Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Boon[_2_] Boon[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,425
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

There's a lot of buzz in the audio community about this "modernized"
version of the Dynaco A-25 loudspeaker from Annandale Acoustics. I
know a couple of people who have ordered a pair, and Jeff Dorgay
reviewed a pair and found them to be similar in balance to the Harbeth
Compact 7, saying that they had a "pretty warm sound overall, pleasing
but definitely on the lush side."

The problem with these speakers (other than the fact that they're not
much to look at) is the price. A pair of new A-25s once cost $79, but
these are $2500 a pair! Even taking inflation into account, these
should be well under $1000. But, as the advertisments say, these
speakers will take you places the originals couldn't.

http://annandaleacoustics.com/

I'm still pretty curious. I heard a pair of restored originals about
two years ago, and they weren't half bad even by today's standards.
  #2   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Bret L Bret L is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,145
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 21, 5:53*pm, Boon wrote:
There's a lot of buzz in the audio community about this "modernized"
version of the Dynaco A-25 loudspeaker from Annandale Acoustics. I
know a couple of people who have ordered a pair, and Jeff Dorgay
reviewed a pair and found them to be similar in balance to the Harbeth
Compact 7, saying that they had a "pretty warm sound overall, pleasing
but definitely on the lush side."

The problem with these speakers (other than the fact that they're not
much to look at) is the price. A pair of new A-25s once cost $79, but
these are $2500 a pair! Even taking inflation into account, these
should be well under $1000. But, as the advertisments say, these
speakers will take you places the originals couldn't.

http://annandaleacoustics.com/

I'm still pretty curious. I heard a pair of restored originals about
two years ago, and they weren't half bad even by today's standards.


There are a lot of gullibards and trendies out there, and this might
be trendy a while.

Are they better than the originals? I hope so because the originals
were what they were, an inexpensive box speaker.

They were competitive with the "Boston Blando" Acoustic Research
speakers, which with an AR table and a Dyna ST70 and PAS combination,
the canonical college dorm system for moderately affluent college
students in the 1963ish micro era. Times changed rapidly then and what
was au courant in '61 was hopelessly quaint by '64, which in turn by
'67 was hopelessly outmoded. That combination was a lot better than
the suitcase record players college students had in those days, but it
was not what we would call high end audio today.

Unfortunately, the A-25 came out quite a bit later-roughly 1970, by
which time only a few backward people still used tube amps in new
installs, and when the price of high power solid state amps started to
come down bigtime. But most people weren't buying separate amps, but
rather receivers, a trend solidified by the Japanese products pouring
in at that time. Most of them were harsh sounding and the A-25 helped
cover that up somewhat.

The A-25 is eclipsed handily by the MTM designs with smaller woofers
that have replaced the ten inch two way and many are available at a
much lower price.
  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Boon[_2_] Boon[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,425
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 21, 6:28�pm, Bret L wrote:
On Apr 21, 5:53�pm, Boon wrote:





There's a lot of buzz in the audio community about this "modernized"
version of the Dynaco A-25 loudspeaker from Annandale Acoustics. I
know a couple of people who have ordered a pair, and Jeff Dorgay
reviewed a pair and found them to be similar in balance to the Harbeth
Compact 7, saying that they had a "pretty warm sound overall, pleasing
but definitely on the lush side."


The problem with these speakers (other than the fact that they're not
much to look at) is the price. A pair of new A-25s once cost $79, but
these are $2500 a pair! Even taking inflation into account, these
should be well under $1000. But, as the advertisments say, these
speakers will take you places the originals couldn't.


http://annandaleacoustics.com/


I'm still pretty curious. I heard a pair of restored originals about
two years ago, and they weren't half bad even by today's standards.


�There are a lot of gullibards and trendies out there, and this might
be trendy a while.

�Are they better than the originals? I hope so because the originals
were what they were, an inexpensive box speaker.

�They were competitive with the "Boston Blando" Acoustic Research
speakers, which with an AR table and a Dyna ST70 and PAS combination,
the canonical college dorm system for moderately affluent college
students in the 1963ish micro era. Times changed rapidly then and what
was au courant in '61 was hopelessly quaint by '64, which in turn by
'67 was hopelessly outmoded. That combination was a lot better than
the suitcase record players college students had in those days, but it
was not what we would call high end audio today.

Unfortunately, the A-25 came out quite a bit later-roughly 1970, by
which time only a few backward people still used tube amps in new
installs, and when the price of high power solid state amps started to
come down bigtime. But most people weren't buying separate amps, but
rather receivers, a trend solidified by the Japanese products pouring
in at that time. Most of them were harsh sounding and the A-25 helped
cover that up somewhat.

�The A-25 is eclipsed handily by the MTM designs with smaller woofers
that have replaced the ten inch two way and many are available at a
much lower price.


