[mgalusha]

Bottomline, it is more rewarding and cost efficient to buy high quality professional drivers, follow basic construction principles widely available and go active filtering. Think for instance that Kenrick is offering a refurbished JBL 4343 pro monitor for about $16k a pair plus transportation. Compare this with a Watt Puppy and there is no photo finish.

Professional sound is comparatively cheaper than Hi End. As for the diamond midrange... buy a diamond ring to your wife in exchange for her letting you install larger speakers in the living room!

+1 

[neobop]

Don't despair Fred, I think the response you allude to is sort of twofold, one is explaining retail market prices vs raw materials cost, which is not specifically defending the high prices charged.  The other viewpoint is still somewhat distaff relative to most AC'ers and is the one defending the high prices as warranted.  There is still big support here for, in example, the GR research model of building your own speakers using the design expertise of a professional, and cost effective solutions like Salk Speakers, where you pay one entity a sustainable markup, rather than support a supply chain that is becoming less and less necessary.  There's no, that I can recall, owners of the brands and models on FRM's list popping up do defend their expenditures, all hope is not lost.

This thing about expensive speakers vs less expensive is silly.  Whether or not you think the price is justified, some of these companies have been around for 20 yrs or more.  So, everyone who bought a pr of Avalons or Wilsons is throwing their money away?  (1) Have you heard them? (2) Why do you care?

If you think your hot rod can beat a Formula 1 car, good for you.  I happen to think Rolls Royce is overpriced, but I've never been in one.  These generalizations about speakers are just as silly.

[ricardojoa]

I have only heard the more common lower cost drivers I have mentioned, so I can't comment on any of these higher priced full-range drivers.  But after today, the prices don't seem quite as outrageous now that I know a $12K 2" midrange driver exists!  (Yes, I know the "magic" is in the midrange).

But I do understand the inherent problems of crossovers and am intrigued by a two-way with a crossover-less midbass driver that magically rolls off perfectly to a tweeter with a very simple high-pass filter, especially like the new Totem Acoustic Element Fire, but those are out of my price range at $6K MSRP.  Maybe some used ones down the road!

Steve

Decware err is similar in concept but an omnidirectional speaker that doesnt break the bank .

[JBLMVBC]

(..) So, everyone who bought a pr of Avalons or Wilsons is throwing their money away?  (1) Have you heard them? (2) Why do you care?

If you think your hot rod can beat a Formula 1 car, good for you.  I happen to think Rolls Royce is overpriced, but I've never been in one.  These generalizations about speakers are just as silly.

Funny you mentioned this as I just listened to the $180k Focal Grande Utopia here at a Vancouver dealership where they were on display with Bryston electronics. Brought my own 24/196 file of our own Steinway D grand piano. Although good speakers, they did not best professional JBL compressions clarity, tone and dynamics in midrange -so it was a piano for sure but not necessarily my Steinway-. In a Curt Cress CD cut "Thunder" the tone of the skin of the drum felt colored and the dynamic could hardly make you think the drumset was in the room, even playing loudly. And I do care because I did not have to spend a quarter million bucks in a system to get superior sound. I suppose others may care too...

So did the people who buy these or the Wilsons that are using Focal drivers waste their dough? It depends.
1) Some for whatever reason, that could include good sound, simply want what they perceived rightly or wrongly as the best money can buy and there are many Hi End oufits who cater exclusively to them. Focal and Wilson are no slouch manufacturers to start with so their top of the line products are serious contenders. Sophisticated appearence also plays a role and these builders offer great woaw factor in this aspect. It's easy the customer signs the check and the stuff is in his room, done.
2) But let's face it, even with means, discriminating buyers may chose other products, less homy/matching the sofa types, such as large studio monitors at a fraction of the cost that are used in professional environments where the real work is happening. How many buyers of HiFi have had the chance to listen to these professional references?
3) Finally skilled audio buffs are most likely to spend their money in the right places and thus save yet achieving serious and in some cases, superior sound quality. Even if the esthetic level of finish can always be improved, they'll still be ahead $ wise for a while before spending more than the turn key stuff for their bespoke.

