Are more expensive speakers better?

Hey, I resent that comment about B&O speakers Mike. I think it's insensitive and insulting. (Sorry, couldnt resist.) But seriously, I remember quite a few B&O speakers that sounded fine. They were just always too expensive for their performance, so you either had to be indifferent to price or buy them new for 50% of retail. If they still make speakers, I have no idea what they sound like now.

Mike is on the right track, though. Is one maker's more expensive speaker better than the lower priced speakers by the same maker? With some exceptions of course, I should hope that the more you pay Vandersteen or B&W or whatever, the better speaker you get. (I really have no idea of what their actual prices are) better than a $2,000 something else? Maybe, maybe not.

Paul

Well, it's a new day, and my temperature has returned to near normal. Several posters above-- whose opinions I respect-- had a considerably different "take" on Pbb's apparently inflammatory (to me) comments. So perhaps I was out of line to "blow up". And thanks to those who offered support for my irascibility. BUT, Pbb should write more clearly.

It may also be that I am especially sensitive about the V5s because I've only had them 2-3 months, really like them, and it took me a year to pay for them.

One thing I have learned re audio and this Forum is that you NEVER, EVER insult another person's stereo system-- that may be an even worse offense than insulting his family members, including the dog.

My apology to Ddhpark for being a distraction on your interesting thread. Calmly, Craig.

Somehow my last sentence got cut off and I didnt notice until it was too late to edit it: Is a $6,000 B&W speaker (I really have no idea what their prices are) better than a $2,000 speaker made by someone else? Maybe, Maybe not. I certainly know of a few $2,000 speakers that I think are better than a lot of more expensive speakers.

Under $2,000 is a more expensive speaker better than a cheaper one? With a few weird exceptions (good and bad), probably.

Garfish: I auditioned the 5's in a Vandersteen preferred system (all AR gear). I feel that "most" auditions of these speakers will be somewhat hindered by the room itself and speaker placement (the subs are in the same cabinet as the rest of the drivers). I did read your posts on "the hoops that you jumped through" in order to properly set them up, but let's face it, this is not going to happen @ many shops. This can be said of many speakers, of course, but I would guess that the 5's may need a bit more attention than the norm. The subs, by the way, scared the crap out of me, when they kicked in on a piece (we were listening pretty much in the near field). It had been quite a while since I had listened to a full range system.

In keeping with the thread, "proper setup" and the room are @ least 50% of the sound of any decent speaker, IMO. You really need to "live" with a speaker in order to benefit from (in excess of 80% of) what it can do under these conditions.

Dekay; you are "right on" regarding set-up of the V5 speakers, ie because of the "in room" adjustable bass, it does take some time and effort to get it right, but when done right, I think most would agree that it is certainly worth it. Yes the bass can be spectacular, and to me HQ bass was a BIG selling point of this speaker (I don't have room for separate subs).

Also in keeping with this threads subject, as I moved up expense wise in the Vandersteen line of speakers, music got better. But the improvement wasn't linear, and by far the biggest improvement came when going from the 3Asigs ($3500.) to the 5s ($11.5K)-- that's the way it should be, and that's the way it was. R. Vandersteen builds honest value into his speakers at each price point. I would also admit that there is some music that I still much prefer on the 3A/3Asigs rather than the 5s. The 5s are a much more revealing speaker; the 3As more forgiving. Cheers. Craig