[SonicReducer]

I’ve enjoyed many posts in the AudioCircle forums, and I wanted to start a thread about audio manufacturers. The recent Lexicon/Oppo “scandal” dragged a common but still relatively unknown audio manufacturing phenomenon into the light, which is the re-branding and up-market positioning of relatively inexpensive audio gear. Auto manufacturers have, of course, done this for years, but most people are aware of the fact that their Lexus is merely an option-laden Toyota, and are willing to pay the premium for a more “luxurious” vehicle. Many audiophiles seem to be aware of umbrella organizations such as Harman International (JBL, Infinity, Harman Kardon, Mark Levinson, Revel, Lexicon etc.) and D&M Holdings (Denon, McIntosh, Snell, Boston, etc.), as well as the ubiquitous B&O ICE amps and Phillips transports, but fewer seem to be aware of companies like Cullen Circuits (http://www.cullencircuits.com/) that design electronics for a number of manufacturers.

Because manufacturing information is difficult to find, I'm very interested in gathering information from AudioCircle’s readership about exact or at least very similar products that co-exist simultaneously in the current market, less for the negative reason of “shaming” manufacturers than for the positive reason of identifying great products that can be had for less money. If hypothetically speaking a JVC DAC is the near twin to a Cambridge Audio DAC, I think that this particular fact is worth sharing with other budget audiophiles. Even if, as most manufacturers claim, the original product has been modified, I think that DIY audiophiles would be interested in having a catalogue of exceptional and inexpensive platforms that can conceivably be made into high-end components with modest effort.

I would guess that most high-end, niche companies have an enormous stake in keeping secret the humble origins of their products (trading more on mystique than engineering), and I think a little light shone into these myriad dark corners will be helpful. My hope, ultimately, is that forum members will update this thread on a continuing basis. The impetus for this thread, by the way, was not the Lexicon/Oppo situation per se, but rather both the Linn Audio/Behringer connection that subsequently (re?) surfaced, and a fantastic chart that I ran across recently while shopping for new home appliances:

http://www.appliance411.com/purchase/make.shtml

So how about it? Who actually designed and manufactured your gear, and could you find similar products for less?

[Phil A]

There's tons of rebadging in audio or someone making something for someone else.  There's plenty of stuff you'll find.  Recently the bid to do was the Lexicon universal Blu-Ray player which is a $500 Oppo with a custom case and a THX logo for $3,500.

[SonicReducer]

Yeah, I know that rebadging is rampant, but because very high-end and/or niche companies have a much larger stake than corporate arms like Lexicon, manufacturing information seems closely held. I'm sure that Lexicon is merely the tip of the iceberg.

Audio equipment these days can cost as much as a home appliance or a car, and yet while there are extensive data available to the appliance or car consumer that detail which company designs and manufactures products for other companies, I have yet to find such a list for home audio.

The vast amount of fog surrounding the industry is just one of the reasons why non-audiophiles are content to buy a superficially "transparent"/"known" product made by Bose rather than a mystery product from company X.

Perhaps you've stumbled across some info while surfing on the web, or perhaps you know people who sell or design audio gear who have a few industry "secrets". Mariusz alluded to an Onkyo iPod dock that is the same as the Wadia (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=76916.msg726613#msg726613). Why isn't this information more freely circulated? Budgets are tight, and the over-zealous control of information that high-end companies exert on manufacturing information is ludicrous in this day and age.

So who actually manufactured and designed your gear? Do you know of any other rebadged bargains? How can anyone be annoyed at the Lexicon/Oppo situation, and not want to really know more about the industry at the heart of their passion? Forget about "exposing" companies, and think about saving money...

[srb]

Mariusz alluded to an Onkyo iPod dock that is the same as the Wadia (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=76916.msg726613#msg726613).

I might be wrong, I don't think he was saying it was the same internal hardware, but said it was "Wadia-like" (actually "Wadia alike"), in that it extracted digital audio from an iPod.
 
Steve

[lcrim]

I  have a tiny integrated amp from Hong Kong that was built by one manufacturer and marketed by another organization as their own.  The laws regarding intellectual property are much hazier in Asia than here. 
This branding issue is already a challenge as many fine manufacturing organizations engage in this practice to keep their assembly lines running.  There are numerous products from Asian manufacturers that can be found (particularly on Ebay) wearing a different label that are of equal quality to that manufacturers "in-house" brand for steep discounts.  Unlike the Lexicon/Oppo issue I don't see a "victim" in this practice.  BTW, in regards to the Lexicon/Oppo thing, why does Oppo not share some of the blame/bad press w/ Lexicon. They must have been aware what was going on.
I also have a Decware amp and an integrated amp from a small Serbian company , Dayens that I'm sure in both cases that they are assembled in house to specs as stated.  The fact that they may have used a design or circuit that was originally some one else's does not seem to enter into this debate.
Again, I don't know whether the last is true but there are few "new" circuit designs.  I don't know where to draw that line.

