advertisement


The best audio system on earth?

Filian said:
It's clearer and clearer that a big part of audio naysaying has more to do with price envy than how close the stuff gets to sounding musical.
Click to expand...

Not really. It has more to with the large price tags and romantic stories attached to equipment that offers no audible advantage over cheaper equipment.

cb01 said:
I find it odd to pick on Borreson because they are a fully vertically integrated company for every single product they make. From a metal foundry that they partially own to making their own circuit boards (and partnering with a few silicon OEMs), winding their own voicecoils, desiging and making their own complex honeycomb cone structures (a mix of CF & Titanium in some models), fully bespoke constrained layer CF cabinets (including some forged-CF, IIRC), they are now branching into additive manufacturing, etc.

Are they good value for money? I think it's safe to say they aren't for most of what they make. Are they doing SpaceX levels of design and manufacturing (including hiring former SpaceX engineers, IIRC)? That is an empirical "yes".

I'm no in the market for a Bugatti Chiron or a Murray T50. Doesn't mean I have to dump on them.
Click to expand...

Most of the negative comments have been aimed at the associated gear that had eye watering prices for what should be thought of as solved, legacy technology.

It still baffles me that any seasoned audiophile does not recognise that speakers, speaker-room-interaction and source material are (by a magnitude) the most significant areas for music reproduction.
 
cb01 said:
Okay, so the word 'empowered' bothers you? What synonym doesn't offend? Let me know and I'll use that.

So far you're attempting to convince me that you simultaneously do not need to speak to every individual (because: nebulous 'market forces' reasons) to concretely know the reasons why they bought a luxury good, and then also that this person has, in some way, been represented with accuracy by other nebulous survey responses/group research/etc?

The Swiss watch industry created the quartz crisis and then returned to the roots of craftsmanship, good design, and mechanical performance. The rescue happened when Rolex was still selling a Sub for $1700. Long before the luxury shift that has been seen lately (with much price inflation being due to naked inflation in addition to market demand.

You are imputing person-specific motivations without person-specific data. I'm asking if/why this does not trouble you.
Click to expand...
Statistics are about populations, not individuals. Who knew etc.

I’ve never claimed to know exactly why every individual makes the individual purchase choices they do. But (good) marketing professionals can make a pretty good stab at understanding how the pool of potential purchasers behaves as a group and what makes them more or less likely to buy through standard quant/behavioural etc research.

Oh, and ‘returned to the roots of’ etc is only part of the story. What also happened is that the Swiss watch industry discovered the power of branding. And they didn’t interview every watch wearer in the world to work it out.
 
Iain Docherty said:
Statistics are about populations, not individuals. Who knew etc.

I’ve never claimed to know exactly why every individual makes the individual purchase choices they do. But (good) marketing professionals can make a pretty good stab at understanding how the pool of potential purchasers behaves as a group and what makes them more or less likely to buy through standard quant/behavioural etc research.

Oh, and ‘returned to the roots of’ etc is only part of the story. What also happened is that the Swiss watch industry discovered the power of branding. And they didn’t interview every watch wearer in the world to work it out.
Click to expand...
But you're making statements about individuals.
 
cb01 said:
I understand what you're saying. I'm actually imminently qualified to speak on consumer data; I work daily in large datasets for buyers and sellers, at one of the largest tech companies in the world. I'm immersed in it, every day.

Data must be correctly interpreted. SO often, it's not. Which is why most market predictions fail.

Understanding market drivers via a forensic, post-mortem analysis is different than attempting to impute motivations to buyer actions or trends in real time.
Click to expand...
You’re not making a lot of sense here. What does ‘imminently qualified’? ‘Post Mortem analysis’ mean?

Successful companies use a combination of 1st & 3rd party data to formulate marketing plans, predict future trends. Media & marketing agencies are also very good at it. Luxury brands know who their affiliates are, if someone buys product X they are more likely to buy product Y etc. They don’t need to know everything about every customer.

I don’t really see anything controversial or offensive about what has been said.
 
Woodface said:
You’re not making a lot of sense here. What does ‘imminently qualified’? ‘Post Mortem analysis’ mean?

Successful companies use a combination of 1st & 3rd party data to formulate marketing plans, predict future trends. Media & marketing agencies are also very good at it. Luxury brands know who their affiliates are, if someone buys product X they are more likely to buy product Y etc. They don’t need to know everything about every customer.

I don’t really see anything controversial or offensive about what has been said.
Click to expand...
I'm making perfect sense. You should probably use Google for those terms.

I'm not going to put my CV on here. I'm qualified to speak on global consumer and seller/merchant data trends because I do it for my VP on a daily and weekly basis. My company collects primarily internal data because we have found that so much if the external data (especially that from marketing firms) has been inaccurate or incomplete, with a few rare exceptions.

Again, you're talking about probabilities. In a thread that is well-populated with posters who are judging the <individual purchase decisions> of certain luxury items...and then imputing motive to those notional individuals. Oligarch-Fi, we'll call it.

While still emotionally uninvolved, I remain baffled that these two issues keep getting conflated.
Woodface said:
He isn’t though. You are making that interpretation.
Click to expand...
I'm not interpreting anything. I'm understanding what Ian is attempting to do rhetorically, and rejecting it as nonsensical.
 
