/Wadia
in data retrieval
finesse.
Readers may notice
another aspect of my
personal experience, one
in which performance of
the latest gear usually
surpasses that of
earlier generation.
Technological
advancement being a
predominant factor,
newer and better parts
play a crucial role as
they are capable of
working within more
exacting, sophisticated
and stringent
specifications as
demanded and expected by
the designer.
I am sure many of us can
relate to my findings
and opinion on the
Decware Zen amp. The
point is that each of us
has his own high-end
values and then votes
with his spending
accordingly. If within
one's economic concept a
$6,000 preamplifier is
justified as superior to
a $4,000 unit, for
however minute
improvements it offers,
then it has found a
market among the
audiophiles among us.
Yet, some of us may not
want to spend more than
$1,000 on a preamplifier
regardless of spending
ability, as well as the
product's worthiness.
Likewise, though you may
be a billionaire, if you
consider a $85,000
speaker system as
ridiculously priced,
despite its superior
sonics, when compared to
a slightly
lesser-sounding system
at a substantially more
accessible $9,500, then
may the superior system
find a customer
elsewhere.
To the manufacturers:
our supply and demand
driven system expects a
product to speak volumes
for its manufacturer who
prices it
astronomically, because
such pricing not only
reflects its creator's
confidence in the
ingenuity and
superiority of his
product, it also puts
the survival of the
product line in the
trust of a minority.
While we have no doubt
our economy will recover
to a prosperity even
more magnificent than
its predecessor, it is
doubtful if some of the
more expensive members
of the current High-End
industries will survive
to see the sun again.
The prudent approach,
therefore, may be to
repackage their own
premium products in a
scaled-down model and
price it accordingly for
the sake of revenue
generation. A good
success story is
Loudspeaker manufacturer
B&W, who is extracting
technologies from its
flagship Nautilus
product line and
incorporating them into
less ambitious speakers
at significant savings.
Not doing that would be
poor business planning.
With only the rarest of
exceptions, no
luxury-item manufacturer
can expect to maintain
longevity creating
strictly expensive
products. Think about
Genesis.
Unfortunately, efforts
from the few SET
amplifier manufacturers
in making excellent but
ultra-expensive SET
amplifiers hardly
represent a serious
marketing initiative
aimed at making the
amplifier a more adopted
preference among
audiophiles in the
foreseeable future.
Neither are some
companies at the other
end of the spectrum
helping the situation,
in their venture of
making super-cheap
SET's. In some cases,
such discrepancies in
pricing and quality are
telling audiophiles that
either you pay premium
to get the best, or pay
much less just to get
by, thus forfeiting your
right to complain.
Whether you are
financially well-endowed
or stricken, regardless
of whether you have a
PhD or a high-school
diploma, whether you're
a brother or a mother,
you're staying alive and
music belongs to you as
well as to all of
humankind. Perhaps it is
this fundamentalism in
our lives that fuels
many music-loving
audiophiles'
condemnation of fine,
expensive and
unreachable audio
equipment. At the same
time, we are searching
for the next "best-buy,"
let's remind ourselves
that whether we like it
or not, in a universe of
limited resources, there
will always be a price
on objects rare and in
demand, be it of natural
origin or of human
manufacture. And the
sole society and system
that withstood the test
of history and politics
in the distribution and
management of such
objects is the one we
are living in.
|