[JohnR]

But seriously, think about all of the truly tiny companies out there (without either design or manufacturing capability) who have no choice but to base their designs on existing products.

You've said this a number of times but perhaps it's not as obviously true to many of us here on this site as it seems to be to you. There are a bunch of small manufacturers with a circle here, and I don't think very many fall into this category at all. Some use existing class D modules, and some mod equipment, but they're completely open about it AFAIK.

[doug s.]

How'za bout z Maxima?

edit:  errr they are no longer rwd.

ain't that the truth!  last time there was a rwd maxima, the company was named datsun, back in 1980.  the model lasted thru '84, when datsuns started being called nissans...

doug s.

[JimJ]

There are a bunch of small manufacturers with a circle here, and I don't think very many fall into this category at all.

It depends on what section of the audio industry you're looking at.

In the 12VDC world, it's more of the rule. Much lower margins there, so using Korean or Chinese OEMs with common boards makes more sense.

[cloudbaseracer]

I guess I still don't get it! Nissan does not make the alternator, sparkplugs, wiring, fabric, glass, etc.  They do assembly these "off the shelf" components in their own soupy mixture to give you a car.

I am sure the same alternators are used in numerous cars from different manufacturers.  No one really cares as long as it is up to Nissan "quality".  AC Delco may produce them for Ford, Chevrolet, Saturn etc.  Same part with Different associated components.  I have never seen a Nissan product re-badged as an Infinity with absolutely no change other than color and decals.

I think what the original poster must be referring to is "private labeling".  Same product - different price -- different label. 

[mort]

The moral of the story, if you can afford to and dont want to partake in this industry wide practice. Only buy equipment with penned signatures from the creator !!

[*Scotty*]

I think the OP is going about this the wrong way. If he is concerned that re-badging is taking place on a grand scale and doesn't want to pay something for nothing he should stick with the offerings from the producers of Mass-Fi electronics. If this is a large scale practice as he believes, he should be able to put together a system that sounds as just good as the boutique brands without the extra expense and BS.
Scotty

[Kevin Haskins]

JackD201/Kevin Haskins:

Whatever happened to the savvy, educated consumer? Why so much apology for the Lexicons of the world? How can you pretend to be so business savvy and then turn around and tell me that the only reason we don't have more Lexicon scandals is because you're pretty sure that these all of these tiny little brands driven solely by mystique and few dollars worth of hardware packed into attractive, overbuilt cases have your best interests at heart?

Don't take me wrong.... I'm not writing as an apology for what companies market.   I'm just pointing out that manufacturing your own product is a thing of the past.   It isn't like Ford or GM back in the old days where a company created, built and marketed a product.   Now companies (even those like Ford/GM) outsource much of it because that is a more efficient business model.   You can have companies that specialize in one thing and do it better than others hence providing more value.

I don't know of a lot of examples of what Harmon has done.   Usually that is something that is done by small companies as they tweak or mod products like the Oppo and it is common knowledge of the starting product's origin.   That is where the middle of the high-end audio market has headed and the upper end will continue to offer products that average consumers won't even consider.   

[SonicReducer]

Scotty/cloudbaseraceer/JackD201:

So as a consumer who dares to actually give a crap about what’s inside the big, shiny metal box that I’m buying, I should really just stick to the shallow end of the pool, huh? Look, I’m not an audio “objectivist” - I think that cables matter; I don’t think that all amps sound alike; I understand that a beautiful, custom piece of gear should rightly cost more than one made on an assembly line, etc. Jack201D claims that ultimately only the sound of the piece of equipment matters, not what’s inside.

Aesthetically, he’s right. In theory I agree. But back here on earth, most people try to maximize their value. Whether I have “only” $1,000 to spend on a system, or “only” $50,000, I want the very best sounding system that I can afford. Now, even with the limited knowledge of the industry that I possess, I know that a lot of these small manufacturers are using off-the-shelf parts, and even off-the-shelf components that are modified in degrees ranging from not at all to very extensively. Some of them also turn to design/manufacturing companies like the following: 