The nice thing about A-25s is that they're one of the few vintage
speakers that didn't use foam surrounds, so you didn't have to worry
about buying a refoam kit when you happened upon a nice used pair. On
the other hand, I don't trust a 10-inch woofer in a conventional two-
way design...the crossover tends to be less than seamless.
  #4   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Bret L Bret L is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,145
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 21, 6:32*pm, Boon wrote:
On Apr 21, 6:28 pm, Bret L wrote:



On Apr 21, 5:53 pm, Boon wrote:


There's a lot of buzz in the audio community about this "modernized"
version of the Dynaco A-25 loudspeaker from Annandale Acoustics. I
know a couple of people who have ordered a pair, and Jeff Dorgay
reviewed a pair and found them to be similar in balance to the Harbeth
Compact 7, saying that they had a "pretty warm sound overall, pleasing
but definitely on the lush side."


The problem with these speakers (other than the fact that they're not
much to look at) is the price. A pair of new A-25s once cost $79, but
these are $2500 a pair! Even taking inflation into account, these
should be well under $1000. But, as the advertisments say, these
speakers will take you places the originals couldn't.


http://annandaleacoustics.com/


I'm still pretty curious. I heard a pair of restored originals about
two years ago, and they weren't half bad even by today's standards.


There are a lot of gullibards and trendies out there, and this might
be trendy a while.


Are they better than the originals? I hope so because the originals
were what they were, an inexpensive box speaker.


They were competitive with the "Boston Blando" Acoustic Research
speakers, which with an AR table and a Dyna ST70 and PAS combination,
the canonical college dorm system for moderately affluent college
students in the 1963ish micro era. Times changed rapidly then and what
was au courant in '61 was hopelessly quaint by '64, which in turn by
'67 was hopelessly outmoded. That combination was a lot better than
the suitcase record players college students had in those days, but it
was not what we would call high end audio today.


Unfortunately, the A-25 came out quite a bit later-roughly 1970, by
which time only a few backward people still used tube amps in new
installs, and when the price of high power solid state amps started to
come down bigtime. But most people weren't buying separate amps, but
rather receivers, a trend solidified by the Japanese products pouring
in at that time. Most of them were harsh sounding and the A-25 helped
cover that up somewhat.


The A-25 is eclipsed handily by the MTM designs with smaller woofers
that have replaced the ten inch two way and many are available at a
much lower price.


The nice thing about A-25s is that they're one of the few vintage
speakers that didn't use foam surrounds, so you didn't have to worry
about buying a refoam kit when you happened upon a nice used pair. On
the other hand, I don't trust a 10-inch woofer in a conventional two-
way design...the crossover tends to be less than seamless.


Refoaming isn't that big a deal, but I tend to prefer speakers that
don't use foam. Tannoy DCs, Altec 604s, JBL and Altec woofers in
cabinets with gain.
  #5   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Boon[_2_] Boon[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,425
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 21, 6:34�pm, Bret L wrote:
On Apr 21, 6:32�pm, Boon wrote:





On Apr 21, 6:28 pm, Bret L wrote:


On Apr 21, 5:53 pm, Boon wrote:


There's a lot of buzz in the audio community about this "modernized"
version of the Dynaco A-25 loudspeaker from Annandale Acoustics. I
know a couple of people who have ordered a pair, and Jeff Dorgay
reviewed a pair and found them to be similar in balance to the Harbeth
Compact 7, saying that they had a "pretty warm sound overall, pleasing
but definitely on the lush side."


The problem with these speakers (other than the fact that they're not
much to look at) is the price. A pair of new A-25s once cost $79, but
these are $2500 a pair! Even taking inflation into account, these
should be well under $1000. But, as the advertisments say, these
speakers will take you places the originals couldn't.


http://annandaleacoustics.com/


I'm still pretty curious. I heard a pair of restored originals about
two years ago, and they weren't half bad even by today's standards.


There are a lot of gullibards and trendies out there, and this might
be trendy a while.


Are they better than the originals? I hope so because the originals
were what they were, an inexpensive box speaker.


They were competitive with the "Boston Blando" Acoustic Research
speakers, which with an AR table and a Dyna ST70 and PAS combination,
the canonical college dorm system for moderately affluent college
students in the 1963ish micro era. Times changed rapidly then and what
was au courant in '61 was hopelessly quaint by '64, which in turn by
'67 was hopelessly outmoded. That combination was a lot better than
the suitcase record players college students had in those days, but it
was not what we would call high end audio today.


Unfortunately, the A-25 came out quite a bit later-roughly 1970, by
which time only a few backward people still used tube amps in new
installs, and when the price of high power solid state amps started to
come down bigtime. But most people weren't buying separate amps, but
rather receivers, a trend solidified by the Japanese products pouring
in at that time. Most of them were harsh sounding and the A-25 helped
cover that up somewhat.


The A-25 is eclipsed handily by the MTM designs with smaller woofers
that have replaced the ten inch two way and many are available at a
much lower price.


The nice thing about A-25s is that they're one of the few vintage
speakers that didn't use foam surrounds, so you didn't have to worry
about buying a refoam kit when you happened upon a nice used pair. On
the other hand, I don't trust a 10-inch woofer in a conventional two-
way design...the crossover tends to be less than seamless.


