A wakeup call for audio consumers?

[Swerd]

A recent thread titled “Outlaw Problems?” prompted me to think about the state of things in the audio industry. I don’t have anything to say about the original poster or his complaint about what appears to be Outlaw’s poor customer service. It occurred to me that this problem might be evidence that Outlaw Audio, a small online audio electronics brand, is getting financially squeezed by its larger competitors.

Please note that I am not an industry insider – I’ve always been a consumer. I noticed in the Outlaw Problems thread a comment from M Code, an AH regular. His comment (below) is what prompted me to speak out.

The challenge that Outlaw faces is trying to keep up with the competition in terms of performance, quality, technology… Essentially not having their own factory they depend upon certain ODM factories to build their products, and now especially the later audio/video products are evolving with newer protocols for immersive surround formats, HDMI, HDCP and their primary factory in China is having difficulties keeping up... The bottom line is that Outlaw as an independent audio brand does not generate enough unit sales to cover the significant R&D, tooling/development costs..

I know alot about this situation but I will not expand the discussion knowing the factory well & Outlaw principals I will not throw more fuel on the fire as IMHO... I like/admire Outlaw as a brand and but to succeed in the long term they have a very steep challenge ahead..

I want to defend the smaller and medium sized audio manufacturers against the increasing pressure put on them by the larger members of the audio industry. These large manufacturers take advantage of their deep-pocketed financial size by continually introducing what appear to be new models of AVRs and AV processors. These rapidly appearing new models give new buyers the false impression that any older models are obsolete and undesirable. It also puts the small and medium sized brands under difficult economic pressure. They have enough financing to produce some good but simpler competing products, but they lack the resources to continually develop new products. This becomes especially critical if these new products involve expensive licenses to include Dolby, HDMI, Audyssey, or Atmos software.

We have all noticed the disturbing trend of planned obsolescence in audio video electronics. When I first got back into audio 19 years ago (remember Y2K ?),the state of the art in A/V processing was 5.1-channel AVRs with digital audio processing, bass management, and Dolby Digital and DTS decoding built into the receiver. I soon saw how AVRs continued to quickly become obsolete – too quickly in my opinion. Within a year or two, Dolby Surround II was grandly announced, replacing Dolby Surround. I easily passed on that as version II only slightly improved version I. Neither really mattered with fully digital DVDs. Later came 7 channels, then 9 and more. Again, I ignored that – so did most others who already owned AV systems, because 5 channels is what works in most home systems where there is one row of seating. However, I noticed new comers didn’t understand that. Most seemed to buy into the idea that more channels were better. I doubt if salesmen or online sellers said anything to dispel that idea. Most of them, in my opinion as a consumer, are not worth the added expense.

The trend to more channels continues. Other alterations added to the planned obsolescence trend, especially HDMI cables and its notoriously buggy software that transfers audio and video data digitally instead of the more familiar analog methods done via mainly RCA type cables. Then there was built-in automated room equalization software, such as Audyssey. Now I see we have Dolby Atmos and IMAX enhanced receivers.

The smaller and medium sized makers cannot afford to keep up with these expensive trends. As soon as national economic growth gets slower, these small and medium sized makers suffer. Sales drop and loans come due, causing them to fail. This is definitely what happened to B&K in 2009. It was perhaps the last AV maker located in the USA. Is it now happening to Outlaw?

 

[Kvn_Walker]

It's a great analogy to the smartphone "megapixel war" where consumers thought bigger numbers automatically meant better pictures. It took years to dispel that myth, and now megapixels are barely advertised anymore.

I see 2 conflicting trends: Dolby adding more and more channels, and physical disc sales yielding to streaming media (as evidenced by the decreasing list of Blu Ray player manufacturers). 5.1 is the norm for most streaming; is Atmos going to be available for Netflix/Apple/Amazon/Disney content down the road? What will happen when BR/4K disc sales slide to the point where physical media all but disappears? That could end in a messy convergence.

 

[Kvn_Walker]

Re: Outlaw in particular, their bad attitudes could well be the frustrations of people fighting for their lives, being taken out on a customer. It's never, ever proper to behave that way, but there could be some really tough issues happening behind the scenes on their end.

 

[Swerd]

Re: Outlaw in particular, their bad attitudes could well be the frustrations of people fighting for their lives, being taken out on a customer. It's never, ever proper to behave that way, but there could be some really tough issues happening behind the scenes on their end.

I agree with you. I am certainly not trying to defend Outlaw's behavior toward a customer. But I do want readers to think about larger issues that might be causing severe stress on smaller companies in the AV business.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I definitely don't like channel-number war (up to 13Ch or more now).