[Russell Dawkins]

JBLMVBC, I gave a listen to Curt Cress "Thunder" and it sounds compressed to me, so I don't think you are going to hear realistic dynamics on any playback system. Un-compressed drum recordings are hard to find. HiFi News had one on their test CD of 20 years ago, and here are some realistic drum samples which don't sound compressed to me, but I don't know for sure:

http://www.stevenslatedrums.com/video.html

Strangely, some of the most realistic drum set dynamics I've ever heard were produced by a Phase Linear 700 amp driving a pair of AR LSTs (12" bass, 4 dome mids and 4 dome tweeters. I say strangely, because in theory you would need more than 700 watts into a low efficiency speaker to accomplish this, but maybe the fact that there was little power (or thermal) compression happening in the mids was the key.

[JLM]

According to Toole it takes at least a 1/20 octave EQ or at least two subs (on the center of opposite walls) to generate half-way consistent bass in a room (look at Duke LeJeune's AudioKinesis circle for his home speakers, and yes highly efficient professional drivers).  If true, that takes all the mega buck speakers I've heard/heard of out of the equation.  How can that be?

Easy to have sour grapes if you (me too) can't or don't want to spend $$$ on audio, but frankly impressive looks (big, glossy) probably sells more than good sound in that market.  And unfortunately loud and way too much low/high frequencies sell too.

[JBLMVBC]

JBLMVBC, I gave a listen to Curt Cress "Thunder" and it sounds compressed to me, so I don't think you are going to hear realistic dynamics on any playback system.

Well it's CD so it won't be sublime. Yet, I know it can sound better than what the utopia offered.

[fredgarvin]

Don't despair Fred, I think the response you allude to is sort of twofold, one is explaining retail market prices vs raw materials cost, which is not specifically defending the high prices charged.  The other viewpoint is still somewhat distaff relative to most AC'ers and is the one defending the high prices as warranted.  There is still big support here for, in example, the GR research model of building your own speakers using the design expertise of a professional, and cost effective solutions like Salk Speakers, where you pay one entity a sustainable markup, rather than support a supply chain that is becoming less and less necessary.  There's no, that I can recall, owners of the brands and models on FRM's list popping up do defend their expenditures, all hope is not lost.

Yeah, it really is two separate trains of thought. Already I noticed someone read your post and had to defend the idea of veblen spending. I'm not sure why he thought he had to.

[Russell Dawkins]

Well it's CD so it won't be sublime. Yet, I know it can sound better than what the utopia offered.

I haven't heard the Utopia, so I don't know, but I understood dynamics was part of their strength. There's a limit to what I would expect from Bryston, too - maybe that was the weak link.

Also, I wouldn't write off CD so easily. I believe 16/44 can sound sublime when done right - and played back through a great amp and speakers.
Specific music aside, so much can (and usually does) go wrong between the diaphragms of the microphones and the final product.

As to the original point, it is completely normal and reasonable to see a 10:1 ratio between retail and parts cost, especially in low volume specialty products. Even for high volume sales, fiscal survival dictates a high ratio.

[*Scotty*]

JLM, the slick approach, which eliminates bass EQ and results in non-resonant room behavior below the Schroeder frequency is explained in Adrian Celestinos doctoral thesis which can be found at this link
  http://vbn.aau.dk/files/12831869/AC-phd.pdf
So far, no megabuck speaker system I am aware of, has yet been sold with another source bass energy ie. Sub or Subs, to be located against the rear wall of the listening room.  This failure to address the inherent problems that stem from system induced resonant behavior in the bass frequencies seems to be an incredibly huge oversight on the part of "Mega Price Loudspeaker manufacturers".
Literally hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on a set of loudspeakers and you have purchased the same problem you could have had for $1000. 
Scotty

[planet10]

So far, no megabuck speaker system I am aware of, has yet been sold with another source bass energy ie. Sub or Subs, to be located against the rear wall of the listening room. 

Big Martin Logans, scaena, more than a few others with separate woofers.

dave

[Early B.]

Many people who buy mega buck loudspeakers may not be audiophiles, so their reasons for purchasing high end audio equipment are likely to be quite different than ours. I doubt that the guy buying a pair of $150,000 speakers is gonna tweak or mod out his gear, spend countless hours determining the best placement, obsess over burn-in, search the forums for input and ideas, call his buddies over to conduct crude AB tests, read the latest issue Affordable Audio, search audiogon for the best deals, etc. For them, it's all about status. Sound quality may not be a major factor. And, of course, they aren't concerned about getting value for the dollar.