�Refoaming isn't that big a deal, but I tend to prefer speakers that
don't use foam. Tannoy DCs, Altec 604s, JBL and Altec woofers in
cabinets with gain.


Altec 604s and 608s are in vogue in Japan right now. I've heard these:

http://www2.117.ne.jp/~y-s/YS-605P-new-eng.html

They're based on 605s. I really enjoyed these a lot...powerful, smooth
and warm.


  #6   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
John Stone John Stone is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 117
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On 4/21/10 5:53 PM, in article
, "Boon"
wrote:

There's a lot of buzz in the audio community about this "modernized"
version of the Dynaco A-25 loudspeaker from Annandale Acoustics. I
know a couple of people who have ordered a pair, and Jeff Dorgay
reviewed a pair and found them to be similar in balance to the Harbeth
Compact 7, saying that they had a "pretty warm sound overall, pleasing
but definitely on the lush side."

The problem with these speakers (other than the fact that they're not
much to look at) is the price. A pair of new A-25s once cost $79, but
these are $2500 a pair! Even taking inflation into account, these
should be well under $1000. But, as the advertisments say, these
speakers will take you places the originals couldn't.

http://annandaleacoustics.com/

I'm still pretty curious. I heard a pair of restored originals about
two years ago, and they weren't half bad even by today's standards.


Correction: the original A25 was $79 ea., not $79/pr. Over 1 million
original A25's were made: cabinets in Denmark, drivers in Norway, assembled
in both places depending on demand.

The cabinet on this new speaker is much fancier and more costly, being made
of baltic birch ply and hand assembled in small quantities. The originals
were mass produced from veneered chipboard. The drivers are similar to the
originals but much improved. But the biggest difference is the crossover.
The original A25 consisted of a single capacitor and resistive attenuator on
the tweeter, with the woofer connected directly to the input terminals. The
Annendale has a full blown crossover network like you would find in any
modern speaker. The crossover design was done by a very well known and
respected engineer in the industry.

Yes, the price is high, but it's hard to compare this system with the
original given the very changed nature of the marketplace. The original A25
was designed to be mass produced at minimal cost. Today that business is all
in China. But the Annandale product is still using expensive European
drivers and US produced cabinets, purchased in very small quantities, and
assembled here. They spend over $200 in driver costs alone, considerably
more than the retail price of a completed pair of speakers in 1970.

I don't know if a rehashed A25 is a good idea given that it will always be a
low volume niche product which will, by necessity, have to be sold for a
very high price. Time will tell.


  #7   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Boon[_2_] Boon[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,425
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 21, 9:40�pm, John Stone wrote:
On 4/21/10 5:53 PM, in article
, "Boon"





wrote:
There's a lot of buzz in the audio community about this "modernized"
version of the Dynaco A-25 loudspeaker from Annandale Acoustics. I
know a couple of people who have ordered a pair, and Jeff Dorgay
reviewed a pair and found them to be similar in balance to the Harbeth
Compact 7, saying that they had a "pretty warm sound overall, pleasing
but definitely on the lush side."


The problem with these speakers (other than the fact that they're not
much to look at) is the price. A pair of new A-25s once cost $79, but
these are $2500 a pair! Even taking inflation into account, these
should be well under $1000. But, as the advertisments say, these
speakers will take you places the originals couldn't.


http://annandaleacoustics.com/


I'm still pretty curious. I heard a pair of restored originals about
two years ago, and they weren't half bad even by today's standards.


Correction: the original A25 was $79 ea., not $79/pr. Over 1 million
original A25's were made: cabinets in Denmark, drivers in Norway, assembled
in both places depending on demand.

The cabinet on this new speaker is much fancier and more costly, being made
of baltic birch ply and hand assembled in small quantities. The originals
were mass produced from veneered chipboard. �The drivers are similar to the
originals but much improved. �But the biggest difference is the crossover.
The original A25 consisted of a single capacitor and resistive attenuator on
the tweeter, with the woofer connected directly to the input terminals. The
Annendale has a full blown crossover network like you would find in any
modern speaker. The crossover design was done by a very well known and
respected engineer in the industry.

Yes, the price is high, but it's hard to compare this system with the
original given the very changed nature of the marketplace. The original A25
was designed to be mass produced at minimal cost. Today that business is all
in China. But the Annandale product is still using expensive European
drivers and US produced cabinets, purchased in very small quantities, and
assembled here. They spend �over $200 in driver costs alone, considerably
more than the retail price of a completed pair of speakers in 1970.

I don't know if a rehashed A25 is a good idea given that it will always be a
low volume niche product which will, by necessity, have to be sold for a
very high price. Time will tell.


Thanks for the info.

By the way, I've never been nuts about that layered ply look favored
by some Scandinavian companies (such as Penaudio). The pictures of the
Annandale speaker are not that flattering, either.

Still, it's a very interesting speaker and I'd like to hear it. I'm
intrigued by the comparisons to Harbeth.
  #8   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Bret L Bret L is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,145
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.