I'm glad some giant companies like Yamaha have NOT gone that route. And I hope they never will because I think more Ch is WORSE because it increases complexity and heat in the AVP or AVR, which is BAD.

But I'm sure there are a few people (including Gene) who wouldn't mind 13Ch in the Yamaha.

 

[Hartley]

We have all noticed the disturbing trend of planned obsolescence in audio video electronics. When I first got back into audio 19 years ago

A really good audio system from the year 2000 is most definitely still a contender IMHO. But yes, video is another matter entirely.

It's a great analogy to the smartphone "megapixel war" where consumers thought bigger numbers automatically meant better pictures. It took years to dispel that myth, and now megapixels are barely advertised anymore.

Yes indeed, now if only I could get people to stop sharing & posting 4 MB snapshots....

 

[KEW]

A recent thread titled “Outlaw Problems?” prompted me to think about the state of things in the audio industry. I don’t have anything to say about the original poster or his complaint about what appears to be Outlaw’s poor customer service. It occurred to me that this problem might be evidence that Outlaw Audio, a small online audio electronics brand, is getting financially squeezed by its larger competitors.

Please note that I am not an industry insider – I’ve always been a consumer. I noticed in the Outlaw Problems thread a comment from M Code, an AH regular. His comment (below) is what prompted me to speak out.
I want to defend the smaller and medium sized audio manufacturers against the increasing pressure put on them by the larger members of the audio industry. These large manufacturers take advantage of their deep-pocketed financial size by continually introducing what appear to be new models of AVRs and AV processors. These rapidly appearing new models give new buyers the false impression that any older models are obsolete and undesirable. It also puts the small and medium sized brands under difficult economic pressure. They have enough financing to produce some good but simpler competing products, but they lack the resources to continually develop new products. This becomes especially critical if these new products involve expensive licenses to include Dolby, HDMI, Audyssey, or Atmos software.

We have all noticed the disturbing trend of planned obsolescence in audio video electronics. When I first got back into audio 19 years ago (remember Y2K ?),the state of the art in A/V processing was 5.1-channel AVRs with digital audio processing, bass management, and Dolby Digital and DTS decoding built into the receiver. I soon saw how AVRs continued to quickly become obsolete – too quickly in my opinion. Within a year or two, Dolby Surround II was grandly announced, replacing Dolby Surround. I easily passed on that as version II only slightly improved version I. Neither really mattered with fully digital DVDs. Later came 7 channels, then 9 and more. Again, I ignored that – so did most others who already owned AV systems, because 5 channels is what works in most home systems where there is one row of seating. However, I noticed new comers didn’t understand that. Most seemed to buy into the idea that more channels were better. I doubt if salesmen or online sellers said anything to dispel that idea. Most of them, in my opinion as a consumer, are not worth the added expense.

The trend to more channels continues. Other alterations added to the planned obsolescence trend, especially HDMI cables and its notoriously buggy software that transfers audio and video data digitally instead of the more familiar analog methods done via mainly RCA type cables. Then there was built-in automated room equalization software, such as Audyssey. Now I see we have Dolby Atmos and IMAX enhanced receivers.

The smaller and medium sized makers cannot afford to keep up with these expensive trends. As soon as national economic growth gets slower, these small and medium sized makers suffer. Sales drop and loans come due, causing them to fail. This is definitely what happened to B&K in 2009. It was perhaps the last AV maker located in the USA. Is it now happening to Outlaw?

Well ... yes and no!

Yes, everything you say is true!

No, because all they have to do is drop pre-pro's from their production line to entirely eliminate the problem!

Honestly, I don't understand why Outlaw or Emotiva are still in the pre-pro business. I'm sure there is a worth to having a full array of products for loyal customers, but we have all seen Emotiva take a beating over premature releases of their Pre-pro's. Outlaw has a better track record of proving the product before release (so customers don't feel like Beta testers),but they still are not so mature as simply using the pre-pro section of a Denon AVR- X3500H.
If you say Emotiva or Outlaw, my first thought is amplifiers! I'd guess either of these companies sell several amps for each pre-pro that goes out the door.

I believe ATI dropped out of the pre-pro fray a few years ago and seems like @AcuDefTechGuy said they were re-entering soon? I assume they have decided to release a pre which includes the more enduring popular features, but foregoes the latest "thing" (such as iMax). ATI knows, if you are the guy who places a high value on the latest features, you are not their customer (for a pre)! But, if I am correct in these statements, it is clear that ATI does not see a pre-pro as a necessary product for their survival and (I hope) they are simply picking and choosing to offer one when they see favorable conditions for it!

