advertisement


August Hifi News

And Linns top end product was thousands of pounds more than Logitech's entry product. What point were you trying to make?
 
.. You can't argue as serge seemed to be doing that the SBT is cheaper than the Linn/Musical Fidelity stuff because Linn and MF are hifi brands and Logitech is an IT brand. Logitech make a streamer that sells for way over a thousand pounds - comfortably more than some Linn and most MF comparable boxes.
 
To me that's completely immoral. If I wanted the cheapest price, and I usually do, then I wouldn't dream of asking for a demo. Just unacceptable.
Does this explain why you're more interested in objective specifications rather than subjective performance?

;)
 
Does this explain why you're more interested in objective specifications rather than subjective performance?

;)

He understands the relevance of key audio specifications to sound quality, which makes a demo unnecessary in most cases.

The performance of an amplifier or dac can be determined solely by the numbers.
Just circuits in a box which obey known rules.


Logitech make a streamer that sells for way over a thousand pounds - comfortably more than some Linn and most MF comparable boxes.

Been out of production for a while. Poor seller and not very popular so I don't think it broke through the barrier. Superfi ended up flogging them cheap to clear.
Certainly nobody seems to talk about them.
The badge certainly won't have helped it in the audiophile market and it was too expensive for a relatively feature poor unit in the wider market.

Something else to consider is that the Logitech bought Slim, and that Slim were a little more audio focused and that's why you got the Transporter in the first place.
Logitech certainly wouldn't have built it, and you won't see them introduce an audiophile version of the SBT selling for a lot more.
 
I have not followed all this thread but wish to add a couple of points about Hi-Fi retail. No names to protect the guilty.
I have been following the progress of a mate who has just started in a Hi-Fi shop. He is on £4 per hour + commission. It is legal to do this because the pay is automatically bumped up to the National Minimum Wage should the commission not increase the wage packet to that level. Of course, if this happens, the worker is made to feel not too secure in his job!
Customers come in and ask for a demonstration, ask a thousand questions, usually exposing their ignorance of anything more complicated than an electric toothbrush, stay an hour and ask for a discount at the end of the wearying rigmarole. The commission is the only way to bump up the very low wages and if discount is offered, the commission suffers first of course so it is unlikely that will happen.
Of course the sales assistant can see this senario unfolding from the outset but has to see it through, it is the job. No wonder sometimes sales assistants take the p**s and try to add cables, stands, usless accessories etc. They are only human.
Some people have a culture of never paying the marked price. Again, he sees that in them from the outset, he also spots customers with money in their pocket, the need to be advised well and who want to walk out of the shop with something they are happy with, this also happens and keeps him relatively sane.
It has changed my outlook on these guys who must hear "it is cheaper on the internet" and "whats your best price", "can you throw the speakers in for free" many times a day. He has risen to the bait a few times and responded with "try that at Tescos" but recently has gained much satisfaction in turning the situation around and making a sale where all the purchaser wanted to do was make a deal. He keeps his commission, the purchaser wonders what has hit him and the smile is on the face of the tiger as the limerick goes.
Personally, I have found myself tipping more generously, being even more respectful and conversational as a customer and as long as the sales assistant knows his stuff and does not BS me, happy to be a customer.
 
I'd go along with Rob's statement, Logitech aren't a hifi company, Slim devices were on the cusp. But that has nothing to do with the price of the SBT, mass production and volume sales is what controls the cost of the SBT, that the Transporter was more expensive is neither here nor there, neither of the products were sold through hifi retailers and as such broadly outside the scope of most 'retarded' hifi magazines.
 
I'd go along with Rob's statement, Logitech aren't a hifi company, Slim devices were on the cusp. But that has nothing to do with the price of the SBT, mass production and volume sales is what controls the cost of the SBT, that the Transporter was more expensive is neither here nor there, neither of the products were sold through hifi retailers and as such broadly outside the scope of most 'retarded' hifi magazines.

Interesting. So what is a HiFi company? Someone who makes something no better than the non HiFi company but charges the audiophile premium?

S
 
Garrard weren`t a Hi Fi company in the fifties and sixties, most of their output was cheap autochangers - but they also made the 301 / 401....
 
Interesting. So what is a HiFi company? Someone who makes something no better than the non HiFi company but charges the audiophile premium?

S

I would say there are two things that differentiate a hi-fi company from a general audio/AV/gadget/computer company.

The first is the target audience.
Hi-Fi companies will be targeting a small niche, and a very small niche indeed in the case of the more esoteric companies.

The second is product focus.
Products designed for the reproduction of music are the main focus and production. This blurs with the larger Japanese companies in particular but they will often have clear divisions within the company, so for example Sony with the Esprit and ES divisions.

This doesn't mean that a company in the first category cannot produce something truly excellent in terms of audio performance - the SBT is a clear example taking onboard the Slim/Logitech issue above.
The outputs of many PC sound cards are also extremely good and comparable to many audiophile branded dacs. So with performance it usually pays to park any preconceived ideas about these things at the door.

Where is gets interesting is that I think the lines are blurring with each year.
Cambridge Audio are a good example who've built their reputation supplying good audio to audiophiles at low cost, but they've been progressively widening their market with the addition of kit designed to appeal across a much broader market.
Arcam show signs of doing the same with products designed for iPods, iPads, and such like. Of course it permeates up into the 'premium' brands too but you'll see this blurring of the line far more at the budget end of the market.
 
Interesting. So what is a HiFi company? Someone who makes something no better than the non HiFi company but charges the audiophile premium?

S
I think you may have just hit the nail on the head there serge;)

DACs for me are way over priced for what is in the box, these compaies are only taking a stock type of DAC layout say a WM8741 and putting it in a box with a power supply if you are lucky, a wallwart if you are not and charging mega bucks my Young Dac is a prime example of that.
Have a look at this DAC and tell me how much a HIFI company would charge if they made them with a nice dual supply like this one has ?
http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-5...0001&campid=5338728743&icep_item=120870273244
Wait till ASUS start making HIFI products my Xonar HDAV 1.3 sound card has 7 burr brown dacs and this cost 100 quid.
Rant over :D
Alan
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.


advertisement


Back
Top