Yes, the price is high, but it's hard to compare this system with the
original given the very changed nature of the marketplace. The original A25
was designed to be mass produced at minimal cost. Today that business is all
in China. But the Annandale product is still using expensive European
drivers and US produced cabinets, purchased in very small quantities, and
assembled here. They spend *over $200 in driver costs alone, considerably
more than the retail price of a completed pair of speakers in 1970.

I don't know if a rehashed A25 is a good idea given that it will always be a
low volume niche product which will, by necessity, have to be sold for a
very high price. Time will tell.


Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.

Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.

  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Boon[_2_] Boon[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,425
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 22, 4:01�pm, Bret L wrote:
Yes, the price is high, but it's hard to compare this system with the
original given the very changed nature of the marketplace. The original A25
was designed to be mass produced at minimal cost. Today that business is all
in China. But the Annandale product is still using expensive European
drivers and US produced cabinets, purchased in very small quantities, and
assembled here. They spend �over $200 in driver costs alone, considerably
more than the retail price of a completed pair of speakers in 1970.


I don't know if a rehashed A25 is a good idea given that it will always be a
low volume niche product which will, by necessity, have to be sold for a
very high price. Time will tell.


�Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.

�Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.

Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.
  #10   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Bret L Bret L is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,145
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 22, 4:52*pm, Boon wrote:
On Apr 22, 4:01 pm, Bret L wrote:







Yes, the price is high, but it's hard to compare this system with the
original given the very changed nature of the marketplace. The original A25
was designed to be mass produced at minimal cost. Today that business is all
in China. But the Annandale product is still using expensive European
drivers and US produced cabinets, purchased in very small quantities, and
assembled here. They spend over $200 in driver costs alone, considerably
more than the retail price of a completed pair of speakers in 1970.


I don't know if a rehashed A25 is a good idea given that it will always be a
low volume niche product which will, by necessity, have to be sold for a
very high price. Time will tell.


Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


The poor ratio of build cost to sale price is why most high end
products today are not very good. And, most of them are NOT very good.
Higher volume would help, but the addiction of audiophools to insanely
priced advertising media and the products advertised therein is a big
one too.

Most high end products today are minimally engineered in fact.
Cookbook design is the rule.


  #11   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Boon[_2_] Boon[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,425
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 22, 5:44�pm, Bret L wrote:
On Apr 22, 4:52�pm, Boon wrote:





On Apr 22, 4:01 pm, Bret L wrote:


Yes, the price is high, but it's hard to compare this system with the
original given the very changed nature of the marketplace. The original A25
was designed to be mass produced at minimal cost. Today that business is all
in China. But the Annandale product is still using expensive European
drivers and US produced cabinets, purchased in very small quantities, and
assembled here. They spend over $200 in driver costs alone, considerably
more than the retail price of a completed pair of speakers in 1970.


I don't know if a rehashed A25 is a good idea given that it will always be a
low volume niche product which will, by necessity, have to be sold for a
very high price. Time will tell.


Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


�The poor ratio of build cost to sale price is why most high end
products today are not very good. And, most of them are NOT very good.
Higher volume would help, but the addiction of audiophools to insanely
priced advertising media and the products advertised therein is a big
one too.

�Most high end products today are minimally engineered in fact.
Cookbook design is the rule.


Maybe so, but no one's getting rich in high-end audio these days,
except maybe Dave Wilson.
  #12   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
John Stone John Stone is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 117
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.


On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"
wrote:

�Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.

�Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.

Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"
wrote:

On Apr 22, 4:01�pm, Bret L wrote:


�Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.

�Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.

Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


Obviously he doesn't have a clue. He thinks Dick Pierce or Joe d'Appolito
will do crossover consulting work for $500. You can multiply that figure by
8-10X. He also leaves out the costs of crossovers, input terminals, wire,
fasteners, variovents, damping material, grille, documentation. Then there's
the little matter of shipping cartons and packing material. And never mind
the labor involved in assembly and testing. Given the cabinet design,
overall BOM costs on these has to be over $600, so I don't see these as
overpriced in the context of BOM cost to MSRP ratio. The simple question-to
be answered by the customer- is whether or not the design choices are
desirable at that price.

  #13   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 278
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 23, 6:21*am, John Stone wrote:

Obviously he doesn't have a clue. He thinks Dick Pierce or Joe d'Appolito
will do crossover consulting work for $500. You can multiply that figure by
8-10X. He also leaves out the costs of crossovers, input terminals, wire,
fasteners, variovents, damping material, grille, documentation. Then there's
the little matter of shipping cartons and packing material. And never mind
the labor involved in assembly and testing. Given the cabinet design,
overall BOM costs on these has to be over $600, so I don't see these as
overpriced in the context of BOM cost to MSRP ratio. The simple question-to
be answered by the customer- is whether or not the design choices are
desirable at that price.


