Crazy US Prices

In this month's Stereophile (Sep-12), Art Dudley in 'Skin Deep' highlights the hugely spiralling average prices of American hi-fi as seen in the recent Chester Group New York Audio and AV Show. If we ever needed further proof that the industry is selling smaller and smaller volumes and therefore pricing itself out of most people's minds, here it is. Hard to believe these prices, but easy to see why many people just don't consider buying a system any more, not when an iPod "will do".

Here's a link to the article (hope it works, I get it on digital subscription):

http://www.zinio.com/pages/Stereophi...416231030/pg-2

To summarise some of his calculations (remember, these are average prices):

• Digital source component $12,670
• Turntable $18,196
• Tonearm $6,184
• Cartridge $7,544
• Preamp $25,393
• Power amp $37,331
• Speakers $39,559

It sounds like the kings new clothes.

Bernie:lol:

The New York show is pretty high end though, for the Manhattan and Wall Street crowds.

I once had a cup of tea and a toasted sandwich in the cafe at Sachs 5th Avenue - the bill was almost £30 :eek: Now it was a bloody good toastie but that did sort of confirm to me that in NYC the price you pay for something has no connection to the true value of the item. They charge £30 for a toastie to keep out the riff-raff, although obviously that didn't work on me ;)

Recently I had an interesting conversation with an acquaintance of mine whom works in a very nice hifi shop. I inquired about the market for stereo (traditional 2-channel, not home theater or install) items in general, and the salient points of his reply are as follows:

The people who are buying are all baby boomers, and spending loads of money on their 'last' purchase.

To that end, the more expensive a product, the better chance it has to sell. Every time they take a risk on an expensive product or line, it pays off in spades.

I have heard this same observation from another retailer in the area, as well as a US manufacturer whom I will not mention, but I am sure you have heard of. The people driving the market are spending insane amounts on gear, and at that level, price is as important, or possibly more important than sound. (I.E., the more expensive one must be better.)

Hence some very established manufacturers coming out with gear priced in the stratosphere.

Some other interesting points discussed -

He mentioned that there is a marked, rather severe disintrest in hifi amongst 'Generation X' (Roughy those born between the assassination of President Kennedy (1963) and the release of Star Wars (1977) give or take a few years)

In fact he said that the market basically has given up on them. He observed that from those people, the only ones who were interested had either a father or brother in the hobby when they grew up. (Incidentally, this is true for me.)

However, there seems to be a very big interest in hifi and especially vinyl playback from those who are in their twenties right now. Lots of $200-300 turntables sold to those people, and of course, some are getting the bug to upgrade. This is quite good.

-

Also, the resurgence in vinyl is also evident in the local record shops, there are a few good ones still in town, and the record shelves are as full as ever, stocked with more new vinyl then I have ever seen since I was a child in the '80s. One retailer has even stopped segregating new from used, as they need the space and it's more efficient to do it that way.

Some interesting points however the prices of some of this equipment are actually so high that they have become a comedy act now.

If folk seriously think that they are getting the equivalent in quality against these laughable price tags then it is indeed very sad and can only be because they themselves earn far too much money to either know or care what it is they are actually buying.

There is an immense interest in any kind of "retro" equipment now which is great if you sell second hand audio gear of any kind. The most basic of domestic open reel machines now go for utterly silly prices - as an example the Technics RS-1500 series machines which in standard form new were around £900 and now command prices in excess of £1800 in standard unmodified form.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 6L6

Recently I had an interesting conversation with an acquaintance of mine whom works in a very nice hifi shop. I inquired about the market for stereo (traditional 2-channel, not home theater or install) items in general, and the salient points of his reply are as follows:

The people who are buying are all baby boomers, and spending loads of money on their 'last' purchase.

---

Thanks, Jim. It's enlightening to hear about it from the ground level over there.

Of all the ludicrous prices, I fail to understand what $37,000 will bring that my already expensive £7,500 Chord power amp doesn't already deliver. I hardly think it would be better technology (advanced switched-mode power supply, dynamic PSU rail coupling, arrayed MOSFET output devices) or build quality.

