the best loudspeaker on this planet earth

[suri]

here is the best loudspeaker on the planet! -

Polymer Audio Research Co.

seems the middle frequencies in music are most important?

 

[unleash_me]

Guess its time again to link this website for quantum refresh

 

[suri]

10 characters

he said that?

but, yes!

 

[murali]

here is the best loudspeaker on the planet! -

Polymer Audio Research Co.

seems the middle frequencies in music are most important?

I think you missed this. Try it.

linn audio of new hampshire

cheers.
murali

 

[suri]

looks good!

the woofer though! - has a stamped basket and the spider is not vented - looks like a pro-woofer rather than a high performance audiophile-intent woofer.

edit - and the mid-range horns made of ABS - ?

and the use of the word "Linn" - ?

edit - the woofer is - Eminence - a pro- woofer same as used in the Emerald Physics.

 

[square_wave]

Did you guys see the value chart here

Polymer Audio Research Co.

 

[square_wave]

I think you missed this. Try it.

linn audio of new hampshire

cheers.
murali

This guy is a joke

All the images are ridiculous photoshop jobs !

Classic White van.

 

[suri]

Did you guys see the value chart here

Polymer Audio Research Co.

hehehehe - thanks for pointing that out! - just saw it!

makes one think!!

 

[murali]

Suri take note : you've spent approx $ 2500 for drivers. David Wilson spends $ 1100 for the Watt/Puppy! So - how would you like to price your new upcoming baby ?? hey, guess you go for the WBT topline then hyeah:hyeah:

You're in the $ 50,000 speaker category !! :lol:

This is one of the most important issues I have studied extensively before I decided to go the Vandersteen way. This is especially true, the cost components in a speaker design, and I had read some fascinating debates when Stereophile put the Wilsons in the highest pedestal and the Vandys much lower.

I remember an old interview session of Richard Vandersteen where he had categorically put his views on this subject, especially when questioned about his extensive use of grill cloth and little wood in his speaker designs like the 2Ce, 3A and Quattro, and even the subs, center and surrounds. RV claims that about 60% of the cost of a speaker goes for the woodwork and therefore, with his designs, he is able to maximise the money being spent on the drivers and electronics. No wonder he sells such performance speakers in our affordable range. The 5A is a cost-no-bar design where wood is used to make the inert housing around the bass drivers. When people demanded the Quattro in wood, he decided to give it a try but finally found that the wood version did not match the cloth version. So the wood version carries even upgraded drivers, some of them used in the 5A, to match the cloth versions' performance. Even my good friends in some other forums using the Vandys unambiguously tell me that there is not any significant difference between the cloth and wood versions of Quattro as far as the performance is concerned.

Just my 2 cents, please.

Thanks and cheers.
murali

 

[suri]

This is one of the most important issues I have studied extensively before I decided to go the Vandersteen way. This is especially true, the cost components in a speaker design, and I had read some fascinating debates when Stereophile put the Wilsons in the highest pedestal and the Vandys much lower.

I remember an old interview session of Richard Vandersteen where he had categorically put his views on this subject, especially when questioned about his extensive use of grill cloth and little wood in his speaker designs like the 2Ce, 3A and Quattro, and even the subs, center and surrounds. RV claims that about 60% of the cost of a speaker goes for the woodwork and therefore, with his designs, he is able to maximise the money being spent on the drivers and electronics. No wonder he sells such performance speakers in our affordable range. The 5A is a cost-no-bar design where wood is used to make the inert housing around the bass drivers. When people demanded the Quattro in wood, he decided to give it a try but finally found that the wood version did not match the cloth version. So the wood version carries even upgraded drivers, some of them used in the 5A, to match the cloth versions' performance. Even my good friends in some other forums using the Vandys unambiguously tell me that there is not any significant difference between the cloth and wood versions of Quattro as far as the performance is concerned.

Just my 2 cents, please.