DO NOT argue with Bratzi. Someone more powerful than God is on his
side: der Fuhrer.
  #15   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Boon[_2_] Boon[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,425
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 23, 6:21*am, John Stone wrote:
On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"





wrote:

Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"





wrote:
On Apr 22, 4:01 pm, Bret L wrote:
Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


Obviously he doesn't have a clue. He thinks Dick Pierce or Joe d'Appolito
will do crossover consulting work for $500. You can multiply that figure by
8-10X. He also leaves out the costs of crossovers, input terminals, wire,
fasteners, variovents, damping material, grille, documentation. Then there's
the little matter of shipping cartons and packing material. And never mind
the labor involved in assembly and testing. Given the cabinet design,
overall BOM costs on these has to be over $600, so I don't see these as
overpriced in the context of BOM cost to MSRP ratio. The simple question-to
be answered by the customer- is whether or not the design choices are
desirable at that price.


When I worked for TONEAudio, I learned just how much packing materials
really cost. Even the simplest cardboard boxes and styrofoam inserts
for a pair of floorstanding speakers could cost $100 to $200. I'm
amazed at companies such as Aperion Audio who offer affordable gear
and free shipping while still double-boxing each speaker and placing
it in its own purple velvet bag. Get a big high-end speaker that's
over 150 pounds, then you're talking professional packing crates and
shipping that cost the better part of a grand.

You even have to hire a guy called a packaging engineer to design the
right shipping materials for your product. That's a handsome chunk of
change as well. We dealt with one guy who manufactured a four-tower
machined aluminum speaker system for $110,000. He actually delivered
the system himself anywhere in the US...he said it was cheaper that
way.

Bratzi also seems to be stuck on the cost of the drivers, when any
speaker designer will tell you that the cabinet is the most expensive
part of a speaker. If you're going to charge a lot for a speaker, it
had better look gorgeous, and that takes the skills of a master
carpenter. Those guys aren't working for minimum wage, either.


  #16   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Bret L Bret L is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,145
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 23, 9:00*am, John Stone wrote:
On 4/23/10 6:35 AM, in article
, "Shhhh!
I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

On Apr 23, 6:21*am, John Stone wrote:


Obviously he doesn't have a clue. He thinks Dick Pierce or Joe d'Appolito
will do crossover consulting work for $500. You can multiply that figure by
8-10X. He also leaves out the costs of crossovers, input terminals, wire,
fasteners, variovents, damping material, grille, documentation. Then there's
the little matter of shipping cartons and packing material. And never mind
the labor involved in assembly and testing. Given the cabinet design,
overall BOM costs on these has to be over $600, so I don't see these as
overpriced in the context of BOM cost to MSRP ratio. The simple question-to
be answered by the customer- is whether or not the design choices are
desirable at that price.


DO NOT argue with Bratzi. Someone more powerful than God is on his
side: der Fuhrer.


I guess that would explain why his cost analysis closely tracks with that of
a '39 Volkswagen.


The VW was designed under fiat (as opposed to FIAT, that would have
been Mussolini) from the German government and Party and was indeed
not purely market driven. It was overengineered in many ways which
made it possible to nearly double the engine displacement and triple
the horsepower of the engine over its manufacturing life which was
over 60 years. It was built out of top quality materials and was
designed for a longer economic life than the market would have
demanded. In that respect it was like a Western Electric phone.

If you have ever driven a DAF Daffodil, a Citroen Dyane or a DKW you
will understand the genius of Ferdinand Porsche, as well as an inkling
that Hitler might have been a terrible man but even the terrible have
their good points. With the Volkswagen, Hitler genuinely wanted to
benefit the German people.
  #17   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 278
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 23, 10:11*am, Boon wrote:
On Apr 23, 6:21*am, John Stone wrote:





On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"


wrote:


Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"


wrote:
On Apr 22, 4:01 pm, Bret L wrote:
Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


Obviously he doesn't have a clue. He thinks Dick Pierce or Joe d'Appolito
will do crossover consulting work for $500. You can multiply that figure by
8-10X. He also leaves out the costs of crossovers, input terminals, wire,
fasteners, variovents, damping material, grille, documentation. Then there's
the little matter of shipping cartons and packing material. And never mind
the labor involved in assembly and testing. Given the cabinet design,
overall BOM costs on these has to be over $600, so I don't see these as
overpriced in the context of BOM cost to MSRP ratio. The simple question-to
be answered by the customer- is whether or not the design choices are
desirable at that price.


When I worked for TONEAudio, I learned just how much packing materials
really cost. Even the simplest cardboard boxes and styrofoam inserts
for a pair of floorstanding speakers could cost $100 to $200. I'm
amazed at companies such as Aperion Audio who offer affordable gear
and free shipping while still double-boxing each speaker and placing
it in its own purple velvet bag. Get a big high-end speaker that's
over 150 pounds, then you're talking professional packing crates and
shipping that cost the better part of a grand.

You even have to hire a guy called a packaging engineer to design the
right shipping materials for your product. That's a handsome chunk of
change as well. We dealt with one guy who manufactured a four-tower
machined aluminum speaker system for $110,000. He actually delivered
the system himself anywhere in the US...he said it was cheaper that
way.