Is it really all down to tiny scale hand-built manufacturing with an expensive labour force? I doubt that they can even be making that much profit.

This is where clever outfits such as Pro-Ject will be successful. They may not make the very best turntables in the world but they perform competently and more importantly they are affordable, well made and quite stylish which should appeal to the 'Tweenies'.

Dartzeel, $144,000 or summat:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/d...lock-amplifier

I'd love to give them a listen though. I remember they reviewed a dual monoblock valave amp on there for $340,000 a few years ago.

S'ok by me... these prices drive more and more folks to DIY and/or restoration/upgrading of classic audio. Even if folks aren't keeping these items for themselves, at least they are pulling 'em out of the bin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

hugely spiralling average prices of American hi-fi as seen in the recent Chester Group New York Audio and AV Show.

---

Oh, one other thing...

The location of that show has an awful lot to do with the prices -

There are probably more people with mind-boggling amounts of money in and around New York than anywhere else in the world. If you want to appeal to those people, make it expensive. That will get their attention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WOStantonCS100

S'ok by me... these prices drive more and more folks to DIY and/or restoration/upgrading of classic audio. Even if folks aren't keeping these items for themselves, at least they are pulling 'em out of the bin.

---

This is a very valid point. As for the cost in New Yorknyou need a bit of perspective. I often frequent one of the "top three" steakhouses in Manhattan when I am there. They are always packed and for 4/5 of us the bill is always around 1000 dollars without going crazy. (the one time we did it was a bottle of red costing 500 dollars:stalks: )
I reckon to have half a lifestyle and live in Manhattan today you would need to earn 300k. Yes, there are people on a lot less and they live there, but would you really want to?
So I can see quite clearly where these "lifestyle manufacturers" are coming from. Not for me though, I think the people who DO buy into this sort of bullshit really ought to know better.

The thing is, you can eat out in New York really well for a lot less. I usually find London more expensive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

The thing is, you can eat out in New York really well for a lot less. I usually find London more expensive.

---

You can still buy Pizza for a dollar a slice in midtown, though the best pizza is in Brooklyn IMHO. You have to understand, I am with people who absolutely must be in the 'best' restaurants. I don't care, I'm not picking up the tab:) Though I always enjoy a good steak.

In many areas of expenditure there are and always have been the ultra-top band. Cars, watches, handbags .... you name it. Is it just that for some reason these are getting the attention now in hifi rags like Stereophile and TAS, where the reviewers themselves often seem to be in that league of income and aspiration? This then drives the UK rags like Hifi+ (which is owned now by The Absolute Sounds publisher anyway) into reviewing the jewellery price-band of hifi.

Is it actually relevant to the vast majority of hifi buyers? Who cares what the ultra-rich do? We're just having it rammed down our throats these days, is all.

Frankly I believe it is all a Willy measuring exercise and rather distasteful. Nothing worse than someone buying something that they have absolutely no knowledge of and then extolling its virtues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jandl100

Is it actually relevant to the vast majority of hifi buyers? Who cares what the ultra-rich do?

---

Art Dudley, when he had his own magazine, Listener, mentioned something in a review of the Ortofon Jubilee cartridge, which was, if memory serves me correctly, about $1600usd at the time...

Basically he said that this cartridge was at the perfect 'no-man's-land' in price. It was much too expensive for normal people to buy, but too cheap to be paid attention to by the really rich people who drive the buying in the industry.

(That's a heavy paraphrase, but hopefully fairly accurate. The review was in 2002 I think...)

If I can find the issue, I will get the quote right. But it sums it up pretty well. And this was 10 years ago! It's only gotten worse.

It's the Rolex effect. You don't buy one if you want really good timekeeping. Horribly blingy. Only for those with more money than sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

It's the Rolex effect. You don't buy one if you want really good timekeeping. Horribly blingy. Only for those with more money than sense.

