|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
216.82.182.34
I will freely admit that on more than one occasion I was heavily swayed by equipment appearance. My process is to narrow my choices down to a short list so that all the options are in range on the budget and would be an acceptable choice, then make an emotional decision.
I have a classic design tube preamp, the Cary SLP-98P. Cary has been tweaking the design for over 20 years and they still sell it becuase the design is still right. It meets my needs and won a close battle against a similarly priced CJ model. My wife and I both thought it had more the sound I was looking for, but I WANTED it to win becuase I love the look. Jaguar red chassis with all the tubes on display. My wife could not care less, she honestly thought it sounded better to her.
I could spout other examples, but you get the picture. Anybody else out there honest enough to admit to be hooked by looks?
Scott
Follow Ups:
When I was a kid, I did love the appearance of my audio gear, although I don't think it ever entered into my purchasing choices. Now, I don't have the same reaction. I think that's because I was surrounded by so much equipment for so many years at work. My inclination now is to get it out of the way, in an equipment closet.
There are way too many black boxes and "lab look" components out there.
When it comes to my audio system, looks are 0%, and sound quality is 100%. My Fulton J speakers look like black refrigerators, but the heavenly sound they produce make them my speaker of choice (my other options are the Gallo Reference Strada and the Dunlavy SCIV).
For a minute I thought we were talking about women here. Drat.
My turn-offs are
Coffin sized amplifiers
expensive interconnects
CD players that look like Beyblades (rega)
Amps that look like Beyblades
speakers that look like robots
speakers that look like a bunch of trumpets stuck into a block of wood
Speakers that look like a box with a vase and some metal stuck on it.
Speakers and components that can only sound good on audiophile stuff
Speakers that are so inneficent that they need coffin sized amps
Stereo components that look like factory machinery
stereo components and speakers that weigh as much or more than a normal human being.
expensive speakers that can only handle 5 or so watts without distorting
speakers that look like penises
being
Sure, I would go for Merlin speakers for the color, Hansen and Vivid for the shape, YG Acoustics for the Elegance, .......
Cheers
Bill
all my hifi gear had to have some hook -- my first 'real' speakers were Infinity tower monitors with a Walsh ice cream cone tweeter.... and so on.
Now my most prized possession is a Thorens TD124 which looks like it came from pre-Stalinist Russia.
it doesn't deserve to be bought
...there are certain designs I've seen that I just could not live with due to their lack of visual aesthetics. I like the 47 Labs gear and I think some of Don Garber's Fi gear is quite beautiful from a Bauhaus inspired form-follows-function aesthetic.
You bet! The equipment aesthetics are very important to me but do not trump SQ.
Today, you can have it all.
...just to give you an idea
;~)
Julien
"There's someone in my head, but it's not me"
but I do like my equipment to have a quality look and feel. If I was absolutely blown away by its sound, a piece could be cheap and/or ugly looking, but if it didn't sound fantastic I wouldn't look twice...
Given two equally good sounding pieces of gear, that cost approximately the same, I will typically take the one that I think looks better. (But if it comes down to paying big bucks for a good looking piece of gear, versus a utilitarian looking piece of gear that costs considerable less and sounds the same, then I'll usually take the utilitarian one.)
But if a piece of gear is what I consider "Butt Ugly", then I will typically not even consider it. Why would I want to look upon something that I think is ugly for the rest of my life, when there is plenty of gear around that not only sounds as good, but looks at least decent, if not actually good? (And, my wife and I have somewhat similar tastes, and if I think it is Butt Ugly, then I know for sure she will too. And so there is no way I want to put up with the constant nagging about having some Butt Ugly piece of gear in my living room, (which is where my stereo is), for the rest of my life.)
Been there, done that; so I've learned my lesson!
Besides, she'll typically authorize the spending of additional funds to buy a better looking piece of gear that sounds as good. (She hated my Martin Logan Sequel II speakers, and she let me spend what she considered a lot of money on other speakers to get rid of them.)
My two cents worth anyway.
... I think that the best looking loudspeakers manage to exude spartan elegance by way of clean lines and interesting color patterns (no affiliations)...
"He was one of those men who live in poverty so that their lines of questioning may continue." - John Steinbeck
Edits: 07/02/12
No. Function before form, always. My system could best be described as a collection of black boxes of various sizes.
And a couple of small silver boxes because they didn't come in black.
OK, I did get my speakers Magnestanded, but that was strictly for the sound, I swear...
I'm not totally superficial. My Sanders Magtech amp won me over purely on its merits. It is really kind of bland looking really. I bought this amp after parting with the gee wiz McIntosh meter show.
I have to admit that SLP-98P is a nice looking preamp. Good choice, by all reports.
Speakers, speaker stands, and speaker cables are an acquired taste, IMO. I'll leave it at that.
I am, however, turned off by gee-whiz-Wally-laser-show cosmetics as typified by companies like McIntosh. You really need a BFM to figure out the speed for the glowing platter on your turntable?
Never owned any "furniture grade" speakers either.
Mine use the very best flat black polane paint available for the steel tubular structure. :)
Eximus DAC and Audio Note speakers are so nice looking. I do think some manufacturers do not "get" this...while not essential, it is never going to hurt, unless the cost is bumped up unnecessarily.
Steve
Myself, not so much - but I have a theory that the high-end audio market is almost entirely supported by looks ;)
It'd be fascinating if somebody could get data for how big the discount is for beat up gear. I tend to think you can get the best sound for the money buying used and if you can find a great performing piece with cosmetic flaws you may get a spectacular deal for the money. If someone had access to the audiogon data they could figure out what percentage drop there is for gear based on the condition rating. If you can get gear with cosmetic flaws for 80% off it tells you a whole lot about the audiophile market.
You can also tell a lot by the refusal to buy brands that are in Best Buy or other mass market retailers. I've bought a bunch of stuff from BB at 70% or more off and I've seen stuff I didn't buy for crazy discounts. These are brands that are or were in a number of high end shops in the area. Audiophiles care a lot about exclusivity.
A few speakers I have seen here or on the web which just looked so cool. But i would not buy them just because of that. And then they would have to be from a long standing company, with a local dealer, and be in my price range and have to sound great.
With all that i never would get anywhere...
In every sense of the word. I need both looks and sound from my gear. There's so many to choose from satisfying both requirements shouldn't be too hard.
Baba-Booey to you all!
I have also been put off by sheer mass, as well.
Examples of put offs, for me, your results may vary by as much as 180 degrees...
Coffin sized amplifiers. Many offenders.
Apologies to Manley Labs, but The Stingray is not my cup of visual meat.
Sceana speakers.
Turntables designed by Rube Goldberg.
If given the choice between two components that I otherwise consider of equal quality looks will certainly be the deciding factor. I'll spend some extra money for looks that appeal to me.
I tend to be a traditionalist, but not always. I ordered my present speakers in hi-gloss Ferrari red, for example.
Looks that do not appeal to me at all:
The Wilson speakers that remind me of the Daleks on the old Dr. Who series.
Most Manley stuff.
YG speakers.
MBL speakers.
Continuum turntables (sorry Mikey, you say they sound great, I contend that for the price they charge they could have improved the looks).
And so on ........
The giant horn's can be so strange they almost qualify as installation art...
“Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead"
― Charles Bukowski
Edits: 07/02/12
I agree with your idea that ugly may yield as much to talk about, and I second the sentiment of Rube Goldberg turntables. Turntable designers so quickly go over the top that I am also turned off by the looks if not by the wacky prices.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: