1. Home
  2. misc-audio
  3. 196308-192372

What Does 80 Grand Get You Nowadays?

A system was playing in a shop. I sat down and pretty soon I thought gosh, I’m glad my system sounds better than this.

That system - just preamp, amp, and speakers - cost about $80,000 new.

I didn’t make the speakers at first, because Sabrinas look far better than the usual Wilson house look. They were driven by one of those new high-end Marantz amps, and I don’t think that was a match made in heaven. The Marantz was driven by a Dan D’Agostino pre that looked like a Minion had been crushed in a hydraulic press. Audiophile music was streaming, but I did not catch whence issued those dulcet ones and zeroes.

I suppose that system constitutes high-end for some. Now, it certainly sounded competent, but it also sounded boring. I thought, this is the Audi SUV of audio: competent and boring.

Conversely, I was impressed and pleased to no end that the end sound of my modest system from the last century could play in the same league as an almost-six figure modern system, and do so in a more engaging and fun fashion - to my ears, at least.

I’m biased, of course; and I am certain many high-priced systems out there leave mine in the dust. Still, I would have thought $80,000 guaranteed a better baseline sound.

How about you, have you heard a lot of gear whose sound was way out of whack with its price?

 

devinplombier
lanx0003
1,961 posts
 

More recently, the Chinese have copied their way into some ’exceptionalism’ in some fields of engineering...might as well get with the program and copy em back rather quickly if ya can or fall behind, its how it works

’Copy’?  I am not confronting your statement but do you have evidence to prove that.  A lot of the innovative engineering method and technology they have deployed in the field and manufacturing do not even exist before.  They may build on the work of earlier scientists and engineers just like Benjamin Franklin and others.  Benjamin is famous for his experiments with electricity but he actually built on the work done by earlier scientists including Steven Gray who studies conduction and Pieter van Musschenbroek (Dutch).

Do you understand the difference?

mahgister's avatar
mahgister
15,053 posts
 

It is comical to read common place erroneous statement repeated after the American medias as truth even if Chinese created  and innovated now in car, space, robotics, and A.I.

China of 2025 is not China of 1900...

History of China is also a creative history of one of the most enduring civilization till today...

Buy Joseph Needham books ..

Here a Chinese robot walking :

https://x.com/search?q=robot%20walking%20China&src=typed_query

https://x.com/HAOHONG_CFA/status/1893123632756646372

https://x.com/DeryaTR_/status/1986107876558180547

https://x.com/dontdieUS/status/1986518974410977521

 

 Some will repeat that Chinese scientist had no real creative power...

Even in A.I. or in space or with cars or with audio ...

 

More recently, the Chinese have copied their way into some ’exceptionalism’ in some fields of engineering...might as well get with the program and copy em back rather quickly if ya can or fall behind, its how it works

parkergetdean
1,094 posts
 

taking stuff apart, reverse engineering it, building a copy and selling it on the black market or on the real market, becoming a major brand (and never inventing anything) is older than hifi.

Some companies don't even bother to change the Sonus/Usher/etc. look

deep_333
2,449 posts
 

I am all for copying, reverse engineering, whatever you wanna call it. I just get mildly irritated if ya toot your horn too much as if you were something ’exceptional’, after you’d done it.

The lifespan is short. If the Chinese came up with something great, i’d rather not re-invent the wheel like a fool and reverse engineer it, copy it as much as i can, build up from it.....If they’re able to do that, great for them.

In fact, reverse engineering certain things in other fields of engg (forget the audio crap) can be quite difficult. If you are able to successfully do it, you deserve it!

There’s also the question of industrial espionage and all kinds of sht...they do it, we do it relentlessly (so saint anywhere). Life is short, carry on boys, stand on the shoulders of giants or reverse engineer away, whatever...advance humanity as a whole.,........quickly...make haste.

’Copy’?  I am not confronting your statement but do you have evidence to prove that.  A lot of the innovative engineering method and technology they have deployed in the field and manufacturing do not even exist before.  They may build on the work of earlier scientists and engineers just like Benjamin Franklin and others.  Benjamin is famous for his experiments with electricity but he actually built on the work done by earlier scientists including Steven Gray who studies conduction and Pieter van Musschenbroek (Dutch).

Do you understand the difference?

desktopguy
456 posts
 

My days of big 2-channel gear are decades behind me (all my audio gear now is desktop/home office-based). But a couple weeks ago I went to a big audio show in New Jersey and heard systems costing a great deal of money, many in the $100K to $500K range. With the 3 exceptions noted below, the speakers in particular sounded shriekingly bright, edgy. I couldn't live with most of those systems.

Three exceptions:

  1. Quad: their latest iteration of the electrostatic panels sounded quite good
  2. Legacy Audio: I heard two Aeris systems in the show. Both sounded somewhat bright, but definitely promising. IMHO those 2 AMT tweeters put out a ton of high frequency energy that's not completely balanced out by the 4 x woofers (but that balance can easily by changed by their crossover/processor). Even better was the considerably more expansive Valor speakers. I could live with either model.
  3. Audio Note: I seriously doubt whether those classic speakers can sound bright under any conditions.
More to discover