---

There you go again Martin, disagreeing with me :)

Now, Hublot...........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by northwest

Now, Hublot...........

---

...or Longines (because I'm wearing one)

A Longines is no good where I am from. No one has heard of it. They will think you paid five quid for it down the market ;) Rolex, OTOH, has brand identity.

Rolex isn't a watch, it's jewellery. In a similar vane, Harley Davidson isn't a motorcycle, it's a lifestyle. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

In this month's Stereophile (Sep-12), Art Dudley in 'Skin Deep' highlights the hugely spiralling average prices of American hi-fi as seen in the recent Chester Group New York Audio and AV Show. If we ever needed further proof that the industry is selling smaller and smaller volumes and therefore pricing itself out of most people's minds, here it is. Hard to believe these prices, but easy to see why many people just don't consider buying a system any more, not when an iPod "will do".

---

Double the price of kit and you could find you sell more - as "you get what you pay for".
If there are just a few people prepared to pay silly prices then you don't have to worry about the hoi poloi - or everyone here !
:)
Not neccesarily at the other end are those whose system/s "are good enough for me"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

I once had a cup of tea and a toasted sandwich in the cafe at Sachs 5th Avenue - the bill was almost £30 :eek: Now it was a bloody good toastie but that did sort of confirm to me that in NYC the price you pay for something has no connection to the true value of the item. They charge £30 for a toastie to keep out the riff-raff, although obviously that didn't work on me ;)

---

Many years ago I had not a lot in a cafe in Geneva
Much the same pricing. Think I went dumb for a few minutes
Rest of Switzerland was fine. I liked Swiss food too

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canetoad

Rolex isn't a watch, it's jewellery. In a similar vane, Harley Davidson isn't a motorcycle, it's a lifestyle. ;)

---

In that case any watch that is not a black plastic Casio digital is jewelry, is it not? Part of the problem is that if you work in business you are subject to the 'watch check' like it or not and people do make value judgements about you based on that.

This also presumably applies to the serious price tag hi-fi. You cannot have your multi-million dollar Manhatten loft apartment supplied with sounds by a set of Wharfedale diamonds and a Sony integrated. Your friends will get nervous - they will think there is something wrong with you. Show them $100k of exotic kit you hardly ever use and they will relax. It is sad but true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 6L6

Recently I had an interesting conversation with an acquaintance of mine whom works in a very nice hifi shop. I inquired about the market for stereo (traditional 2-channel, not home theater or install) items in general, and the salient points of his reply are as follows:

The people who are buying are all baby boomers, and spending loads of money on their 'last' purchase.

To that end, the more expensive a product, the better chance it has to sell. Every time they take a risk on an expensive product or line, it pays off in spades.

---

Yup. I can see that. S'pose it correlates to cars.
Plenty of the older generation driving nice, or nice to them and their friends, motors. Do they *drive* no never.
Why spend all that money ?!
Being a cheapskate I bought a 2nd hand 1996 Saab a few years ago as my even older one was terminal. Goes like stink, but I can't *drive* it anyway with crowded roads, speed limits, cameras
Be interesting to see what these high spending on hifi guys drive, where they live, size of TV etc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

Of all the ludicrous prices, I fail to understand what $37,000 will bring that my already expensive £7,500 Chord power amp doesn't already deliver.

---

Much better profit for the seller !
:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by northwest

This is a very valid point. As for the cost in New Yorknyou need a bit of perspective. I often frequent one of the "top three" steakhouses in Manhattan when I am there. They are always packed and for 4/5 of us the bill is always around 1000 dollars without going crazy. (the one time we did it was a bottle of red costing 500 dollars:stalks: )
I reckon to have half a lifestyle and live in Manhattan today you would need to earn 300k. Yes, there are people on a lot less and they live there, but would you really want to?
So I can see quite clearly where these "lifestyle manufacturers" are coming from. Not for me though, I think the people who DO buy into this sort of bullshit really ought to know better.

