A quicky from NPR on us.

jinjuku

jinjuku

Moderator
Interesting talk on the $$ size of the market. Budget electronics have quickly closed the gap and I believe will continue to erode the high $$ markets.

Sad but I believe ultimately true.
 
ski2xblack

ski2xblack

Audioholic Samurai
the comment thread was pretty funny...

...until they deleted the snarky posts.
 
I

InTheIndustry

Senior Audioholic
Interesting talk on the $$ size of the market. Budget electronics have quickly closed the gap and I believe will continue to erode the high $$ markets.

Sad but I believe ultimately true.
What's exciting is that more purpose driven, problem solving audio products are still being manufactured and are worth the investment, while the point of entrance into the hobby to get a great system has been lowered.

The down side is that because of globalized manufacturing and the internet there is a lot of crap, misinformation/overinformation, and a lot of choices out there that can be daunting to try and tackle affectively. It's a yin & yang. The chances of someone getting something great are good... but so are the chances of getting something complicated and over promised-underdelivered.
 
Pyrrho

Pyrrho

Audioholic Ninja
Interesting talk on the $$ size of the market. Budget electronics have quickly closed the gap and I believe will continue to erode the high $$ markets.

Sad but I believe ultimately true.
I don't think it is completely sad. Some low end products of today sound quite a bit better than low end gear of the past, particularly when one figures in how much inflation there has been. In the early 1970's, one could buy a new Porsche for $4k. Now it costs over 10 times that much. There has been a general trend in lesser quality of construction for gear (I really like units like that Pioneer in the picture at the top of the article), but it is a mistake to confuse quality of construction with actual sound quality. There is a cheap Sony HD radio that sells for about $100, which supposedly gives great analog FM reception and sound as well, housed in a cheap black plastic box. Supposedly, it preforms at near state of the art for FM reception, and when one thinks about what good tuners used to cost, and adds in inflation, that is really an incredible thing. Of course, the cheap Sony does not look as pretty on one's shelf, but does one want to look at a tuner, or listen to it? And how much do you really want to pay for something to look better?

A quick search turned up the tuner:

http://theaudiocritic.com/plog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=35

http://ham-radio.com/k6sti/xdr-f1hd.htm

I have been tempted to buy one, and would, except that I don't listen to the radio much at home, and already have an excellent tuner in my Pioneer SX-1250 (though if the reviews of the Sony are right, the Sony would be a better tuner, though not as attractive). If the reviews of that Sony are correct, pretty much everyone who makes a more expensive tuner is screwing their customers and not giving them value for their money. Sony ought to put that tuner into their higher end receivers, to give them an advantage over other receivers made these days, as most are pretty sad when it comes to FM performance, which is obviously a choice made by manufacturers, as great FM performance is now clearly possible to do at a decent price.

I think that it is very good that some cheap gear performs as well as it does, as it brings the possibility of good sound to more people. Of course, if one wants great sound, it still will cost for the speakers, but even there I think that, generally speaking, the newer ones are better at the same price points, especially after one factors in inflation.
 
davidtwotrees

davidtwotrees

Audioholic General
I think NPR is a national treasure. That was a great article, and just a snapshot of what NPR is about. They nailed it.
 
V

valvesnvinylfan

Audioholic
Fun read and great article, thanks for sharing.
 
digicidal

digicidal

Full Audioholic
In the early 1970's, one could buy a new Porsche for $4k. Now it costs over 10 times that much.
Please point me to the source you have that is selling new Porsches for $40K and I will be your friend for life! :D

Other than that understatement... I agree with your points for the most part - although part of what allows for newer technologies to be priced at levels far below older technologies at their point of release is simple manufacturing economics. At some point simple demand-based pricing is overcome by manufacturing improvements. Those tuners from the 70's and 80's were produced using (at the time) state-of-the-art tooling and fabrication... not to mention that the component cost on the boards themselves was much higher. Now with so many different forms of CE devices, computer systems, and IC's in everything from a toaster to hand tools - creating almost any electronic device can cost much, much less.

And anything created via automated assembly is (for the most part) able to be performed on equipment that has been paid for long ago and is therefore nearly a zero-cost to the company producing it.

However, I whole-heartedly agree that there are some really unbelieveable deals available in the low-end and midfi market currently. I'm not sure how long that will last, but we can enjoy it while it's here. :)
 
Pyrrho

Pyrrho

Audioholic Ninja
Please point me to the source you have that is selling new Porsches for $40K and I will be your friend for life! :D
...
You should reread what you quoted; here it is again, with the word you seemed to not notice emphasized:

In the early 1970's, one could buy a new Porsche for $4k. Now it costs over 10 times that much.
That word "over" means that you can't get a new Porsche for $40k; it will cost you more.