Bratzi also seems to be stuck on the cost of the drivers, when any
speaker designer will tell you that the cabinet is the most expensive
part of a speaker. If you're going to charge a lot for a speaker, it
had better look gorgeous, and that takes the skills of a master
carpenter. Those guys aren't working for minimum wage, either.


((Anybody should be able to get excellent sound by spending lots of
money. The trick is getting excellent sound, like I do, using speakers
that are discarded by the thrift shops I frequent. There's one just
around the corner from my trailer park where I've scored some nice
Soundesign 10" woofers and one of the tweeters still worked too. I got
another tweeter from a 6X9 car speaker and it slipped right in. I had
to recone one of the woofers - anybody who knows anything about
stereos can recone speakers- with some newpaper I dunked in water and
made into a kind of paper nache. Talk about damping! The set cost me
less than eight dollars and you'd be hard-pressed to tell them apart
from Wilson speakers in a blind test. Shhhh!.))
  #18   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Bret L Bret L is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,145
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 23, 10:11*am, Boon wrote:
On Apr 23, 6:21*am, John Stone wrote:



On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"


wrote:


Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"


wrote:
On Apr 22, 4:01 pm, Bret L wrote:
Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


Obviously he doesn't have a clue. He thinks Dick Pierce or Joe d'Appolito
will do crossover consulting work for $500. You can multiply that figure by
8-10X. He also leaves out the costs of crossovers, input terminals, wire,
fasteners, variovents, damping material, grille, documentation. Then there's
the little matter of shipping cartons and packing material. And never mind
the labor involved in assembly and testing. Given the cabinet design,
overall BOM costs on these has to be over $600, so I don't see these as
overpriced in the context of BOM cost to MSRP ratio. The simple question-to
be answered by the customer- is whether or not the design choices are
desirable at that price.


When I worked for TONEAudio,




"Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion

From: Boon
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:15:16 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Wed, Apr 14 2010 10:15 am
Subject: The Dismantling of GeoSynch
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | View thread | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Let's take a careful look at what GeoSynch is repeating over and over
about me:

"Marc Phillips, aka Vinyl Anachronist formerly of TONE Audio [sic],
argues with himself
(again): "

There's no such thing as TONE Audio. I've never worked for TONE Audio.
"

Bratzi also seems to be stuck on the cost of the drivers, when any
speaker designer will tell you that the cabinet is the most expensive
part of a speaker. If you're going to charge a lot for a speaker, it
had better look gorgeous, and that takes the skills of a master
carpenter. Those guys aren't working for minimum wage, either.


No, it takes a journeyman cabinetmaker and a journeyman finisher. When
we actually manufactured stuff this was no problem: these guys made
fifteen or twenty bucks an hour and you probably had an hour total in
a set of cabs in production.
  #19   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Boon[_2_] Boon[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,425
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 23, 12:04*pm, Bret L wrote:
On Apr 23, 10:11*am, Boon wrote:





On Apr 23, 6:21*am, John Stone wrote:


On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"


wrote:


Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"


wrote:
On Apr 22, 4:01 pm, Bret L wrote:
Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


Obviously he doesn't have a clue. He thinks Dick Pierce or Joe d'Appolito
will do crossover consulting work for $500. You can multiply that figure by
8-10X. He also leaves out the costs of crossovers, input terminals, wire,
fasteners, variovents, damping material, grille, documentation. Then there's
the little matter of shipping cartons and packing material. And never mind
the labor involved in assembly and testing. Given the cabinet design,
overall BOM costs on these has to be over $600, so I don't see these as
overpriced in the context of BOM cost to MSRP ratio. The simple question-to
be answered by the customer- is whether or not the design choices are
desirable at that price.


When I worked for TONEAudio,
"Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion


From: Boon
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:15:16 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Wed, Apr 14 2010 10:15 am
Subject: The Dismantling of GeoSynch
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | View thread | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Let's take a careful look at what GeoSynch is repeating over and over
about me:

"Marc Phillips, aka Vinyl Anachronist formerly of TONE Audio [sic],
argues with himself
(again): "

There's no such thing as TONE Audio. I've never worked for TONE Audio.


So you can't tell the difference between TONE Audio and TONEAudio?
Search engines can.

"

Bratzi also seems to be stuck on the cost of the drivers, when any
speaker designer will tell you that the cabinet is the most expensive
part of a speaker. If you're going to charge a lot for a speaker, it
had better look gorgeous, and that takes the skills of a master
carpenter. Those guys aren't working for minimum wage, either.


No, it takes a journeyman cabinetmaker and a journeyman finisher. When
we actually manufactured stuff this was no problem: these guys made
fifteen or twenty bucks an hour and you probably had an hour total in
a set of cabs in production.


That's an incredible generalization. What you're describing is mass
production, not the high end.