http://www.cullencircuits.com/

Now Cullen Circuits is only one company among many offering both engineering and manufacturing solutions. Does every amp that comes out of there sound the same? Probably not. But maybe they all have a similar sonic signature. Maybe I want to hear both the PS Audio Trio A100 (100 wpc, Class D) and the Genesis GR 180 (180 wpc, Class D). As long as I’m in the market for an amp, what would it hurt to compare the $4,800 Genesis and the $1,000 PS Audio? Is the Genesis really “worth” four times the PS Audio? If I’m a reviewer at Stereophile, the answer is unequivocally “yes”. In the real world, I know that pricing for a lot of this gear is arbitrary, and that if manufacturers feel that they can get away with charging more, they’ll charge more. The market will let them know if it’s too much, and apparently the market has been pretty accepting. Perhaps the Genesis is pure magic compared to the PS Audio. But maybe - and only maybe - the two are almost identical. So as a smart consumer, I’m going to want hear both.

I can understand the reluctance on the part of both audiophiles and manufacturers to view audio products as “mere” consumer goods instead of magical objects worthy of reverence. But for every dedicated manufacturer who truly sweats the details, I’m sure there are three manufacturers who, having seen the profit margins on some these items, want in on this free ride. They’re the ones who perhaps take existing products and only change a few parts, instead of many. I hardly think that one has to be a “crusader” or a “cynic” to have this perspective. After all, it’s just business (and often only business).

I love great-sounding music as much as anyone else, but I’d really like to see some of the reverence and elitism and BS drained out of high-end audio. I do see changes happening even now, mostly in and around computer-based audio. As a consumer, I’d like to be able to go to audio forum boards and pick up information on who manufactures what. An earlier poster stated that JVC does the manufacturing (and engineering?) for Pioneer, Anthem and Meridian. I think this information is interesting, useful and just possibly valuable. It’s entirely possible that the Meridian gear is absolutely tops, no question. But I’m going to put away my audiophile equivalent of beer goggles and actually (and fairly) listen to higher-end JVC/Pioneer gear. You can sneer away, but let’s not pretend that the boutique audio brands aren’t charging a killing by playing into your class aspirations and self-inflated aesthetic concerns.

Now, I’m NOT trying to “de-bunk” high-end audio. My viewpoint remains pragmatic and realistic. There are undoubtedly small brands run by passionate engineers who make quality, value-laden, beautiful products that, yes, cost a small fortune, and rightly so. The only real, pragmatic change that I’d like to see is one that I think is already occurring: the rabid and extensive sharing of information that was once considered too “inside baseball” or dismissed as irrelevant.

I mentioned earlier that I’m seeing some of newer, smaller brands very explicitly revealing information on transports, DAC’s, drivers, crossovers, etc. I think these changes are for the better, and lead to better consumer decisions. My only surprise is that these changes aren't happening more quickly, or with as much enthusiasm as I might expect. On this very forum, a number of posters have taken issue with my concerns, and have more or less dismissed my desire for a more transparent industry as fanciful, foolish and impractical.

I honestly think that these changes are simply a matter of time as high-end audio is forced to deal with the twin forces of the tanking economy and the sharing of information. But in the meantime, I’m not quite sure why such a very simple, consumer-positive goal is encountering so much pushback.

[lcrim]

SonicReducer:
The pushback is because you took the position that this rebadging was a widespread practice.  What you heard is that it isn't.
My systems are in my signature.  I know who designed and built my components.  They are modestly priced but sound very good.  I wasn't cheated in any way. 

[*Scotty*]

SonicReducer,Audio is a little different than the examples you gave from other areas of consumer goods. Sturgeon's Law operates with a vengeance in the Audio domain. There are damn few examples of adequately designed mass-fi gear which would pass sonic muster. Most of it is crud and re-badging doesn't make it better. I don't think there are hundreds of pieces of audiophile grade gear from the mass-fi manufacturers waiting to be discovered. Like-wise if a manufacturers starts with a soundly engineered piece from a major manufacturer and adds a better power supply and analogue stage there is nothing wrong with that,you have the reliability of a major manufacturer with better sound. About the only example of rampant "re-badging", which may not be the correct term in this case that I can think of is companies selling the ICE ASAP module. The only difference is the box it is sold in. This is an OEM turnkey technology that can't really be altered by the end user,basically you pick which aluminum reseller you want to by from and go from there.
Scotty

[SonicReducer]