[SonicReducer]

Steve: Point taken, but I would be very surprised if the Wadia were NOT a virtual clone of a "big box" company's dock.

Larry: I'm also not interested in dwelling on the "victims" of this practice. My point is that while rebadging occurs in nearly every industry, high-end audio consumers have very little available information. In which other industry could you buy a $10,000 product without knowing anything about who actually designed and manufactured said product? I've noticed a weird reluctance on the part of audio enthusiasts to drag this information into the light, a reluctance perhaps carried over from most of the high-end reviewers who stand to lose their very livelihood should they get too nosy.

The bottom line: As a consumer, I want more information so that I can make better decisions. I think we could all benefit...

[chadh]

Steve: Point taken, but I would be very surprised if the Wadia were NOT a virtual clone of a "big box" company's dock.

As I remember, when the Wadia item came out they were the ONLY player in the market that had acquired the key from Apple to unlock the direct digital feed.  Subsequently, others have secured the same access.  But this would imply that Wadia was not rebadging anything at all.

It's true that there is nothing very special about the technology that Wadia is using.  They just happened to be the first ones to get Apple to give up the key.  Potentially, Apple demanded a big fee for this information - or maybe they gave it away, I don't know.  But there doesn't seem to be any reason to presume that Wadia (or anyone else) is doing anything shifty just because they have a simple but nifty product.

Chad

[SonicReducer]

As I stated above, rebadging occurs within every industry at every level. If the Wadia were, for example, a clone of an Onkyo dock, they would be merely following accepted industry practice. My point is that this information is very rarely made public, especially in the upper reaches of high-end audio. Most of these tiny audio companies are really just marketers. They don't possess the ability to either design or manufacture their products. As a consumer, I think it would be very helpful to know that, say, a Bryston amp was at the heart of a Boulder amp that cost four times as much. Many consumers might not even care, but wouldn't it be great to actually have this information available? This type of full disclosure is common practice in the auto industry, but occurs rarely in high-end audio.

[TheChairGuy]

Within reason of course...but as long as you are pleased with the sonics of some piece of a gear from whatever make - why would or should you care who make it?

Seeking 'best cost possible' seems an elusive goal....affordable excellence for your finite budget is more realistic.

Yeah, I wouldn't be pleased to find my $3500 Lexicon Blu-Ray player to be a duplicate of the OPPO unit at $599....but most badge-engineering (in any industry) is far more nuanced in costing. 

I  have a tiny integrated amp from Hong Kong that was built by one manufacturer and marketed by another organization as their own.  The laws regarding intellectual property are much hazier in Asia than the here. 

Lar - it's not so much that intellectual property law is hazier in Asia (China, I suspect you mean most pointedly), it's merely that their legal systems haven't been setup to challenge and close down copycat factories.  There are patent attorneys for hire in China, amazingly at prices akin to US as their specialty is rare, but it takes forever to close down rogue factories.

Part of the reason has been that intellectual property ownership has been that of holders outside of China...now that Chinese are inventing and patenting at a more rapid rate, the Chinese are realizing how destructive lax enforcement of intellectual property really is now (that it effects Chinese-owned enterprises)

It can be done - we were able to bankrupt a small copy cat factory in Ningbo last year as they fought off our legal team - but it's costly and difficult.  Note that we bankrupted the copycat factory, we weren't able to close them down, as we had deeper pockets to protect our IP.  There are two more factories in China copying now and it's costing us plenty to fight them, too 

Time is on our side for some of the reasons noted above.

John

[SonicReducer]

TheChairGuy:

Sorry, but I'm not accepting your plea for blissful ignorance. The high-end audio industry is relying on people just like you to keep them afloat. I see your blase attitude as symptomatic of the toxic mystique cultivated by high-end reviewers and manufacturers who want you to feel that your $3,000 or $7,000 or $20,000 was spent on a magical piece of wholly unique, hand-crafted gear, regardless of its actual origin. Perhaps there are still people buying the Lexicon because they want a piece of gear that looks better in the living room, or because they feel special when visiting a high-end audio boutique instead of a more conventional retailer. Good for them. But I would speculate that the majority of the Lexicon owners who know about the "scandal" are less than happy. People have and will always pay for products perceived as being upscale, but wouldn't it be great to actually know what you're buying? The buyers of a hand-built Spyker sports car know that they're getting an engine very similar to one found in the Lamborghini Gallardo or the Audi R8. Some buyers will still shell out over $300,000, but other buyers will see the $200,000 premium over the Audi R8 as ridiculous. The high-end audio industry is one of the remaining few that still exists shrouded in pre-internet fog.

