They put a smile on my face every day!
I'm pretty lucky with WAF too. I think she might even like the aesthetic. As long as I keep everything neat and clean (which is a labor of love for me!). The money spent tho... not so much, but I've been good and haven't had the upgrade bug for a while so she's content.
I know there are always posts about the point of diminishing returns on spending for speakers. It really strikes me that there could be a reasonable point for everyone's needs. The old-school pricing for the BMRs is a prime example. A stand-mount that can compete with towers at twice the cost!
Unfortunately, when I look at speaker design in the modern world, the one thing that isn't easily accounted for in a boutique company is the actual cost of the build.
Where Dennis used pre-built cabinets where possible, it became untenable when Dayton discontinued everything in that category. The final cabinet he was using for the BMR was clearly a special build arranged from an overseas supplier. Yet without Dayton's cabs, he lost the ability to do his Philharmonitors in the Mini and New form.
Fast foward to Salk taking on the BMR torch. Yes, the speaker competes against towers costing $3K per pair and more... but his business necessitated a markup that covers his costs: all of them! Router bits and packing tape and saw blades and sandpaper and... oh yeah, that little thing called labor. There were many arguments on that other site about the price that Jim was charging. It was pretty sad.
Companies like Salk, Selah and Ascend blow me away! I would love to see [hear] what companies like SVS and Aperion are doing, too. Somewhere between the two levels there is a balance point that I wish the OEM/mass-market companies would strive for. Sure a more complex crossover costs more money, but imagine what that R&D cost spread over 1000 speakers actually costs, plus the cost of the components.
Dennis just did a new XO for a Monoprice speaker. He posted what the cost would be for them to implement and what it would do for the speaker. Astounding! A 5% markup would cover it and you would have a good speaker become a
GOOD speaker.
Apply that to SVS and what they just did to the Prime series with the Pinnacle. How does that look if they update the Ultra Tower to a 2.0, uses the premium components already in use and makes room placement easier and more effective while improving performance and sound quality? Would that be worth an extra $150 per? Especially if it competes with speakers selling at $1500 or more?