Iain Docherty said:
No, I am commenting about the probabilities that help me understand why individuals do what they do.
Click to expand...
Probabilities and likelihoods. That <IS> statistics.

But that's a data-driven discussion about how far from random chance our predictive power can be made to perform.

There is never a substitute for the ultimate in granularity (call it customer obsession); just ask them. My entire point is that rather than judging people who purchase luxury items that may not make sense to any of us....and rather than ridicule those decisions....based upon group data and categorical assumptions about drivers/motivations/other factors....maybe we just SHOULDN'T JUDGE these people at all, prior to engaging them personally.

None of us are required to postulate an opinion about other individuals. It seems like the worst case of 'judging a book by the cover' that I have yet seen. It seems my call for embracing nuance and complexity here is being lost...
 
Blackmetalboon said:
Not really. It has more to with the large price tags and romantic stories attached to equipment that offers no audible advantage over cheaper equipment.
Click to expand...
Explain how that works in the world in general without resorting to an obviously narrow single opinion. I'd like to know how and where I can get top-level sound for a pittance. Brands and models, please.
 
cb01 said:
You're getting silly. SO now you don't really have ANY advice to give? Nothing that could even remotely steer a decision? Odd....you seemed so confident upthread. Now, we are "strongly suspecting" and "I'd have to try them" and everybody has a different opinion?

You obviously are very ignorant about Borreson (I own none of their things and have no desire to change this in the future, btw). They are contemplating using additive manufacturing to make voicecoil assemblies, complex rear back chambers for tweeter and midrange drivers (that cannot be machined by CNC), the usage of Ti + forged carbon fiber, etc.

This is all public domain information, too. You don't have to have an opinion on everything.
Click to expand...
Look, Borresen is charging 100 k for a two way stand mount loudspeaker. None of the technical sophistication matters here, it is pure marketing speak.
 
Iain Docherty said:
No, I am commenting about the probabilities that help me understand why individuals do what they do.
Click to expand...
Excellent. Next, I look forward, again, to your listing the "immediately obvious" excesses in high end audio, as you originally put it. You can itemize actual gear or you can cite general principles of electroacoustics.
 
cb01 said:
I'm making perfect sense. You should probably use Google for those terms.

I'm not going to put my CV on here. I'm qualified to speak on global consumer and seller/merchant data trends because I do it for my VP on a daily and weekly basis. My company collects primarily internal data because we have found that so much if the external data (especially that from marketing firms) has been inaccurate or incomplete, with a few rare exceptions.

Again, you're talking about probabilities. In a thread that is well-populated with posters who are judging the <individual purchase decisions> of certain luxury items...and then imputing motive to those notional individuals. Oligarch-Fi, we'll call it.

While still emotionally uninvolved, I remain baffled that these two issues keep getting conflated.

I'm not interpreting anything. I'm understanding what Ian is attempting to do rhetorically, and rejecting it as nonsensical.
Click to expand...
I think you should use a dictionary.

I can only assume you mixed up imminent with eminent but it’s me who is confused by your towering intellect.

I give up.
 
Blackmetalboon said:
Most of the negative comments have been aimed at the associated gear that had eye watering prices for what should be thought of as solved, legacy technology.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. As an example I’d cite MBL as an exception to the rule as there is some genuinely interesting and innovative technology there. I’m not saying it’s for me, and I still think it is unnecessarily expensive, but I recognise it as something very different both in design concept and the sound it presents. It is not just sticking a copy of a pair of McIntosh MC40s or NS1000s in a massive shiny CNC-machined alloy box, slapping bright blue LEDs all over the place and charging the price of a house for it. Sadly too much is to my eyes. I want to see real innovation and lateral thought. The best of that brings new things to the majority.
 
Filian said:
Explain how that works in the world in general without resorting to an obviously narrow single opinion. I'd like to know how and where I can get top-level sound for a pittance. Brands and models, please.
Click to expand...

As you so kindly quoted my post I am sure you noticed my use of the word “cheaper“ used in a thread about a system that used a $350K server/DAC/PSU. Take your pick on where you can get “top-level-sound for a pittance”.

All three of those items are now mature technology, available for significantly less. If you are unaware of this I would suggest you got out and listen and compare more equipment.

I have access to a digital front end that, while expensive, cost 1/10th of the Wadax. I do not use it all as my main source as UI, reliability, speed and functions have improved over the years. Technology has trickled down and I get the same audio performance using equipment that cost a fraction of the price.

Make no mistake, I have no delusions about where the major BOM costs of my equipment are.
 
Tony L said:
It is not just sticking a copy of a pair of McIntosh MC40s or NS1000s in a massive shiny CNC-machined alloy box, slapping bright blue LEDs all over the place and charging the price of a house for it. Sadly too much is to my eyes. I want to see real innovation and lateral thought. The best of that brings new things to the majority.
Click to expand...
I'm sure a £1000 Montblanc ball point pen is nicer to use than a Bic Biro but it's the Biro that's celebrated at the Design Museum for it's innovation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top