2. speakers
  3. 164300-88016

Top down or bottom up? Just asking...

This is a purely theoretical question that I’m tossing out just to learn what folks might say.

Consider, say, Magico and Wilson Audio. Their top speakers are in 6 figures, but their ‘bottom’ ones go as low as 10k. Consider, say, Monitor Audio and Paradigm. Their bottom is very low 4 figures or lower; their top in the low 30s.

Now, wouldn’t it stand to reason that other things being equal a 20-30k speaker from Wilson or Magico would be better than the same from the other firms? The upper firms have all that top level technology to scale down, while MA and Para would be at the top of their game in the 20-30 range.

Obviously, there are other issues—personal taste being the most important. And room size and other components.

But ‘all things being equal’ isn’t the answer clear? What am I missing?

P.s. I am a very happy owner of MA PL100II, which I got half price used here at less than a year old. And of B and W CM9 I got 10 years ago. I’m just wondering…


128x128rsgottlieb
urbie
275 posts
 
What are you talking about the monitor audio platinum line is world renowned and it is a world-class speaker according to the reviewers if people are stupid and want to pay 80 to 100,000 for a speaker that a $30,000 monitor audio speaker will beat then so be it if they want to be stupid LOL
urbie
275 posts
 
And just so you know Magico isn't even one quarter is big as monitor audio is.
chilli42
107 posts
 
The answer will be different for each speaker company.  Each company will have a different profit margin they determine to be acceptable for each product line/price tier.  That profit margins is first determined by what price the company believes they can sell the line at (usually determined by the target competitor price).  Secondly by the cost of materials/manufacture.  Then within these parameters, can they deliver an acceptable sound (in the opinion of the company).  When a  high end trickles down they have more pricing leverage due to brand value.  When low end moves up, they may have an advantage on cost of materials/manufacture (leveraging scale).  Though they face a headwind of any low price brand that tries to move up market using the same brand name.  Based on the experience of my past life, price leverage determines profit margin.  So trickle down is the easier business strategy.  Does that mean Wilson could make a better sounding  low priced speaker than Sony ... not necessarily.
clearthinker's avatar
clearthinker
1,582 posts
 
It depends on which company makes better speakers.
Which comes down to which one makes the speakers you think sound best.
That one will always be best for you.

Why would Wilson trickle down all their tech from the $250,000 price point to $30,000?  And how, because of cost of top-tech materials and solutions.

There is no general rule and no answer to this rather nebulous question.
tk21
237 posts
 

Some of the best loudspeakers seem to come from boutique manufacturers, for whom neither top-down nor bottom-up necessarily applies very well. Their products tend to fall in a relatively narrow price band.  Sanders comes to mind.  The company currently sells one loudspeaker, the Model 10.  Base price is $17K.  They're not chasing huge sales volumes (which may be the main reason to have a wide range of price points).
More to discover