It Costs How Much? Another look at the Tone Tot by Thomas J. Norton

[The Computer Audiophile]

As I usually say about topics like this, I couldn’t care less what something costs. If I want it and I can afford it, great. If I want it and can’t afford it, I move on. 

 

I’ve never understood complaining about the price of something that isn’t forced upon us by the government. I understand complaining about taxes and what we get for the money because there’s no way around it. But complaining about the price of a luxury item, when there are plenty of alternatives, makes no sense to me. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Outrageous? I can’t afford it, but I think it’s pretty cool. 

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 hours ago, PleasantSounds said:

 

I think the concern here is that the alternatives are becoming more and more expensive.

Unfortunately this appears to be not an isolated example but a symptom of an industry trend.

 

I disagree. Take a look at Elac for price and performance that’s never been better. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Um OK ?

[The Computer Audiophile]

20 hours ago, hifitommy said:

let us remember history.  dave wilson did not intend his line of work would be speaker manufacturer, he was a recording engineer with his own record company who made his own monitoring speakers, the WATT (wilson audio tiny tot).  visitors to the studio requested him to make them a pair repeatedly and they paid the price because of their quality and robustness.

 

the WATT needed the bass to be full range so the PUPPY became the woofer section and a great number of those systems (WATT/PUPPY) sold in ever increasing updates and sounded best with Jadis tube electronics.  they would play back live levels of music producing a VERY pleasing sound.  

 

dave paid Americans on American soil decent wages including health insurance and personally installed the speakers for a large number of customers.  his products went all the way up to ~ $225k and now even higher with the newest WAMM.  they aren't easy to make sound good but when they arrive at that point (with careful placement and selection of ancillaries), they are nothing short of delightful.  

 

they are worth the money for those that afford them and the accompanying lifestyle is usually commensurate with their cost.  

 

i live at the opposite end of the food chain and yet i can still have a more than relevant sounding system.  magneplanar MMGs, Freid Model RIIs from 1975, and Spendor S3/5s with a Rythmik sub suffice to fill my bill.  ELAC speakers would do nicely if i didn't own the others.  would i buy wilson audio speakers?  YUP.

 

11 minutes ago, semente said:

 

That was a nice story.

 

Please allow me an alternative view.

 

David Wilson was a very effective businessman. His products had qualities but were not without flaws. The value for money of those products was ridiculously low but the target audience were the rich (though not famous). He spent many years selling slightly different iterations of the same speaker models and yet the price of each new version increased exponentially. He probably sold as many new versions of each model to new customers as he did to customers who already owned an older version of that same model. He was a master at marketing and made very good use of the audio press (the words shilling and hype come to mind); he was probably one of the manufacturers most responsible for changing the meaning of High-End (from performance equipement to luxury items). For a record engineer he didn't make many recordings, and hardly anyone has ever listened to them. But he sure knew how to sell speakers.

 

"Dave knew what 'e wan'ed his new midrange driver to do after hearing a Mohler Symphony in Vienna's famed Musikverein Concert Hall." ?

 

 

 

One reason why I love you guys. Two completely different opinions, written without vitriol and very valid. 

 

Live and let listen.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

5 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

yes, let's listen blind to a Wilson system and something 1/3 as much

But that's something in which many happy Wilson customers have no interest because it excludes all other factors that go into purchasing something. 

 

If I could get a speaker that costs 1/3 and sounds better, but was made by children in a third world country, I'd have zero interest. Granted this isn't the choice being presented here, but it's illustrative of my point about all the other factors that go into a purchase.

[The Computer Audiophile]

11 minutes ago, PeterG said:

just the first 20 seconds illustrates a key aspect of my point--beautiful high end living room apparently decorated by a wealthy woman, with speakers that appear to be a science fair exposition.  C'mon!  Do you know any rich middle-aged woman who would sign off on those 

 

I nearly spit out my nonexistent coffee laughing. Very true for most people, but that’s ok. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

58 minutes ago, George Hincapie said:

 

An item has to justify it's price with performance. Surely you aren't arguing that?

 

Only a complete fool would pay £XXXXX for something that costs £XXX to make. If people want to piss their money away just give it to charity where it'll do some good.

 

I don’t understand your comment. 

 

An item doesn’t have to justify anything. Some people like stuff made by adults in their own country rather than kids in terrible conditions in a third world territory. 

 

Diamonds in jewelry only have value because people pay for them. I don’t care if someone pays $100,000 for $10 worth of diamonds. It doesn’t effect me. 

 

Same with HiFi. I don’t judge or care what people spend money on.