Most of the experienced people here believe the best value for an AVR or Pre-pro is to buy last years AVR after this years is released, so we recognize that the difference between the features of subsequent years is usually minor (and certainly not worth the $600-900 you save buying the "obsolete" model). There have been only a few features that strike me as significant upgrades over the last many years:
1) the conversion to HDMI - this required no immediacy, but over the following several years it has reached the point where many DVD players only have HDMI output!
2) Atmos - for those who have it, I understand it is significant. I'm not there yet, so it is still not of consequence to me!
3) The D&M Audyssey app - for anyone using Audyssey, the ability to save room correction settings, specify the frequency range over which to apply Audyssey, and convenience to manage it from your tablet are pretty compelling. Yet ... considering D&M is probably the largest of the giants, the app has still shown some of the types of issues we might expect out of an Emotive or Outlaw pre-pro, so there's that!

Much of my point is that not all customers seek the latest feature set. I do believe there is a market for pre-pro's from companies that do not buy into the "annual upgrade game" as long as they can present a "sense of quality" or "simple elegance and durabilty" to offset the "latest feature" aspect (whether the quality is really there is a different issue).

Is Cambridge Audio still in the pre-pro/AVR game? How current do they attempt to be?
How often does Anthem update their models?
I honestly don't know the answer to either of these questions, but they do represent companies that fall between the extremes of the giants and the small Outlaw/Emotiva companies!

Sorry, that is a bit of a ramble and all over the place, but I can kind of sum it up with my earlier question:
"Why are Outlaw and Emotive selling pre-pros?"

Last, I would use the Outlaw stereo receiver as a poster-child for a small company carving out a niche while dodging the upgrade/feature race!

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I think the ONLY reason ATI is “back” in the pre-pro game is because they own both Theta Digital ($20K pre-pro) and DataSat ($10K and $20K pre-pros).

So technically speaking, as a whole company, they never “exited” the pre-pro game. They just left the “affordable” pre-pro game.

And the upcoming ATI ATP-16 pre-pro is supposed to be around $7-$8K, which is still not exactly “affordable” for most people.

The ATI-made Monolith HTP-1 pre-pro is $4K. So I suppose ATI will have a footprint in the “affordable” pre-pro game.

With more affordable high quality pre-pros from Yamaha and Marantz that people could get for under $2K street price, I just don’t see too many people spending more.

 

[Phase 2]

Kew, ADTG nice replys! Your post pretty much sums it up on the Pre-Pro market. Some can't or won't pay 3 to 5 K for a Pre-Pro when say at 1k you can get a AVR with pre-amp outs and use a AVR "like" a Pre-Pro. I use to own many Emotive amps and never had any issues with any of my amps from Emo, plus their CS was always good. Some with this hobby can't afford a 1k AVR or don't want to send that much. I'm also in the camp that speakers are you best value and you get the most for your money when buying the best speakers you can. Putting more of your money on better speakers will give you the best return on your investment.

 

[Swerd]

Thanks to all those who replied.

Some can't or won't pay 3 to 5 K for a Pre-Pro when say at 1k you can get a AVR with pre-amp outs and use a AVR "like" a Pre-Pro.

Agreed. But many of us here at AH are like the choir members who hear the preacher each Sunday. Preaching at them wasn't my intention. My original post may have been too long or complex.

I had intended to say that the planned obsolescence contest among AVR and AVP makers did not happen by accident. The big corporate AV makers realized they could drive out their medium and small sized competition by making the costs of developing new models so great that only the biggest can manage it. It benefits them in the long run more than the customers.

I have often read posts where people complain that the AVR layout of today does not reflect the future. They hope to see the amplifiers of the future leave the black box of the AVR and instead become integral with loudspeakers. They argue that future AV electronics should morph into a more utilitarian AV processor and switch center. I think that may suit consumers, but not the big AV manufacturers.

 

[Trell]

...
I had intended to say that the planned obsolescence contest among AVR and AVP makers did not happen by accident. The big corporate AV makers realized they could drive out their medium and small sized competition by making the costs of developing new models so great that only the biggest can manage it. It benefits them in the long run more than the customers.

That might very well be at least partly true. M-Code has written that in a modern AVR licensing costs are very high and rising, as well as complexities of implementation.

 

[Phase 2]

Thanks to all those who replied.
Agreed. But many of us here at AH are like the choir members who hear the preacher each Sunday. Preaching at them wasn't my intention. My original post may have been too long or complex.

I had intended to say that the planned obsolescence contest among AVR and AVP makers did not happen by accident. The big corporate AV makers realized they could drive out their medium and small sized competition by making the costs of developing new models so great that only the biggest can manage it. It benefits them in the long run more than the customers.

