$27,500 for whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat???

@yyzsantabarbara  
"When the Wilson rep was demoing the $200K whatever it was called with D'Agasinto (sp?) mono blocks (Dan as in the room). I thought the prices for the gear was a little insane for what I was hearing. It was really good with large scale but it was not the best thing I have heard.

The most uncomfortable part was when I was speaking with the Wilson rep (some VP) and my wife comes over to us and says to the Wilson rep, "Why are those speakers so ugly, they look like Darth Vadar". That comment did not go over too well."

Good for her - I wish I had the nerve to make such comments when confronted by audio monstrosities. Ever encouraging of those brave souls who venture into the manufacturing side of things I just tend to find something/anything positive to say and then quickly move away.

However, that being said I have no problem with mentioning here that even as a fan of some of the more elegant Wilson designs (Sasha/Sabrina) there's no question that Wilson Audio sell some appallingly ugly loudspeakers. 

I guess that as long the money keeps rolling in Daryl will keep churning them out. And why not? 

Just as long as they don't screw up the more elegant models. Looks do still  matter - as all but the out of touch insanely rich know.

@glupson, "It looks nice, probably drives nice, and they usually have good customer service. If one desires SUV, not many things to dislike here."


The price perhaps?

How much of that of that $190k would you be paying for prestige which was was earned quite accidentally (long ago) in the first place?

No doubt they make 'nice' cars but you must admit they do owe a HUGE debt to what must be the greatest product placement relationship of all time.

https://www2.astonmartin.com/en/heritage/james-bond

@andy2 ,

"The point here is it’s the market that determines the value of something, not the manufacturer. I mean you can say your product will cost an x-amount, but it will only worth that much if the market decides to pay for that."

Yes, and working out just how the market will react has occupied some of the best minds (admittedly with only limited success) for the past century.

Brand image and marketing both go a very long way to establishing value and prestige. The manufacturer does has some control over these and will readily realise that neither are immune from the benefits of omission or misinformation.

Time will tell whether Daryl Wilson is able to keep all the wheels on the wagon his dad built.

In the meantime when people are willing to pay $27,000 for a loudspeaker paintjob - it tells you more about them than the company willing to provide it.

@jon_5912,

"I’m personally disgusted by conspicuous consumption and vanity products and that’s all this is. It has no redeeming qualities. The 27k for paint is just an especially egregious example of it. I think it’s something we should all avoid. Almost anyone can feel good by having something others can’t. Even if you’re just the homeless crackhead with the fanciest pipe. It’s not that the pipe somehow performs better, it’s that the other crackheads in your group can’t afford it, and you make yourself feel superior by being better than them. There’s no higher level goal like a better crack high. It’s the most base instinct. Moving up in the pecking order, like a chicken."



Good points. I totally agree a 27k paintjob is something any decent human being should try to avoid, but perhaps it’s a little bit strong to feel disgusted?

For sure ostentatiousness via possessions doesn’t really help anyone in the end. Not when you’ve long passed the point of any detectable (sonic) improvement.

I guess you might still inspire envy, gain some hollow attention but you still get old, you still get sick, you still going to die.

Like it or not we are still a competitive lot, aren’t we? I’ve got working-class cousins who are semi literate but who still seem to live their lives by the labels they flash around, Hugo Boss, iPhone 11, Timberlands etc.

I guess such things must give some kind of meaning, comfort, feeling of one-upmanship. A feeling of aspiration, of belonging to some superior group, or of attaining some desirable hegemony perhaps. At least for a short while.

Perhaps in a similar way that owning good Hi-Fi might give us?

No it can’t be that, we’re in it for the right reasons, we’re in it for the sound quality alone.

Aren’t we?

@jon_5912, you've got me thinking now.

Anyone living in the West who has travelled much must have inevitably encountered people living in such dire poverty that they would make the poorest of us here seem affluent in comparison.

Against such a background $27,000 for a loudspeaker paint job does seem a trifle obscene, and not to mention sonically quite unecessary.

My entire system, including music must have cost me somewhere around $5k. Outside a couple of audiophile friends I personally don't know anyone who has spent anything near that amount on audio.

Having said that, it's probably my only comparitive extravagance in life. That's how much music means to me.

Probably also explains why the price/performance ratio of audio products matters so much to me.

So you'll never see me paying $27k for a Wilson loudspeaker paintjob, however unlikely that I will ever be in the position to do so. Even if I was, and my accountant advised it as a tax avoidance measure I'd much rather simply give the money away. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price%E2%80%93performance_ratio

@french_fries , "For me, the contradiction comes from their stating how well the present line performs, while they are already working on re-designing them at the factory for the next upgrade. The availability of "newer technology", or some new cabinet material is already in the works, and so you’re "obligated" to come by after 3-4 years and audition the V-2, then the 3, and so on. This all happens way too quickly while other companies stick by their designs for much longer intervals. You may want to know what was so wrong with the original SOTA speaker you paid so much for."



Great point, valid today as it ever has been.

Some might say that the whole of audio is nothing more than a unhealthy mixture of the Emperor’s New Clothes regularly doused in very rare and precious snake oil. Nothing more - nothing less.

Do today’s Wilson speakers sound any better than yesterday’s? Does anything sound better than the original 1959 Quads? Is the LS3/5 still the best bookshelf speaker ever built? Are box speakers (monkey coffins) now caught in the leaping frog puzzle syndrome where only increasingly minuscule forward leaps are possible?

Are Harbeth the only company willing to admit their designs today are only marginally better than those from the 1990s?

Are we all being suckered onto a never-ending merry go round ride? Eventually arriving to find we are hardly any further along than when we started.

Perhaps the lucky ones were those who had assembled a system they could enjoy and then forgot about the quagmire infested world of audio. Perhaps they found when they returned to have a new look a few years later that nothing much ever changes.

Here’s Daryl Wilson talking about where he’s coming from. My take is that he sounds more like he’s Tim Cook than Steve Jobs. Not sure what deodorant he’s using, but nice suit and tie, nevertheless.

Should keep the shareholders happy.

https://youtu.be/JTnaSrIIW2s