[meilankev]

I ask because a good friend of mine lives in Atlanta (he has a brother that lives in the suburbs). They have been down on 3 occasions since my family moved into our home. Both are huge audio junkies.

The first time they just brought along some music (no equipment). They really enjoyed my system (when playing vinyl), and in fact stayed an extra day just to enjoy the listening room. They, of course, knew of the turntable company Basis, but had dismissed them in favor of one of the newer boutique turntable manufacturers.

Both of them had bought turntables from this new company (I'll call Company X), and had been really pleased. However, my system intrigued them, so on each of the next two visits, they packed up one of their turntables and brought it along for a comparo.

To make a long story short, both preferred my turntable over their more expensive (and supposedly "Giant-killer" rig). My friend has since sold his "Company X" turntable, and replaced it with a Basis (of course, he had to out-do me, so he went up the product line).

However, his brother has decided to keep his turntable, and his only reason is "how cool it looks". I can't disagree - this company makes for exceptional eye-candy. But he could sell his turntable, buy a Basis, and come away with money in his pocket. Better sound - less money; sounds like a winner.

But it gets trumped because the Basis has (relatively) pedestrian looks.

In your opinion, how common is this in the audio world??

Kevin

P.S. - I'm not revealing "Company X", as I'm sure some of our members own this turntable, and that's not what this thread is about...

[Redbone]

I think that it goes a lot deeper than aesthetics.  Some of the stuff that I have seen is downright insanity.  What I have learned by reading the Audiophile boards for almost a year is that the mind-ear connection is really loose and subjective.  It's much deeper than the way a piece of equipment looks.  Price and expectation make big differences, more so than the actual sound.  It is truly a disease.

[Dan Banquer]

For the great bulk of consumers it's looks first and sound quality second. Or, don't ever make the mistake of shipping cables in bubble wrap; ship them in a cloth bag with draw strings.
                  d.b.

[Eric]

Probably more than I would like to admit

[Tyson]

That's one reason I love my AVA gear so much - nothing that plain looking should sound that great.  Stealth high end at it's finest

[nathanm]

I totally have to like the way something looks.  Doesn't bother me at all to say so.  Only blind listeners could be chided for excessive money spent on looks.  Of course, this doesn't mean I am going to drop 8 grand on the Oracle CD transport\player though, despite the 3 pints of drool excreted everytime I see a picture of it.  I wouldn't expect it to sound drastically different from what I already have (although you
'd hope it would!  It's clear you are paying for the millwork, not so much the actual gubbins)  But cool looks are relative.  For example, the Van Alstine equipment looks very cool to me, as well as Dan's six channel preamp.  (silver knobs on black, can't beat that) Some might think these products are overly utilitarian and boring though.  Well, both AVA and Dan's RE logos kinda suck, but I won't hold that against them! (kidding)  

If you think about the actual stuff that does the work then NO component from any vendor would look cool at all.  It would be a bunch of green circuit boards or a jumble of point-to-point wired parts.  But since it has to go in some kind of container I figure there's ways to make it more visually appealing.  And good looks does not necessarily mean you have to spend a fortune.  Good design is not a monetary matter.

It's a balance, you can do both: have a great circuit in an asthetically pleasing case and not necessarily break the bank.  Of course it can be taken to extremes like Jeff Rowland faceplates as one example.  I am not sure how they do that, but I assume it involves a gazillion CNC passes for oodles 'o dough.  But really, it's a lot of work to make a nifty chunk of metal that is stuck on what it essentially a plain black rectangle.  A different yet equally pleasing faceplate could be fashioned for less money.  Just the layout of knobs and switches can make a difference in one's perception of the component's visual appeal.

Most of Basis' turntables look pretty cool to me. I prefer the clear acrylic myself, over the black.  I'd like to know what the guy's brother felt was more visually appealing.  Clearaudio perhaps? (acrylic explosion!) Vyger? (machinist on PCP!) There really aren't too many "ugly" turntables out there once you get beyond the DJ market stuff if you ask me.  It's all pretty darn swank lookin'

[Tonto Yoder]

I've always thought of Basis tables being pretty nice looking too.
Personally, I DO like aesthetically-pleasing gear and would factor that into purchases. For instance,I would NEVER buy the gaudy Musical Fidelity gear (with the gold trim stuck on).