I have often read posts where people complain that the AVR layout of today does not reflect the future. They hope to see the amplifiers of the future leave the black box of the AVR and instead become integral with loudspeakers. They argue that future AV electronics should morph into a more utilitarian AV processor and switch center. I think that may suit consumers, but not the big AV manufacturers.

Swerd, not at all Sir, your post was spot on! It's members like, You PENG, ADTG, KEW, Loveinthehd, M Code, the old timers! on here, that make this Forum a wealth of knowledge and awesome tips not to forget Gene, our leader and his Staff. I'm on the same boat with you guys they way the industry seems to be going with Blu Ray players being undone for streaming-only I feel is a Big mistake. Do I stream music sure I do but when I want to sit and pull out one or two of my Blu Ray movies or music it is my disk for critical listening. Also I feel the movie industry my have at lot to do with the rising cost. It would be a very sad day if or when we find the only way to get enjoyment is by having to pay a monthly fee continuously! That's when I'll step off the boat. Come to think of it, hindsight being 20-20 keeping most of my Vinyl LP's from the 70's 80's is a blessing in disguise.

 

[lovinthehd]

FWIW I think in general consumer electronics issues aren't limited to audio. The boutique audio brands still have a niche, and the big audio brands have delivered largely a competent and affordable product.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

1. The big corporate AV makers realized they could drive out their medium and small sized competition by making the costs of developing new models so great that only the biggest can manage it.

2. I have often read posts where people complain that the AVR layout of today does not reflect the future. They hope to see the amplifiers of the future leave the black box of the AVR and instead become integral with loudspeakers.

1. Survival of the fittest. Way of the world. Are smaller companies (like Outlaw) doing themselves any favors by doing a few customers wrong? And whom benefit most from the giant companies like Yamaha and Denon who continue to offer 50% discounts on previous year models? I think the consumers benefit most. Why buy from smaller companies with inferior services and products?

2. That’s a whole different can of worms that many people will disagree. If amps are “bad” inside AVR, why are they suddenly “good” inside speakers? Why put amps inside anything other than their own chassis? If it’s already bad servicing amps inside a 25 pound AVR, it will be cataclysmic servicing amps inside a 150 pound speaker!

 

[TLS Guy]

The real problem Swerd, is forums like this that promote unsuitable systems for most spaces in homes.

The fundamental problem is home architecture, not electronic technology.

If you are going to want a multi channel cinema experience then you HAVE to create a custom dedicated room in the house for it.

The other issue is speaker quality and speech discrimination. I have said so many times that two good speakers are preferable to 5,7, or 11 lousy ones.

Very few systems posted here can really benefit in any way from multi channel audio, because of the room and how it imposes layout.

So if I were a small manufacturer, I would try and make pre/pros. They would be small, able to be panel mounted, made for longevity from the finest components. They would be two or at the most three channel with bass management. My power amps would be designed to be placed out of sight and forgotten.

I would design elegant unobtrusive furniture to house it.

Speakers would be part of the line up, with concentration on clear but natural speech. Develop a line of elliptical bass drivers, for slim line TL subs, that could be easily hidden behind furniture like couches. Elegance of design all round should be the goal. Those large TV screens need to disappear when not in use. Boxy subs need to go.

We need a totally new approach to AV in the home. Along the above lines it would be possible to install a system that could perform for 30 years plus without fiddling about.

In the UK plenty have held on to their systems from the golden age of British audio, with Quad electronics usually, and speakers from firms like TDL. In sound quality they still best a lot if not most of the systems around today. Because of the design of Quad preamps and tuners etc, these systems are usually highly unobtrusive.

It absolutely astounds me that we have pre/pros, as large as receivers, when with modern technology a good 2.1 or 3.1 could be diminutive and excellent.

We keep travelling along the wrong road, and that will kill high quality AV. Quality and elegance need to be the watch words, and NOT 11 channels.

If things do not change, the only IV around will be watching on an iPad or Smart Phone. This is already the choice of many and rising fast.

 

[Irvrobinson]

The real problem Swerd, is forums like this that promote unsuitable systems for most spaces in homes.

The fundamental problem is home architecture, not electronic technology.

If you are going to want a multi channel cinema experience then you HAVE to create a custom dedicated room in the house for it.

The other issue is speaker quality and speech discrimination. I have said so many times that two good speakers are preferable to 5,7, or 11 lousy ones.

Very few systems posted here can really benefit in any way from multi channel audio, because of the room and how it imposes layout.

