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

I think it’s really pretty cool what can be done for a fraction of cost of reproducing the original silicon.

@tomrk 

Yes - and it shows once again that when demand exists, someone will step up.

As you mentioned, old, hard-to-find SIL opamps can be replaced with tiny adapter PCBs on which you can solder any modern, 90-cent opamp that is not only widely available but has far better specs than the original.

An open-hardware project on DIYAudio lets you replace the notorious STK power modules - the bane of classic 70s receivers - with compatible amp boards populated with proper discrete components, ensuring those silver-faced beauties stay with us another 50 years.

The one thing that’s not being replaced fast enough is competent techs. But, the runaway success of the aforementioned diyaudio.com and of countless other DIY sites shows that increasing numbers of folks - including yours truly - are taking things into our own hands.

The impetus for starting this thread was the realization that my system, humble as it is, outperformed (sounded, to my ears, better than) a $80K new, Wilson Audio-based system.

I also said my system cost me $2,300, but in the interest of full disclosure it took me a considerable amount of time to repair or restore non-functioning components bought at a very steep discount. If I’d had to farm out the work at $100 / hr, my cost would be an order of magnitude higher.

I recommend audiophiles learn to service and repair their own gear, time permitting. It’s fun, it’s empowering, and it’ll save you tons of money!

 

People who believe top level audio audio gear and sound can only be had from known high-end brands in new condition and latest design iteration, in addition to a variety of self-imposed restrictions (incl. interior decoration/aesthetic demands) and a dogmatic/conservative approach to audiophilia, are likely to find it difficult coming to above mentioned conclusion. However if one really wants to there’s nothing than yourself holding you back from achieving sonics as described, and at a less than stratospheric price level.

@phusis 

Great points.

Mindsets and beliefs related to audio and gear are cyclical. For instance, 50 years ago lamp cord was considered just fine, so fine indeed that power cords were permanently attached to components. Now the pendulum has swung all the way the other way, but as more and more folks realize the absurdity of spending as much money on a power cord as on the component it’s attached to, attitudes will continue to evolve and the zeitgeist revert to the mean.

It’s doubly interesting what you say, because 50 years ago pro and "audiophile" gear coexisted and were often interchangeable. McIntosh made both the pro MC2200 and hifi MC2205 - different face plates, same exact amp; it was OK to have a Crown amp powering your living room system; and so on.

Even today, gear closely related to pro audio is actually sought after by audiophiles, as long as it presents in appropriate audiophile clothes. JBL Summit series, Bricasti, Bryston, Yamaha 5000 series, etc. Can the days be far ahead when things go full circle and pro gear is widely embraced by audiophiles? As always, education will help sort things out.

@devinplombier  perhaps you have a bias for your equipment, seeing how you fixed it.  I also like what Bob Carver said about pro audio equipment, "it's made to play loud and not break".

perhaps you have a bias for your equipment, seeing how you fixed it.

@invalid 

Kind of... but not a whole lot more than if I had bought it fully functioning. What DIY does give me though is a good knowledge of and appreciation (or not) for how my gear was designed and built and how it works.

I have maybe half a dozen Carver pieces around my house. They sound good and they’re pretty. But three of them grossly overheated as designed (I fixed that), and the PCBs look like they’ve been slapped together by gibbons.

Bob Carver said about pro audio equipment, "it’s made to play loud and not break"

Hmm. Bob spoke the truth that time :)

@devinplombier wrote:

Mindsets and beliefs related to audio and gear are cyclical. For instance, 50 years ago lamp cord was considered just fine, so fine indeed that power cords were permanently attached to components. Now the pendulum has swung all the way the other way, but as more and more folks realize the absurdity of spending as much money on a power cord as on the component it’s attached to, attitudes will continue to evolve and the zeitgeist revert to the mean.

You wonder why there isn’t more of a middle ground with power cords - maybe when the pendulum is one its way back we can experience the path in between on its way back to the other extreme.

I get the feeling that just because people don’t pay thousands of dollars for power cords it must follow they don’t care at all and that lamp cords is all it takes. [...] I’ve used my own low price DIY power cords for over a decade now, behind which there are conscious design decisions, and while I wouldn’t claim there aren’t better alternatives out there they just get out of the way not feeling like a bottleneck. Very well then, now let’s move on with the other, more important stuff. 

It’s doubly interesting what you say, because 50 years ago pro and "audiophile" gear coexisted and were often interchangeable. McIntosh made both the pro MC2200 and hifi MC2205 - different face plates, same exact amp; it was OK to have a Crown amp powering your living room system; and so on.

Many audiophiles seem oblivious of the high level of engineering capacity and skill the pro sector really holds. Pro amps aren’t made to deliberately sound bad, for those who might believe that, but to be reliable, well cooled (actively with fans), powerful and with no fuss sonics that reflect good designs.

PA amps nowadays are very much about efficiency, very high power and cutting down weight (so, class D variations), but that doesn’t make them bad designs or necessarily "incompatible" sound-wise with home audio reproduction. Fixed installation studio amps (my preferred pro amp segment) have some manufacturers stick with class A/B topology for the best possible sound and where higher weight isn’t an issue.

I’ve heard older Crown amps like the Macro Tech 1200 which, apart from their cooling fans that produce noise akin to an angle grinder, were very well sounding. As is the Amcron DC300 series II and Crown Studio Reference I and II, as well as and not least my own MC²  Audio S800 amps that won’t lose face against amps costing tens of thousands of dollars (which, like your example with the McIntosh amp, has a hi-fi sibling costing a lot more). 

The high-end sector of hi-fi by comparison is a more or less boutique and highly idiosyncratic product segment that often tries to distinguish itself with a sonic "flavor" and fancy (i.e.: expensive) looks. 

Even today, gear closely related to pro audio is actually sought after by audiophiles, as long as it presents in appropriate audiophile clothes. JBL Summit series, Bricasti, Bryston, Yamaha 5000 series, etc. Can the days be far ahead when things go full circle and pro gear is widely embraced by audiophiles? As always, education will help sort things out.

I believe that would take a paradigm shift that isn’t likely to happen unless the world at large would face a severe and long lasting recession. Even then I doubt audiophiles in general would be willing to accept pro segment products in "working clothes" and a large size factor with speakers; they still need the nice wrappings and glimmer that exudes exclusivity and that particular hi-fi/high-end scent.

In a way I prefer things a they are as it makes it easier to come by the interesting products of the pro arena without having to pay a fortune because the demand is skyhigh. 

@invalid wrote:

I also like what Bob Carver said about pro audio equipment, "it’s made to play loud and not break".

While true it’s what isn’t said that’s interesting: it’s also how the majority of audiophiles view pro audio equipment, but importantly with the implicit extension to "It’s made to play loud and not break" with "... and nothing more." However the level of design pedigree and sonic potential to be found here is plentiful - for those willing to let loose preconceptions and look a little closer.