Thanks and cheers.
murali

hi murali,

RV uses MDF - see construction of model 5




and wilson audio uses proprietary "X" and "M" composites for their enclosures - only god and wilson audio are privy to that knowledge!!

i think that what is happening here is that, since drivers are the same (wilson and vandersteen seem to use the same derivative of scanspeak/18W8545 for midwoofer) , the more ambitious spend inordinate amounts in creating massive bespoke cabinets - differentiate themselves from the hoi polloi, and become aspirational for those who use ferraris as second cars!

in the highest priced speakers - 96 % must be the cost the manufacturer demands for the "inertial reference" cabinet.

after all, even if the most expensive transducers (except feastrex) and crossover components (mundorf gold/silver) were used, how can one justify a price tag of $150,000/- ?

but then, there are buyers for every type/price of loudspeakers -

 

[venkatcr]

in the highest priced speakers - 96 % must be the cost the manufacturer demands for the "inertial reference" cabinet.

after all, even if the most expensive transducers (except feastrex) and crossover components (mundorf gold/silver) were used, how can one justify a price tag of $150,000/- ?

but then, there are buyers for every type/price of loudspeakers -

Beyond a certain level, there are a number of factors that come into play for end pricing:

1. Brand value: you really have to set a price that reflects your brand, irrespective of what your costs are. A small episode from 'The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance' portrays this well. There was small issue with a guy's BMW bike that could actually have been fixed (at least temporarily) with a small piece of aluminium sheet. Instead, the owner spends endless hours panicking till he get the 'original' part from BMW that costs a couple of hundred dollars. Peace of mind at any cost? There are people who will write only with a Mont Blanc, who will wear only a Chirag Din shirt, or only walk on shoes made by Gucci. So why not speakers only by xxx, and screw the price?

2. Most well know companies spends millions of dollars on the design of a speaker model. B&W is rumoured to shave spent close to 50 million on their 800 and Nautilus series particularly as they were experimenting with Kevlar and Aluminium for drivers.

3. There is marketing costs and organisational costs such as salaries, rent, etc. And top of all this, if course, the profits to be made.

4. If any part of the design, assembling, or manufacturing is done using someone else's technology or knowledge, there is royalty costs attached.

When you manufacture is large numbers, the cost per item comes down. But when you sell in small numbers like Vandersteen does, the cost per unit will be high. Simple economies of scale. And finally there is something called opportunity costs. As long as something has earned a reputation and you can demand a particular price, why chase away the goose that lays the golden eggs?

Cheers

 

[suri]

All I can say is :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
David Wilson is a sly bugger who knows the ways & means to dig deep down into people's pockets! Wilsons IMO have always sounded uninvolving & sterile - excellent studio tools though that 'll help you to efficiently get your work done in the studio & get the hell out of there!

hehehe!!!

 

[sdhawan]

It may help to look at this:

Grande Utopia EM, more "Grande" than ever. Focal.

Indian importer is ProFx.com, in case you are interested in buying. Price Rs. 96,00,000/- a pair. Weight 260 Kg.

And if you do, please book me for a paid audition ;-)

 

[sachi]

^^ :lol:


Btw, a pair of Feastrex drivers can set one back by $69,000! That's right, just a pair of drivers!! hyeah:

 

[murali]

When you manufacture is large numbers, the cost per item comes down. But when you sell in small numbers like Vandersteen does, the cost per unit will be high. Simple economies of scale. And finally there is something called opportunity costs. As long as something has earned a reputation and you can demand a particular price, why chase away the goose that lays the golden eggs?

Cheers

I do not agree at all that the Vandys cost high; it is the other way around. The 2Ce (which I own) costs < $2000 and is one of the best sounding speakers which will satisfy everyone except the most cynical and critical folks. The next one higher up (3A) is around $3500. Everyone knows that Vandys are real value for money. RV himself admits that his motivation and goal in speaker design are from benchmarking the Quad ESL as the finest in this planet and whether a dynamic speaker can reproduce or better that!

The point I was trying to make earlier is that the bulk of the speaker costs of a Vandy goes for the drivers, crossovers etc and it is its simple grill cloth wrap-around rather than exotic wood that helps in allocating more money for what matters. Compare to all those Brit speakers like Spendor, Proac etc where reviewers usually gloss over the "fine, exquisite etc wood" as many of them look at their speakers as living room furniture rather than as a musical component.

cheers.
murali