My point isn’t to romanticize “big box” crapola, but rather to explore (and ultimately capitalize upon) the idea that within each general audio category there is (from what I've seen) a lot of very similar gear floating around out there at wildly different (and often arbitrary) price points. The entrenched audiophile notion that every single piece of gear is wholly unique is I think untrue both technically and aesthetically. This notion works in favor of the boutique audio brands by unmooring price from any “reasonable” expectation, a practice built upon the premise of an absolute distinctiveness that cannot easily be contextualized or valued even when cross-shopping similar gear. This “uniqueness” also prevents both professional reviewers and casual forum posters from truly criticizing audio components due to an unhealthy reverence for individual preferences that apparently trump any and all more formal aesthetic criteria.

In essence, I would recommend an approach that to a certain extent demystifies high-end audio without going down the “objectivist” path of viewing audio gear as mere electronic appliances without any kind of sonic character. If nothing else, I think that the increased sharing of information regarding similar equipment that is being sold by different audio companies could only be helpful. I think that part of the resistance to this idea in this forum is simply disbelief from people who have an aesthetic/emotional stake in a very idealized, romantic notion of high-end audio. Ever wonder why, even in this awful economy, there are still so many small companies trying to enter high-end audio? Pure profit, obviously. High profit margins are available to small brands that can both slap together a handful of off-the-shelf items to an acceptable standard and successfully position their products as being in some way novel.

I’ve already beaten the dead horse (and then some), but my main point throughout the thread has been the encouragement of a more proactive and diligent consumer stance that’s a bit less naive and reverential regarding the realities of the high-end audio industry. Given the state of the economy, and the corresponding interest in value, I think that increased vigilance and information sharing can only have a positive effect on the industry as a whole.

[JackD201]

I'll just ask a hypothetical question.

If someone came up to you and let you try something that sounded exactly a piece of gear you've been seriously considering at a price far lower, a price that would not make you blink, would you pull out your wallet right then and there or would you play 20 questions?

MY resistence is not to proactive and diligent consumer practices but to what you consider to be diligent and proactive practices. To me this hobby is about the sound therefore to me the diligent practice requires that the consumer first figure out his sonic priorities then actually listen to a product. The matter of price should then be the simple question "Does what I hear justify what they are asking for it?".  This is a very personal hobby and as such each decision is personal and must conform to the individual's personal criteria set within his personal value system. Most AC members follow th esame general principles. To be smart, audition, audition, audition and carry a sack of salt when reading any review.

Surely there are folks out there that worship at the feet of reviewers and marketers, quite a few actually but not here at AC. The membership here is composed of folks from all over the world that have been through the mill. Being through the mill oft means having made expensive mistakes I agree but I will be bold enough to say that these mistakes were to buy stuff that they, myself included, didn't like because we used our heads and not our ears either through false economy on the low side or being blinded by flashy looks or published specs on the high side.

[*Scotty*]

SonicReducer, I think you have a very distorted view of the potential profits that can be realized from a business involving audio electronics that has a low volume of production. Kevin and other manufacturers here on AC can give you a reality check regarding your perceptions of the financial viability of a small audio based business in this economy. Now if you want to talk about the numbers of new cable manufacturers that have sprung up in the last few years that is another matter. As I don't rely on reviewers perceptions of the gear they review for meaningful information regarding purchasing decisions I don't care what form their biases take. I also don't
rely on opinions expressed online about equipment for meaningful information either. Ten million people CAN be wrong. 
As far as I am concerned there is no substitute for hearing a piece of gear in your own system.
Scotty

[timind]

Had to read the entire thread before responding.
A few examples have been given but nothing earth shattering, no new news. My guess is actual rebadging is not all that rampant.
I am another one of those who opens up every piece I purchase to have a look inside. With the exception of the ICE amps I have owned I haven't seen anything that would qualify as rebadging.
What I have seen that might qualify is the cdps sold by Music Hall, Onix, Shanling and a few others are nearly identical inside. Once again, not news.
As for amps based on ICE modules, while the modules look identical there are differences with input modules that are fairly substantial. Also, the manufacturers of these products are pretty straight forward about what they are selling. It's not difficult to find information concerning the differences in these products.
Good hunting.