I am old enough to remember how expensive gear was in the 1970's. It cost a lot of money for a good stereo (in terms of hours of work; inflation must be remembered or the retail prices of the gear will give one a very false impression; hence, the Porsche example), and now one can get a good stereo for far less. And if one factors in used gear, it is really incredible now compared with what one got back then. If I could have gotten the deals I have seen recently when I was a kid, I would have had a vastly better stereo than I had back then (even at the same dollar amount; if one also factored in inflation, I would have had an amazingly better stereo, for the same or less money).

Frankly, I get the impression that more people are interested in good sound than used to be the case, probably because it is not so prohibitively expensive anymore. Of course, there are still few people who are going to get something great, but that still costs a lot of money, though better gear is possible now than then.
 
digicidal

digicidal

Full Audioholic
That word "over" means that you can't get a new Porsche for $40k; it will cost you more.

I am old enough to remember how expensive gear was in the 1970's.
Yes and by the same token I could simply say: You can buy a 90ft yacht for "over" $40K as well - since the statement would be true, however laughable it might be. I would reply in like manner to you and ask that you re-read my comment (which wasn't my point and was just for comedic value): That word "understatement" means that although techincally correct to say that $80-90K is more than 10X $4K... that the difference is more significant than what was implied. :rolleyes:

I too am old enough to remember how expensive gear was in the 1970's... since I had to save up until the 1980's to be able to afford any of it (well at least the higher end stuff). However, the point I was trying to make is that I disagree with the current trends indicating an increase in the number of people interested in achieving truly great sound. It's simply a by-product of advancing technologies and declining production costs due to refining and reusing of existing manufacturing processes. There is also the issue of a significant increase in the amount of disposable income available to the middle class during the past decade (something that may well be coming to an end now with the death of the "my-home-is-an-ATM" phenomenon).

There are only two principal ways for a company to be successful in sales: sell a small amount of something at a very high margin, or sell a very large amount of something at a much smaller margin. If Scott, Teac, Pioneer, etc.. could have produced 10 million ultra high quality receivers and had a distribution network to sell them in 1970... then they could have sold each one at only $30-40 over their cost to manufacture each and been wildly successful. However, since there weren't huge electronics stores everywhere, and no ID sales options (not to mention the components used were in more limited supply, and the products much more costly to manufacture) they instead had to sell a few thousand units per year and therefore had to increase their prices much more. And, of course, reduce features and performance in order to hit even slightly more reasonable price targets.

What I was agreeing with you completely about was the fact that it is much, much easier for someone who is interested in good sound to be able to purchase equipment at virtually any price-level today, and this was not the case in the 70's and 80's.

However, by the very same token and further indicating the divergence between the two sales directions mentioned above - there were no more than a couple companies selling amps costing $10K+, or speakers costing $50K+, etc... while today there are literally dozens of companies that sell nothing but products at these levels. And many others that sell products in both (KEF, B&W, Focal, Canton, Bryston, etc...).

The takeaway is that the economic changes that occurred in the 90's not only created a massive consumer base that has at least a few thousand to spend on home entertainment (low-enders like me) but also for there to be enough deep pockets with nothing better to spend a few HUNDRED thousand on than home entertainment as well (high-enders nothing like me). :D
 
Last edited:
Pyrrho

Pyrrho

Audioholic Ninja
Yes and by the same token I could simply say: You can buy a 90ft yacht for "over" $40K as well - since the statement would be true, however laughable it might be. I would reply in like manner to you and ask that you re-read my comment (which wasn't my point and was just for comedic value): That word "understatement" means that although techincally correct to say that $80-90K is more than 10X $4K... that the difference is more significant than what was implied. :rolleyes:
...
Porsches currently start at $48,100. See:

http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/boxster/boxster/

So the figure you are giving is way off the mark for a bottom of the line model (the $4k in the early 1970's would have gotten a bottom of the line model, though a different and, in my opinion, inferior model to what is offered today).


Edited to add:

If one includes the non-traditional types of Porsches, they start at $47,700:

http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/cayenne/cayenne/

But I normally only think of their sports cars, and not these other things that I would never want.
 
Last edited:
digicidal

digicidal

Full Audioholic
But I normally only think of their sports cars, and not these other things that I would never want.
OK - I stand corrected and obviously shouldn't have bothered with the (obviously not very humorous after all) aside. I also don't think of anything but their sports cars, and admit perhaps a 1970 914 is actually a pretty good direct comparison to the current boxter... i.e. they both are toilet-fodder as far as I'm concerned. Although I almost bought a Cayman as a weekend car, I thankfully came to my senses and returned to just saving up for a 'real' Porsche a year or two further down the road.

Care to comment on any of the on-topic information in either of my posts? I would be much more interested if you feel similarly (or contrarily) to the market economics vs. mass popularity argument than the Porsche-pricing one.
 
its phillip

its phillip

Audioholic Ninja
Nothing wrong with a boxter or cayman (i'd much rather have the cayman, even though it's just a boxter with a roof).
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top