---

Strewth !
I bet that's worse than Geneva !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 6L6

Basically he said that this cartridge was at the perfect 'no-man's-land' in price. It was much too expensive for normal people to buy, but too cheap to be paid attention to by the really rich people who drive the buying in the industry.

---

Like it. Makes lots of sense

The rich people I know are far too tight to spend that sort of money on Hi Fi and in general don’t seem to care about making a public display of their wealth by wearing the right watch, or driving the right car etc etc.

What I do see more and more of is people who are earning excessive amounts of money (but still having to work) trying to impress their way into a class shift with the erroneous belief that their display of “good taste”, (right car, house, lifestyle) will help.
It doesn’t work general. In England in particular, class is something you get born into and all the money you like wont make the change and in general such obvious displays of wealth and bad taste are viewed with distaste.

Semi-detached Barrat Home in the minor counties, 5 year old BMW 318 masquerading as an M3 parked on the drive, fake Rolex on the wrist, iPad on show whenever possible. Know the type John ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by synsei

Semi-detached Barrat Home in the minor counties, 5 year old BMW 318 masquerading as an M3 parked on the drive, fake Rolex on the wrist, iPad on show whenever possible. Know the type John ;)

---

I was thinking more of a couple of financial tiers up Dave. :)
No problem with access to finance who tends to buy and place high value on items and a lifestyle he/she believe are indications that they are discerning people with taste going up in the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

Rolex, OTOH, has brand identity.

---

But would you want to be identified with that particular brand?

http://24hourhiphop.com/files/articl...p-c-715217.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MartinT

It's the Rolex effect. You don't buy one if you want really good timekeeping. Horribly blingy. Only for those with more money than sense.

---

Well I've worn a Rolex for the last 41 years! It's not 'blingy' and I wouldn't change it for the world.

http://i780.photobucket.com/albums/y...hunt/001-6.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Techno Commander

But would you want to be identified with that particular brand?

http://24hourhiphop.com/files/articl...p-c-715217.jpg

---

I couldn't wear that coat. I'd get chocolate stains or ash or something on it in seconds. Besides Gangsta Pimp doesn't suit my eyes ;)

I don't think the majority of people associate Rolex with that image anyway. It's just a widely known expensive brand and more likely to impress the rubes than a Patek Phillipe at 5 times the price. And sometimes it is necessary to impress the rubes.

Barry your Rolex is lovely but too tasteful for me ;)

Reminds me of something I was told when I was kid.

Never ask a man wearing a watch anything but the time. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Welder

Reminds me of something I was told when I was kid.

. ;)

---

Remind me again, John, you were a kid - when? The 1890s? :ner:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

Remind me again, John, you were a kid - when? The 1890s? :ner:

---

Close Martin, close. ;)
There is however some wisdom in the saying.

I have to say I feel uncomfortable if I am not wearing a watch. I have done so constantly since I was about six years old. I while back both of my watches were broken I still wore a broken one because it felt odd not to. I suppose it is the opposite of when you put a collar on a cat for the first time and it goes schiz for a minute or two before accepting it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

I have to say I feel uncomfortable if I am not wearing a watch. I have done so constantly since I was about six years old. I while back both of my watches were broken I still wore a broken one because it felt odd not to. I suppose it is the opposite of when you put a collar on a cat for the first time and it goes schiz for a minute or two before accepting it.

---

Shackle on a slave seems more appropriate. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Welder

Shackle on a slave seems more appropriate. :)

---

Exactly what a friend of mine says! He never wears a watch - or a tie (noose) and says he despises them, However prior to the advent of mobile phones (which seem to have replaced the pocket watch:scratch:) he had of course no means of telling the time - but he still wanted to know what time it was pretty much all the time and was constantly asking the question of those of us who did wear watches: 'What's the time now?'

To which the answer eventually became - 'Time you bought a watch'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

Exactly what a friend of mine says! He never wears a watch - or a tie (noose) and says he despises them, However prior to the advent of mobile phones (which seem to have replaced the pocket watch:scratch:) he had of course no means of telling the time - but he still wanted to know what time it was pretty much all the time and was constantly asking the question of those of us who did wear watches: 'What's the time now?'

