Aperion VGTs are in the running, and I read great things about the upcoming Sierra towers, too. There was a thread in avsforums where some WI-based folks held a speaker shootout, and had HT2TLs and Verus Grand bookshelves, and Sierra 1s, too, all crossed over to a sub at 80hZ. But they experienced a room anomaly adversely affecting the mids on the Verus speaks which lead them to setup a new shootout in a better room. Doesn't seem they got around to it yet.
My first job out of college back in the Reagan days was as a full commission salesman (with a monthly draw) for Circuit City (things changed for the worst for them later). We could buy things at CC's cost, and I doubt much has changed over the years, but my Acoustic Research AR91 towers listed for $429 each, last floor model pair sold for $299 each, but employee cost for new was $103 each. (Digression: those AR91s were driven all those years by a 1982 Yamaha 80wpc integrated amp (A-760II) which still works today)
Does anyone else think corporations producing speakers with more resources, with similar, and perhaps even more talent, with more patents and labs and other resources, with economies of scale hopefully on their side, should be able to best out smaller "boutique" shops in many of their speaker lines (but certainly not every single model in every line)?
Aesthetics aside for now, just based on pure aural pleasure? I mean if small shop #1 can sell a finely crafted product for $1800, how can we relatively compare that value with a much larger corporation's particular product's price? It's all subjective. Clearly every single speaker reviewer always, or almost without fail, mentions a relative value, compared to more (sometimes far more) expensive models, for the speaker being reviewed. Odd isn't it? They seldom do this as religiously for receivers and similar ilk -- here, they'll often refer to the receiver's price/value being at or near the top of its class, or par for the course, or that you can get more features for similar money with other brands, for example. If every speaker reviewed always is better than some far more expensive, it really only encourages one to buy it based on value not aural delight. Even I got caught up by those kinds of reviews, hence my Axiom M22s purchase.
So if the list price to cost ratio is similar today as it was in the early 80s (for at least one fairly well known speaker maker), retailer cost of a larger-corporation-manufactured speaker can be 25% of suggested list. Anyone think it's much higher today? For speaks around $1k a pair? $2K a pair? $4K a pair?
How about a ratio for a smaller company, such as a Salk or Ascend or Aperion? If their speakers were to be retailed, not sold ID, would the ratio be much higher than 25%? Maybe as high as 65%?
If I can buy Aperion VGTs or Songtowers for $1800+, does this mean I'd best be comparing these to retail speakers listing well over $2500 (maybe even as high as $3375 for a retail pair, even after a 25% discount)?
Not every really good speaker can be worth far more than its price! And nobody wants to pay $3000 when they could have found an equivalent for $2000 or $1500 or even $1000, including me!