So if I were a small manufacturer, I would try and make pre/pros. They would be small, able to be panel mounted, made for longevity from the finest components. They would be two or at the most three channel with bass management. My power amps would be designed to be placed out of sight and forgotten.

I would design elegant unobtrusive furniture to house it.

Speakers would be part of the line up, with concentration on clear but natural speech. Develop a line of elliptical bass drivers, for slim line TL subs, that could be easily hidden behind furniture like couches. Elegance of design all round should be the goal. Those large TV screens need to disappear when not in use. Boxy subs need to go.

We need a totally new approach to AV in the home. Along the above lines it would be possible to install a system that could perform for 30 years plus without fiddling about.

In the UK plenty have held on to their systems from the golden age of British audio, with Quad electronics usually, and speakers from firms like TDL. In sound quality they still best a lot if not most of the systems around today. Because of the design of Quad preamps and tuners etc, these systems are usually highly unobtrusive.

It absolutely astounds me that we have pre/pros, as large as receivers, when with modern technology a good 2.1 or 3.1 could be diminutive and excellent.

We keep travelling along the wrong road, and that will kill high quality AV. Quality and elegance need to be the watch words, and NOT 11 channels.

If things do not change, the only IV around will be watching on an iPad or Smart Phone. This is already the choice of many and rising fast.

There's a lot to agree with here. I would quickly buy a 2.1 pre-pro that switched 4K video. Personally, I wouldn't even use a sub, but I can see where a lot of people would want to. I'll never use more than two channels.

 

[highfigh]

A large part of the problem with the AV industry is their idiotic way of adding useless technologies at an ever-increasing pace. Look at 3d- it lasted for about fifteen minutes and when they realized it wouldn't sell, they jumped right into 4K. 2K lasted for about a half hour, using the same scale. Now, they have added Atmos of various levels and at 13 amplifier channels, it's a nightmare to install in a retrofit. In a new build, remodel or if the homeowner is willing to pay, it can be done but for many, the only choice is to add speakers that amount to scabs on the walls and ceiling. Reliability and complexity of setup makes it less likely that a novice will ever get to the point where they know how to operate the system without a lot of fumbling around and when Alexa or Google Home are added, they need to learn a new way of speaking because those are successful about 75% of the time, so the command needs to be repeated. I don't understand why so many people are expecting a $49 trinket to control a $15, 000 system. Adding lights, locks, cameras, thermostats, etc just makes it more complex.

Then, there's the network issue. WiFi is advertised as the way to go for all of this stuff and it's clearly not. Wires are for performance, Wireless is for convenience.

Companies will go under and it will be due to licensing fees and scale of economy- they can't compete with the large companies, yet I expect a few to hang in a bit too long.

 

[highfigh]

There's a lot to agree with here. I would quickly buy a 2.1 pre-pro that switched 4K video. Personally, I wouldn't even use a sub, but I can see where a lot of people would want to. I'll never use more than two channels.

I completely agree, with the addition of, as I have written before, making the video section modular so it needs power, ground and control wiring but the rest is done inside of the removable module. That way, if it goes bad or needs to be updated, it's just a matter of buying a new video module, like replacing a video card in a computer. At this point, you might as well buy an AVR if you want video- the HDMI processing/switching isn't done on a small sub-panel inside, it's a major PCB that takes up a lot of space and it doesn't cost much more to include more amplifier channels when it's done on that scale.

 

[M Code]

Interesting comments..
However...
IMHO the real situation is that video & cinema content drive the market.. Just think back for all of the upgrades for video content today, while audio has kinda taken a 2nd priority. Yes more channels have been added, to add more realism to the action. But then again sitting down & enjoying a great stereo, music recording can provide excellent satisfaction/relaxation...

Just my $0.02...

 

[Irvrobinson]

I completely agree, with the addition of, as I have written before, making the video section modular so it needs power, ground and control wiring but the rest is done inside of the removable module. That way, if it goes bad or needs to be updated, it's just a matter of buying a new video module, like replacing a video card in a computer. At this point, you might as well buy an AVR if you want video- the HDMI processing/switching isn't done on a small sub-panel inside, it's a major PCB that takes up a lot of space and it doesn't cost much more to include more amplifier channels when it's done on that scale.

The challenge is that the PC market is a tough economic act to follow. Intel created the PC market as we think of it now, by driving the creation of the PCI and PCIe specifications, which included form factor specifications for the cards, including connectors, design rules, power specs, etc. And at their peak, PC sales were well over 300 million units per year, and they're still in the ~280M range. It doesn't seem like there's an Intel-equivalent company in the AV industry to virtually force standards on the rest of the industry.