But I DID buy my turntable despite mild dislike over its blue marbleized base (always reminds me of my mother's bowling ball).

[meilankev]

Nathan and Mr Yoder,

The Basis I own is the 1400 with the acrylic base.  It is their entry-level model.  And while I can't imagine anyone saying it is "ugly" or "poorly-designed", it was visually outclassed by the rig by "Company X".  All three of us agreed on that.

I'm not saying that Basis makes some kind of ultimate deck, but it fits in very nicely with my system.  And again, I'm hoping to keep this thread from evolving into "Kevin says his Basis kicks ass".  It's just that this experience made me curious about the bigger picture of the importance of aesthetics in folks' decisions.

Kevin

[DVV]

I can't say how much is much, but in my view, looks have far too much to do with the general public's perception of audio gear. This is a nice way of saying it's looks first, and the rest comes "naturally".

As a very common and basic example, take the insanely thich aluminium front plates. These days, they go as far as a full inch - and more! - thick. Yet, to this day, I have never once heard any technical or acoustic justification for this aluminium reselling. A couple of times, vibration control was hinted at; while I agree greater mass tends to resonate less than low mass, I can think up quite a number of methods of dealing with the very real vibration problem far more effectively for less money. And if we were to ask some of the real hotshots working on that problem for such not completely unknown organizations like NASA, I'm sure they could write volumes on the topic.

Yet, if you don't use a thick front plate, and massive volume knobs (again, good up to a point), you have nothing, nobody is interested, nobody takes you seriously. The fact that you gear plays better music than the other, thick plate stuff, seems completely irrelevant. And it's not just front plates - these days, if it ain't got a computer inside, well sheesh, it cain't be any good, can it?

About the only bastion of sanity left I can readily think of in terms of groups of audio users, beside isolated individuals, are the DIY guys. They sure care about the insides a hell of a lot more than about the looks. Maybe it's because they are an integral part of the manufacturing process, in which they too have their say, while classic passive buyers are reduced to only plonking down the money.

But that's the way it was ordained to be when audio became such a big business; for lack of ideas, true, advance design, manufacturers resort to visual tricks.

Cheers,
DVV

[nathanm]

It's pretty difficult to NOT be influenced by looks considering that most people are comparing two or more pieces of equipment completely non-blind with full awareness about which they are listening to.  I have a feeling that many purely sonic differences would disappear or become lessened without visual cues.  That's why I think it would be cool if when the regional groups around AC got together in person that they'd do their listening in the dark.  It would just offer a lot of useful data I think.

Ergonomics is also a critical issue too which may not influence the sonics.  A piece of gear with a crummy remote control could make you dislike it even if it sounds good.  It might look great but maybe the jacks are too close together and it's hard to plug stuff into it.  Maybe the power switch is on the back instead of the front.  Maybe the cool heatsinks are always cutting your hands up.  All of that stuff influences opinion as well.

Dejan, do you think that the excessively thick panels are a significant contributor to the final price?  I mean, I do agree that it is a needless expense, but I'm just curious what percentage of the final price constitutes the metalwork for the casing.

In Rowland's case it's the polished pattern on there that folks dig I'd wager - not necessarily raw thickness of the metal.  I just wonder what parameter affects the cost the most?  Would a 2mm thick bit of polished metal be significantly cheaper or not? Hmmm...  How much would a Pass Labs X350 cost if it was put inside a plain rolled steel project box?

Perhaps companies could offer a 'brown wrapper' version of their product without any cosmetic stuff bolted on and the appropriate cost savings adjusted; then the buyer could decide just how much the eyecandy is really worth to them.  I don't think making cool looking stuff is unethical, but people should know where their money is going.