Let's face it -- if any of us had mega bucks to spend on audio, a significant part of our purchasing decision would be based on aesthetics. Personally, I'd buy a pair of the biggest tube monoblocks I could find, and sound quality would be a secondary consideration because I would assume they'd sound great because of the price.

[*Scotty*]

My post/rant was intended to underline the lack of an integrated systemic approach by the manufacturer to the way the "Mega Price Loudspeakers" interface with the customers listening room below the Schroeder frequency. No increased understanding or research is necessary on the part a consumer. In many cases the customer receives the personal attention of the dealer or manufacturer and the speaker system is installed by them in the customers home. In this case it's literally a no-brainer for the customer as they have nothing to do with the install.
Scotty

[Barry_NJ]

Many people who buy mega buck loudspeakers may not be audiophiles, so their reasons for purchasing high end audio equipment are likely to be quite different than ours. I doubt that the guy buying a pair of $150,000 speakers is gonna tweak or mod out his gear, spend countless hours determining the best placement, obsess over burn-in, search the forums for input and ideas, call his buddies over to conduct crude AB tests, read the latest issue Affordable Audio, search audiogon for the best deals, etc. For them, it's all about status. Sound quality may not be a major factor. And, of course, they aren't concerned about getting value for the dollar.

Let's face it -- if any of us had mega bucks to spend on audio, a significant part of our purchasing decision would be based on aesthetics. Personally, I'd buy a pair of the biggest tube monoblocks I could find, and sound quality would be a secondary consideration because I would assume they'd sound great because of the price.

Why can't someone with big bux be an audiophile hobbyist? I think you're incorrect.

I've met the gentleman pictured below, and been to his place, he tweeks and plays and enjoys it...

[Russell Dawkins]

If I had his bux, I'd do something about the walls - like remove them or something!

[Barry_NJ]

If I had his bux, I'd do something about the walls - like remove them or something!

Well, he's essentially removed the ceiling... it's about 40ft above the floor

And the walls are all treated too 

[Early B.]

If I had his bux, I'd do something about the walls - like remove them or something!

His system looks like it was set up in a racquetball court. A true audiophile with deep pockets would have designed an acoustic room where all of those panels would not be necessary.

[Barry_NJ]

His system looks like it was set up in a racquetball court. A true audiophile with deep pockets would have designed an acoustic room where all of those panels would not be necessary.

All of those panels are speakers

http://www.soundlab-speakers.com/

[FullRangeMan]

To stay in business selling thru bricks & mortar, driver & cabinet costs should be on the order of 10% of retail.  Keep inmind these guys will get OEM pricing, iften on unique versiona of drivers, and they will often hand select from what they buy and toss the rest.

Peak Consult Zoltan - 34,995/$2950 = 8.4%

Joseph Audio Pearl - 1/23,500/$1460 = 6.2%

Wilson Audio Watt Puppy - 1/27,900/$1100 = 3.9% (very pricet cabinet material)

Eggleston Works Andra 2 - 1/19,500/$1870 = 9.6%

Avalon Eidolon Vision - 1/23,950/$1490 = 6.2%

Verity Audio Sarastro - 1/29,995/$2380 = 7.9%

dave

In the 90years I read in the late Audio mag(paper) that the loudspeaker industry profit margins were about 100% the cost price, and the dealer margin were also the same(100%).
So with these data provided by Polymer site seems this Audio magazine info seems true.
A raw projection:
Drivers cost=10
Cabinet cost=10
Crossover cost=10
Total = 30
Factory profit=30
Factory Price=60
Dealer profit=40
Grand Total =100 >>(MSRP to custumer=100)

[Barry_NJ]

In the 90years I read in the late Audio mag(paper) that the loudspeaker industry profit margins were about 100% the cost price, and the dealer margin were also the same(100%).
So with these data provided by Polymer site seems this Audio magazine info seems true.
A raw projection:
Drivers cost=10
Cabinet cost=10
Crossover cost=10
Total = 30
Factory profit=30
Factory Price=60
Dealer profit=40
Grand Total =100 >>(MSRP to custumer=100)

If it's so easy and so profitable, maybe you should start a speaker company and get rich instead of whining about how others are doing it