To which the answer eventually became - 'Time you bought a watch'

---

I bleieve the art is too employ someone with a watch and ask them the time. ;)

I do have a couple of watches but I rarely wear them. It was one of my "I will never again" when I went self employed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barry

Well I've worn a Rolex for the last 41 years! It's not 'blingy' and I wouldn't change it for the world.

http://i780.photobucket.com/albums/y...hunt/001-6.jpg

---

Back then they weren't so "bling" Barry. I have a friend who bought a vintage Rolex for $50 from the Trading Post. It didn't work. Cost him $100 to get a new winder fitted. Bargain! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Welder

I bleieve the art is too employ someone with a watch and ask them the time. ;)

I do have a couple of watches but I rarely wear them. It was one of my "I will never again" when I went self employed.

---

I suppose there may be a difference betwen those who started wearing watches at a young age and those who only did so because it was necesary when starting to work for a living?

I just don't associate watches with work or slavery or whatever you want to call it. Having said that I am luck in that I quite enjoy my work and it keeps me out of mischief:eyebrows:. I once took redundancy although there was very little money in it but I could afford to have a year or two off, no need to sign on or claim anything, and I was really looking forward to it as I had always resented working to an extent. After 2 months off I started to miss working and after 7 months I went and got another job. Since then working has never bothered me.:scratch:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barry

Well I've worn a Rolex for the last 41 years! It's not 'blingy' and I wouldn't change it for the world.

---

Oops, that's the problem with making sweeping statements. Your Rolex is very old world, Barry, and isn't blingy at all.

The things I was involved with when running sales campaigns at Xerox were very over-the-top heavyweight designs that - obviously - turned the salesmen on. They proved to be rather unreliable with several having to be returned for repair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macca

I suppose there may be a difference betwen those who started wearing watches at a young age and those who only did so because it was necesary when starting to work for a living?

I just don't associate watches with work or slavery or whatever you want to call it. Having said that I am luck in that I quite enjoy my work and it keeps me out of mischief:eyebrows:. I once took redundancy although there was very little money in it but I could afford to have a year or two off, no need to sign on or claim anything, and I was really looking forward to it as I had always resented working to an extent. After 2 months off I started to miss working and after 7 months I went and got another job. Since then working has never bothered me.:scratch:

---

For me there’s a bit more too it than work and slavery, but I’m a bit strange. :D
The only reason I can see for wearing/owning a watch apart from vanity, is if your time isn’t your own.
I’ve lost a few contracts for being “late” a bit strange given I got paid for what I produced rather than by the hour/month/year. :mental:
Add to this that in those days I did manual work and watches, even good ones, don’t do well being bashed around.

I could quite happily not ‘work’ ever again and keep myself amused with a very modest amount of money. In fact, I’m to put this to the ultimate test shortly by moving somewhere where watches, computers, cars, bling etc aren’t really relevant. It’s going to be more of a case of can I get the donkey down to the village and back without mishap. :doh::D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Welder

I was thinking more of a couple of financial tiers up Dave. :)
No problem with access to finance who tends to buy and place high value on items and a lifestyle he/she believe are indications that they are discerning people with taste going up in the world.

---

There's a horrible FT supplement called 'How to spend it' which does what it says on the tin; ie points people with lots of money but no taste at expensive consumer goods that mark one out from the plebs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barry

Well I've worn a Rolex for the last 41 years! It's not 'blingy' and I wouldn't change it for the world.

http://i780.photobucket.com/albums/y...hunt/001-6.jpg

---

That is one hairy wrist!

I was taught that being on time was a matter of common courtesy and personal integrity and that being late indicates that you think that you don't feel that others time is valuable to them or to you, which is disrespectful. I also enjoy not having to rush and get myself worked up because I have allowed sufficient time.

I really dislike it when others are late and don't even bother to acknowledge it. Very rude IMHO