Aww come on meilankev, who's company x?

[Tonto Yoder]

Nathan and Mr Yoder,

The Basis I own is the 1400 with the acrylic base.  It is their entry-level model.  And while I can't imagine anyone saying it is "ugly" or "poorly-designed", it was visually outclassed ....

Just for a frame of reference


Straight-forward styling,  but I understand your point that other tables with all the frills could be considered more visually impressive.

[_scotty_]

A short piece of advice. Listen to your music with your eyes closed and your ears open and make your judgements accordingly. My two cents
worth.

[mcgsxr]

Nice topic, I like that people are willing to put their eyes and ears on trial!

Well, I guess I fall into the form follows function camp.  No one I know is very impressed by the ART DIO I have, nor the Teac tripath amps (just little 1/2 chassis boxes), nor my 14 year old Nakamichi basic black cd player, nor the Monarchy DIP....nor the B&K pre/pro in black!

Then again, I did pop for the Atlantis Reference stands (chunky 4 pillar metal), and I HAD to have the mahogany Totems... plus I did paint my Teacs to match the rest of my black gear.

For me, it has to sound good, if, after that, I can afford the swanky looks, I will pop for it, in certain components.

Mark in Canada

[Dan Banquer]

To all and especially Nathan: The case is generally the most expensive part of any piece of equipment . The fancier the case the more money it costs. Then multiply the cost of the case by 5 and that's typically what the retail price will be.
  I must admit Nathan; I am crushed that you don't like my logo. I spent a fair amount of money to have that as a registered trademark.  
               d.b.

[nathanm]

See Dan, you shoulda put the logo money into thicker faceplates instead! Just kidding man, it's not that bad, I've seen much worse logos! The SCPA is a very nice looking unit.  Heck, stick two chunks of stained wood on the side and it would be a little flashier.  Maybe some chrome spiked feet...But seriously, I think you should send that thing on a demo tour. .25db volume trims - that is a seriously good idea if you ask me.   Hell, if you can't center the vocalist with that - whew!

So the case really is the most pricey bit?  Wow...  I would've thought that all the little parts and most importantly the labor that would have to go into assembling\soldering all that stuff together would be the main expense.  Hmm.  At least, you'd have to pay ME a lot more to solder something together than to make a metal case!  Heh!

Maybe we could have a poll to pick two similar price ranged components, one of which people think is ugly and drab looking and another which is more like a sculpture and A\B them blindly.  Even better, do a sighted test but with the gubbins from one component put in the case of the other!  Okay, so it's a little far fetched but what the hey...

[DVV]

It's pretty difficult to NOT be influenced by looks considering that most people are comparing two or more pieces of equipment completely non-blind with full awareness about which they are listening to. I have a feeling that many purely sonic differences would disappear or become lessened without visual cues. That's why I think it would be cool if when the regional groups around AC got together in person that they'd do their listening in the dark. It would just offer a lot of useful data I think.

Agreed! You'd be surprised how tables would turn in respect to choosing on looks first and sound later.

Ergonomics is also a critical issue too which may not influence the sonics. A piece of gear with a crummy remote control could make you dislike it even if it sounds good. It might look great but maybe the jacks are too close together and it's hard to plug stuff into it. Maybe the power switch is on the back instead of the front. Maybe the cool heatsinks are always cutting your hands up. All of that stuff influences opinion as well.

Regarding ergonomics Nate, I couldn't agree with you more. Awkwardly placed controls can be a pain, even if one eventually gets used to them. Ultimately, it's not necessary to be difficult.

And let's be honest about it - good design does not necessarily cost more than poor design. It's all in the head and the vision.

Dejan, do you think that the excessively thick panels are a significant contributor to the final price? I mean, I do agree that it is a needless expense, but I'm just curious what percentage of the final price constitutes the metalwork for the casing.