[Sun_N_H2O]

It seems to me that most are missing the original point of this thread. I don't believe any judgement was being made on the practice or necessarily even the amount of it happening, only that is does sometimes happen and that if you know of any straight up rebadging or even know of possable similarities due to common manufacturing facilities or even hired design help, please share with the rest of us so that we might cross shop something that may be similar (for potentially much less money).

[SonicReducer]

Sun -n- H20

You are exactly correct. An earlier poster, for instance, thought that I was attacking manufacturers for outsourcing parts and even entire components, saying to me that such outsourcing was very commonplace and a reality of today's manufacturing landscape. I absolutely agree, and precisely because so many manufacturers (even very large and/or established manufacturers) do not do their own manufacturing, and instead either use other (branded) companies or companies that specialize solely in consulting and manufacturing, I think that consumers would benefit greatly from sharing information about products that are in all likelihood very similar. There are far more brands than there are manufacturers, and in almost every industry, a handful of companies perform the majority of manufacturing. If a high-profile, relatively transparent giant like Volkswagon feels that it's perfectly acceptable to sell a premium SUV/CUV under three names at a number of different price points (Tourag, Cayenne, Q7), then it takes very little imagination to speculate on the amount of rebadging that must go on in a far smaller industry that (at its high end) is comprised of a number of small manufacturers that have little to no transparency. For a number of interesting reasons, some people seem to feel that home audio is somehow different from other industries, and that it is somehow insulated from contemporary business practices. I like to drink the Kool-Aid occasionally myself when marveling over a beautiful piece of gear, but when it comes time to put my dollars on the line, I want to have access to the best "inside" information available (and I will, accordingly, also share my own information).

I'm not pretending to "educate" anyone on this phenomenon, nor do I think that I'm "exposing" any company or practice. I'm simply surprised that more consumers (audiophiles, in this case) don't dig a little deeper and share more information that could work to their benefit. Again, one needn't be a "cynic", "crusader" or "conspiracy theorist" to 1) Acknowledge the reality of certain widely-accepted business practices within the realm of high-end audio, and 2) Look to share useful information that will help consumers make better decisions, and perhaps even force companies to be more transparent, if they feel that consumer sentiment demands such transparency. I realize that, in an audio forum where many people actually build their own gear, this message may seem irrelevant, but I started this thread with the site's bias towards "value" in mind.

[SonicReducer]

At the risk of repeating myself ad nauseam, I thought that I’d give an example of what I’m talking about. Consider the following curiously similar (and possibly completely unique) integrated amplifiers:

http://www.rotel.com/NA/products/ProductDetails.htm?Id=483&Tab=2&Pic=1 $1,000.00

http://www.eu.onkyo.com/products/A-9155.html $400.00

http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/specifications.php?PID=371&Title=Specifications $550.00

http://www.audioanalogue.com/prodotti_scheda.php?ID_prodotto=46 $1,200.00

http://www.musichallaudio.com/detail.php?p=18, $700.00

http://www.atoll-electronique.com/uk/ampliintegre.php $1,400.00

If you examine the specs, you’ll see that each integrated amp has roughly the same power, features, connections, size, weight and layout. Perhaps amplifiers in this segment simply fly off the shelves, and each company has decided to throw their hat into the ring with a wholly unique and yet very comparable and competitive amp. My guess, however, is that they’re probably sourced from Onkyo. Onkyo would logically agree to this because, as a “mainstream” brand, they know that they can’t charge “audiophile” prices for their equipment, and so, being unable to capitalize on brand prestige, they have to compete on price. For certain self-styled “upmarket” audio enthusiasts, the Onkyo might even be considered to be competing in a different, “lower” market. The other brands, catering almost solely to audiophiles, can (and clearly do) charge more for their very similar amps.

Should someone stumble across two or three of these amps in the process of researching a purchase, they will likely ending up comparing them only in terms of sound and cost, as the amps have identical features. An already-diligent consumer who has researched all of his options won’t truly care if they are, in fact, all based on the same amp, because he already has all the facts he needs, and he can focus on the most important aspect, sound (followed by cost, although not necessarily).