  #20   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Boon[_2_] Boon[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,425
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 23, 12:01*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Apr 23, 10:11*am, Boon wrote:





On Apr 23, 6:21*am, John Stone wrote:


On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"


wrote:


Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"


wrote:
On Apr 22, 4:01 pm, Bret L wrote:
Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


Obviously he doesn't have a clue. He thinks Dick Pierce or Joe d'Appolito
will do crossover consulting work for $500. You can multiply that figure by
8-10X. He also leaves out the costs of crossovers, input terminals, wire,
fasteners, variovents, damping material, grille, documentation. Then there's
the little matter of shipping cartons and packing material. And never mind
the labor involved in assembly and testing. Given the cabinet design,
overall BOM costs on these has to be over $600, so I don't see these as
overpriced in the context of BOM cost to MSRP ratio. The simple question-to
be answered by the customer- is whether or not the design choices are
desirable at that price.


When I worked for TONEAudio, I learned just how much packing materials
really cost. Even the simplest cardboard boxes and styrofoam inserts
for a pair of floorstanding speakers could cost $100 to $200. I'm
amazed at companies such as Aperion Audio who offer affordable gear
and free shipping while still double-boxing each speaker and placing
it in its own purple velvet bag. Get a big high-end speaker that's
over 150 pounds, then you're talking professional packing crates and
shipping that cost the better part of a grand.


You even have to hire a guy called a packaging engineer to design the
right shipping materials for your product. That's a handsome chunk of
change as well. We dealt with one guy who manufactured a four-tower
machined aluminum speaker system for $110,000. He actually delivered
the system himself anywhere in the US...he said it was cheaper that
way.


Bratzi also seems to be stuck on the cost of the drivers, when any
speaker designer will tell you that the cabinet is the most expensive
part of a speaker. If you're going to charge a lot for a speaker, it
had better look gorgeous, and that takes the skills of a master
carpenter. Those guys aren't working for minimum wage, either.


((Anybody should be able to get excellent sound by spending lots of
money. The trick is getting excellent sound, like I do, using speakers
that are discarded by the thrift shops I frequent. There's one just
around the corner from my trailer park where I've scored some nice
Soundesign 10" woofers and one of the tweeters still worked too. I got
another tweeter from a 6X9 car speaker and it slipped right in. I had
to recone one of the woofers - anybody who knows anything about
stereos can recone speakers- with some newpaper I dunked in water and
made into a kind of paper nache. Talk about damping! The set cost me
less than eight dollars and you'd be hard-pressed to tell them apart
from Wilson speakers in a blind test. Shhhh!.))


((What the twiode ****s won't tell you is that papier mache only works
well if you use newspaper clippings from August 5, 1962, the day MM
died. Even the Nazis had their good points, which doesn't mean that I
condone the use of shredded copies of Mein Kampf for surrounds, but I
have to admit it makes better sound than I hear in most audio saloons.
Boon.))


  #21   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 278
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 23, 1:29*pm, Boon wrote:
On Apr 23, 12:04*pm, Bret L wrote:





On Apr 23, 10:11*am, Boon wrote:


On Apr 23, 6:21*am, John Stone wrote:


On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"


wrote:


Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"


wrote:
On Apr 22, 4:01 pm, Bret L wrote:
Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


Obviously he doesn't have a clue. He thinks Dick Pierce or Joe d'Appolito
will do crossover consulting work for $500. You can multiply that figure by
8-10X. He also leaves out the costs of crossovers, input terminals, wire,
fasteners, variovents, damping material, grille, documentation. Then there's
the little matter of shipping cartons and packing material. And never mind
the labor involved in assembly and testing. Given the cabinet design,
overall BOM costs on these has to be over $600, so I don't see these as
overpriced in the context of BOM cost to MSRP ratio. The simple question-to
be answered by the customer- is whether or not the design choices are
desirable at that price.


When I worked for TONEAudio,
"Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion


From: Boon
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:15:16 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Wed, Apr 14 2010 10:15 am
Subject: The Dismantling of GeoSynch
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | View thread | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Let's take a careful look at what GeoSynch is repeating over and over
about me:


"Marc Phillips, aka Vinyl Anachronist formerly of TONE Audio [sic],
argues with himself
(again): "


There's no such thing as TONE Audio. I've never worked for TONE Audio.


So you can't tell the difference between TONE Audio and TONEAudio?
Search engines can.

"


Bratzi also seems to be stuck on the cost of the drivers, when any
speaker designer will tell you that the cabinet is the most expensive
part of a speaker. If you're going to charge a lot for a speaker, it
had better look gorgeous, and that takes the skills of a master
carpenter. Those guys aren't working for minimum wage, either.


No, it takes a journeyman cabinetmaker and a journeyman finisher. When
we actually manufactured stuff this was no problem: these guys made
fifteen or twenty bucks an hour and you probably had an hour total in
a set of cabs in production.


That's an incredible generalization. What you're describing is mass
production, not the high end.