As Dan so rightly pointed out, the case is THE most expensive part of the unit. I can't claim this to be the ultimate truth, and local prices do vary quite a bit, but I know Karan's case (a massive aluminium affair, 1" thick sculptured front panel, 0.5" bottom and top, massive 12" side heatsinks, massive two rotary controls) costs him around $600!!! Yes, it looks gorgeous, yes it's ultra high quality, yes local prices are higher than in the US, yes it's a hand-made (hence low volume, hence more expensive) product, but $600? That makes up for about 1/3 of its total RETAIL price in the US, which was about $5.4K (when multiplied with added costs and dealer margins).

To be fair, now that I've dropped a name, I have yet to hear an integrated amp with such beautiful voicing as the Karan; it certainly beats Krell, Levinson, Kensonic at al. offerings, at least so far (but it is a game of leapfrog, as we all know). And 2x180W/8 ohms is a fair bit o' power.

In Rowland's case it's the polished pattern on there that folks dig I'd wager - not necessarily raw thickness of the metal. I just wonder what parameter affects the cost the most? Would a 2mm thick bit of polished metal be significantly cheaper or not? Hmmm... How much would a Pass Labs X350 cost if it was put inside a plain rolled steel project box?

Ergo ...

Nate, it would shave off at least 25% of its retail price, and at those prices, 25% is mucho dolores. True, it would then be packed inside a rather plain looking, pro orientated 19" rack case, which is no big deal these days. But it could retain all its essential electrical and acoustic properties at a lower price. And it wouldn't sell.

Cheers,
DVV

[lonewolfny42]

The SCPA is a very nice looking unit.  Heck, stick two chunks of stained wood on the side and it would be a little flashier.  Maybe some chrome spiked feet...But seriously, I think you should send that thing on a demo tour.

Good idea nathan !!  I've never read any posts about Dan's equipement    ......its like a big secret ...???

[viggen]

I am just starting to look at turntables, and aesthitics is my first criteria so far mainly because I don't know how any of them sound.  If it's a looker then reviews of it are read to determine whether I want to pursue this turntable further or not.  Mainly, I want to know whether it fits my listening taste, smooth, slow, melancholy rather than fast, hyper detailed and strong.  I guess this is sort of like online dating.  I am also looking at tone arms and cartridges in the same manner.  I can't say there are any drop dead turntables out there so far.  Thorens 1800s I think it is looks nice.  So does Michell Tecnodec, and some vintage Micro Seikis.  I'd like a subdued yet industrial look.  Also, material is important to me too.  I don't like plinths made of acrylic or mdf.  The search goes on.

You don't mind sharing what that brand X turntable is?  I am curious to know.

Oh yeah, just for point of reference, if another cd transport performs exactly like the 47 Labs Pitracer, costs 80% less but looks like a Panasonic dvd player, I'd pay the extra 80% to get a Pitracer because I love the way it looks.  This is if I have the discretionary funds... just a for fun scenario.

[Dan Banquer]

O.K. folks; when one of my demo units comes back from Pro Audio Review I will consider a tour. The problem is that the editor does not want to part with it, and since he gives me lots of good press I'm not going to push the issue.
You're basically right Nathan; I should have spent the money on a fancier case, and nevermind building it to satisfy what the mixdown and recording engineers told me what was needed.
                            d.b.

[DVV]

O.K. folks; when one of my demo units comes back from Pro Audio Review I will consider a tour. The problem is that the editor does not want to part with it, and since he gives me lots of good press I'm not going to push the issue.
You're basically right Nathan; I should have spent the money on a fancier case, and nevermind building it to satisfy what the mixdown and recording engineers told me what was needed.
                            d.b.

And then you wouldn't be you.

Forget it Dan, you are you precisely because you think the way you do. I'm not saying your (or anyone else's) case couldn't stand some improvement, but that's "some", not adding another 20-30% to the cost on account of the case.

As opposed to Nate, I'd say you should spend more money on advertising; what the potential customers don't even know is there, they can't buy, it doesn't exist.

Cheers,
DVV

P.S. A tour is DAMN fine idea - the best form of advertising there is. No snake oil, no bull, there it is, try it out yourself.