What are you, MS Office?
Yes, I'm sure, but thanks for checking.
Some of bullets you’ve listed don’t mean anything to me when it comes to upstart companies. Anyway, to be clear and precise; I’ve read in these forums that it was Mr. Murphy who did a lot for Salk. In my book this means that even though your brand is starting anew, you benefit from some accumulated knowledge and experience.
I don’t care if the brand name is new. Upstart for me means new kids on the block doing their own stuff their own way.
That’s’ why, when GrimSurfer said this:
I think he had a point. And when you said this:
I don’t think you had one. I also think you knew this which is why you’ve chosen Salk in your last explanation and not Phil. Also; a number is singular as well as a large number. In fact, no matter how large a number is, it’s still singular so it’s: there is a large number of. Back to the point, perhaps we disagree on what upstart is, that’s fine, but since Grim was differentiating between ML, JBL, B&W, Paradigm because they had expertise, experience and dedication (the last one IS shared IMO),and the upstart companies, it was clear that for him an upstart company is the one without these traits.
So when you try to counter that by naming companies which have expertise, experience and dedication (even if all of those are not within the CEO but perhaps within a consultant),I come and say:
I think this is as contingent as you’ll ever get.
Sure thing, good luck. I wasn’t trying to get in the way. For me his points were clear although I don’t fully agree with him since my affordable LS50's were made possible with a completely unaffordable Blade driver.
I really didn’t get this from his posts. I thought he was saying that if one day you know little or nothing about speakers, you won’t start making excellent stuff tomorrow morning without at least having some blueprints and good parts. There’s no epiphany for XO’s. Big companies have the upper hand with R&D because it is expensive and demanding.
But even this wasn’t his main point. He started with reviews of an 80k speaker being futile for the most part and for most of us. Since this is in many ways obvious, I really think you kind’a “gung hoed” on the guy with very little reason. ML will not make a bad 80k speaker so the review might have consisted of: yes, it’s very good. Audiophile community is small and shrinking and only a small fraction can afford this speaker, but that small fraction is further divided among other good companies that make expensive gear, so saying that the community by large doesn’t profit from these statement pieces is not entirely wrong.