((I say again: Soundesign rocks and is the best speaker ever. Shhhh!))
  #22   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Boon[_2_] Boon[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,425
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 23, 3:13*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Apr 23, 1:29*pm, Boon wrote:





On Apr 23, 12:04*pm, Bret L wrote:


On Apr 23, 10:11*am, Boon wrote:


On Apr 23, 6:21*am, John Stone wrote:


On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"


wrote:


Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


On 4/22/10 4:52 PM, in article
, "Boon"


wrote:
On Apr 22, 4:01 pm, Bret L wrote:
Low volume usually means a onesy twoesy man shop with no ISO-9000, no
product liability (not a big factor with speakers usually, though ones
with active power supplies could catch fire and of course Maggies
could fall over and hit someone if they fell apart), engineering costs
a one time consulting fee (i.e. they paid $500 for a Dick Pierce or
Joe d'Appolito half day consultation), etc. They are probably
manufacturing out of a back lot space in a "business incubator" or in
a defunct strip mall- or a suburban garage.


Anyway, $200 in parts plus a cab means if you are paying two thousand
plus you are getting screwed. In my opinion.


One of the marketing formulas in audio is "times ten." Parts are
usually around 10% of the MSRP. That certainly doesn't mean your
margins are 90%, or even 50%. R&D, labor, advertising, shipping and
other fixed costs take a big chunk out of the pie.


Have you ever run your own business? Generally, businesses need to
make a profit, you know.


Obviously he doesn't have a clue. He thinks Dick Pierce or Joe d'Appolito
will do crossover consulting work for $500. You can multiply that figure by
8-10X. He also leaves out the costs of crossovers, input terminals, wire,
fasteners, variovents, damping material, grille, documentation. Then there's
the little matter of shipping cartons and packing material. And never mind
the labor involved in assembly and testing. Given the cabinet design,
overall BOM costs on these has to be over $600, so I don't see these as
overpriced in the context of BOM cost to MSRP ratio. The simple question-to
be answered by the customer- is whether or not the design choices are
desirable at that price.


When I worked for TONEAudio,
"Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion


From: Boon
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:15:16 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Wed, Apr 14 2010 10:15 am
Subject: The Dismantling of GeoSynch
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | View thread | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Let's take a careful look at what GeoSynch is repeating over and over
about me:


"Marc Phillips, aka Vinyl Anachronist formerly of TONE Audio [sic],
argues with himself
(again): "


There's no such thing as TONE Audio. I've never worked for TONE Audio..


So you can't tell the difference between TONE Audio and TONEAudio?
Search engines can.


"


Bratzi also seems to be stuck on the cost of the drivers, when any
speaker designer will tell you that the cabinet is the most expensive
part of a speaker. If you're going to charge a lot for a speaker, it
had better look gorgeous, and that takes the skills of a master
carpenter. Those guys aren't working for minimum wage, either.


No, it takes a journeyman cabinetmaker and a journeyman finisher. When
we actually manufactured stuff this was no problem: these guys made
fifteen or twenty bucks an hour and you probably had an hour total in
a set of cabs in production.


That's an incredible generalization. What you're describing is mass
production, not the high end.


((I say again: Soundesign rocks and is the best speaker ever. Shhhh!))


((You're an idiot. Sailer once wrote an illuminating piece on
Soundesign where it was discovered that some of the black employees
actually logged onto the $LPC website. Boon.))

  #23   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.opinion
Boon[_2_] Boon[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,425
Default A speaker to drive Bratzi crazy.

On Apr 23, 9:00*am, John Stone wrote:
On 4/23/10 6:35 AM, in article
, "Shhhh!
I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

On Apr 23, 6:21*am, John Stone wrote:


Obviously he doesn't have a clue. He thinks Dick Pierce or Joe d'Appolito
will do crossover consulting work for $500. You can multiply that figure by
8-10X. He also leaves out the costs of crossovers, input terminals, wire,
fasteners, variovents, damping material, grille, documentation. Then there's
the little matter of shipping cartons and packing material. And never mind
the labor involved in assembly and testing. Given the cabinet design,
overall BOM costs on these has to be over $600, so I don't see these as
overpriced in the context of BOM cost to MSRP ratio. The simple question-to
be answered by the customer- is whether or not the design choices are
desirable at that price.


DO NOT argue with Bratzi. Someone more powerful than God is on his
side: der Fuhrer.


I guess that would explain why his cost analysis closely tracks with that of
a '39 Volkswagen.


I'm curious, John, to hear your opinions on the Audio Note AN series
(if you have any). This, of course, is another speaker to drive Bratzi
crazy based upon a casual scan, but they're wringing more performance
out of these simple two-ways than anyone else seems to be.

The AN-E/Sogons, at $125K, always seemed to push the credibility
issue, but I've heard the more modest ones using the new hemp woofers
and they sound quite extraordinary.
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bratzi Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! Audio Opinions 13 February 25th 09 05:27 PM
A Tube Amplifier That Will Drive Any Speaker...... RapidRonnie Vacuum Tubes 13 June 11th 08 02:14 AM
Hey, Bratzi, have you... Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! Audio Opinions 59 October 26th 07 09:52 PM
FO/Swap: ELAC speaker drive units ! DH Marketplace 0 February 17th 06 11:53 AM
Safe to drive cars over power/speaker cable? Bobby_M Pro Audio 21 June 10th 05 01:09 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:35 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"