[doorman]

I  have a tiny integrated amp from Hong Kong that was built by one manufacturer and marketed by another organization as their own.  The laws regarding intellectual property are much hazier in Asia than the here. 
This branding issue is already a challenge as many fine manufacturing organizations engage in this practice to keep their assembly lines running.  There are numerous products from Asian manufacturers that can be found (particularly on Ebay) wearing a different label that are of equal quality to that manufacturers "in-house" brand for steep discounts.  Unlike the Lexicon/Oppo issue I don't see a "victim" in this practice.  BTW, in regards to the Lexicon/Oppo thing, why does Oppo not share some of the blame/bad press w/ Lexicon. They must have been aware what was going on.
I also have a Decware amp and an integrated amp from a small Serbian company , Dayens that I'm sure that the badging and manufacturer are the same.  The fact that they may have used a design or circuit that was originally some one else's does not seem to enter into this debate.
Again, I don't know whether the last is true but there are few "new" circuit designs.  I don't know where to draw that line.

Am I understanding correctly that the Decware and the Serbian product are the same?
Can you elaborate?
Don

[lcrim]

SR:
Not to be argumentative but the members of this particular audio board are terribly well informed consumers re: audio gear. 
I think you can usually glean the inside information about hardware by doing online research.  Many here are have become pretty well informed about things audio and tend to share that information. 
Many times particular entities are taken to task by the membership here for what they at least perceive to be less than honest undertakings.   "buyer beware" is already being practiced by most here.

Don:
I'm sorry if you got that impression from my earlier post.  Dayens and Decware are two manufacturers that I'm holding up as examples that are totally transparent with regard to manufacture and marketing of goods.

[SonicReducer]

Larry:

There are engineers on this forum who are very familiar with the principles of audio reproduction, there are people who know how to design and build their own gear, and there are many people who, through long exposure to both music and audio gear, have "trained" ears and refined tastes. I can guarantee, however, that the majority of people on this site have no idea who designed and manufactured their gear.

If you were to give me the name of any currently-produced car, I could, within minutes, find out what's under the hood. Try that with niche, high-end gear. Go ahead. But leave yourself a nice chunk of time.

My point - again - is that the sort of transparency that exists in other industries simply does not exist within the audio industry. If we all agree that rebadging is rampant, then why aren't more people even interested in either ferreting out bargains or avoiding overpaying for rebadging?

I started this thread as a possible place for people to share any "inside" knowledge regarding sister products that co-exist in the marketplace. I find it interesting that people are arguing with me about the need to be more educated as consumers rather than actually listing useful rebadging information. Instead of getting defensive about your audio savvy, why not share some of your information?

[Pez]

TheChairGuy:

Sorry, but I'm not accepting your plea for blissful ignorance. The high-end audio industry is relying on people just like you to keep them afloat. I see your blase attitude as symptomatic of the toxic mystique cultivated by high-end reviewers and manufacturers who want you to feel that blah blah blah

I'm calling you out on the floor on this. Don't be a prick. You don't get to talk to any member on this forum like that, especially thechairguy, somebody who has contributed way more than 5 posts to this site. I don't care what ridiculous conspiracy theory you think you're uncovering. I think an appology is owed.

[SonicReducer]

Okay, then I apologize. I'm certainly not going to make this personal. But I still perceive his response as being blase.

Chair Guy: I apologize if you took my criticism personally in any way. I still, however, disagree.

[doug s.]

red rose music is notorious for this.  check out the aurum cantus moon river for <$1200/pair, vs the red rose music classics for $8k/pair.  they also do the same, w/similar mark-ups on their amplification, using re-labeled korsun/dusson electronics.  $425 for the dusson u3i fono stage, or $2k for the red rose rosette 2; dusson v8i for $1100, or red rose affirmation for $7k...  when it acquired audio prism, it "only" doubled the prices...

doug s.

[Mike B.]

A number of the domestic high end manufactures have their stuff built overseas and the parts sent back for assembly. PC board stuffing and soldering is especially expensive to do in-house. So the made in America stamp is not always completely true.

[doorman]

Thanks for the clarification, Larry. On re-reading your original post, I now "get it"!
Don

[SonicReducer]

Pez:

"Conspiracy theory"? Not even close. I state in the first post that my desire is to have a place where people can share knowledge about rebadging, with the goal being saving money. I myself have tried to find manufacturing information a number of times, to no avail. While it's very possible that manufacturing information is available, the fact that it is so difficult to find says a lot about both the industry and its customers. Why should people tolerate fog in this industry but not, say, the auto industry? And why wouldn't anyone want to be a more knowledgeable consumer?

Doug:

Thanks for your reply; it's exactly the kind of information that I think is useful, even necessary. If there are people who enjoy their Red Rose products, then that's great, but if a cheaper twin exists, then people should know.

[lcrim]

I'm surprised that doug took so long to jump on this topic, but to prove my point, we are aware of this practice.  I doubt that all this information re: rebadging is contained in any single place but most regulars around here are pretty well informed on this subject.