The question remains, however: Why does this information matter? Because most audio products are ultimately compared on the basis of sound and cost, the easy answer is that this information doesn’t matter in the slightest as long as the consumer is reasonably well informed. But that’s the catch. An aspiring audiophile might greatly want the Atoll, perceiving a correlation between the highest price and the highest quality. This same audiophile might not even be aware of the Onkyo because he has turned his back on the “mainstream” segment entirely in the course of his research. But what if the two sound remarkably similar? If our consumer purchases the Atoll, he has just “lost” $1,000.00. It’s true that if he is in love with his Atoll amp, he may never be aware of the Onkyo, and may therefore be blissfully ignorant of his “loss”, which is actually a mixed blessing. But what if he, in researching the Atoll, stumbles onto this site and sees all of the possible choices? Maybe he’ll rethink his purchase. If nothing else, perhaps he’ll audition the Onkyo with an open mind. He might even choose one of the amps priced between the two. In any event, the dissemination of this information has subsequently made him a better consumer who has made a better choice. Even if he still ends up with the Atoll simply because he’s always dreamed of being an Atoll owner, he is at least aware of the options. Since this purchase won’t be “high-dollar” no matter which amp he chooses, I would imagine that only so much research is going to go into his decision. I know that the fact that there are at least six amps on the market with the same specs wouldn’t even occur to me. I’d probably stop at two or three and call it a day, not knowing that a better (or cheaper, or both) choice might exist.

In a nutshell, I’d like to see more of this kind of information sharing. Not to “shame” Atoll (or any other company), or to automatically assume that the Onkyo is the best value (it may indeed have the worst sound), but to simply to make others aware of the wide array of very similar products that may, aside from small and possibly inaudible changes, be exactly the same. I’m not suggesting that any of the audio enthusiasts on this site actually need to be taken by the hand before making a purchase, merely that such information is in general a benefit to the consumer. I’m also not pretending to offer a bombshell revelation. Better information for better purchases is the beginning and end of the story.

[doug s.]

sonicreducer, the examples you give are grasping at straws, imo - it seems to me these products are all quite different.  if they share some internal componentry, so be it.  if they sound similar, it is likely because the quality of gear has improved, and the differences between components that have reached a certain level start to become smaller & smaller.  yust check your price-range, look for something that has the features you want, start auditioning, and make your own decisions.  buy used, if you are really wanting to maximize your dollar's walue.

as i said before, the thing that really offends my sensibilities is when a manufacturer simply re-labels another product and sells it for multiples of the original product's price.  while there is some lower-end chinese tubed gear that seems to share a lot of major componentry, the worst offender i am aware of like this, is red rose music, which i mentioned earlier.  a couple examples:

red rose classic, at $8k:


aurum cantus moon river, at $1165:


red rose affirmation, at $7k:


dusson v8i, at $1095:


ymmv,

doug s.

[JohnR]

My guess, however, is that they’re probably sourced from Onkyo.

Um... why would you guess that? Just because they have similar specs? I think you're probably over-estimating the design effort required for these items, it's probably orders of magnitude less than for a car motor.

At least three of them look like they are completely different internally:

[TheChairGuy]

I've always been amazed at the hi-fi industry - from a different perspective than Sonic Reducer, our OP.

I see a very, very small group of (traditional) 2-channel enthusiasts worldwide today and cannot fathom how so many small specialist manufacturers stay in business making such small volumes for a dwindling (perhaps that's dying ) audience.

I see a kludge of unique designs, unrelated to one another except that they are poised to fill a particular (ultra-small) market niche.

Frankly, I don't see enough re-badging in at least the ultra-small 2 channel market.  I don't know how the heck makers hang on and stay in business making such puny volumes of gear in the face of dwindling enthusiast numbers.  I'm simply slack-jawed at the amount of talented engineers, builders, craftsmen and techies worldwide that think that if they simply build some great piece of gear.....then folks will buy it.

No market studies of what the market will pay for this item, no realization that the number of enthusiasts is most often quite small, no advanced planning of cash-burn or capital needed.  They just make it - and hope it sells - on faith alone  

I'm both enthusiastic about the gusto that many have taking specialist gear to market....and equally dismayed and amazed to see clearly that market forces are against them and that business failure is near certain. 

I'm not a downer, merely a realist - but I think it great that some folks place their passion in their work and give all of us so much potential gear to buy...even if it doesn't make good economic sense to have all this gear to buy 

John