Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Sony SS-AR1

Expand Messages
  • Bernard Haitink
    Forgive me for the email address first. I am not the Haitink. I have been a long time reader and it s the first time to post. Robert, how did the AR1s succeed
    Message 1 of 46 , Jun 30, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Forgive me for the email address first. I am not the Haitink. I have been a long time reader and it's the first time to post.

      Robert, how did the AR1s succeed in the baffle step issue with a relative narrow one. It's edge is not that curved/smooth judging from the picture. Gradient Helsinki did it with a rather unconventional shape, and that's understandable. Is wide baffle really necessary given AR1s' success.

      Patrick

      --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "regtas43" <regonaudio@...> wrote:
      >
      > I do not think anyone believes that I am insensitive
      > to price. For example, as I said(in softer language)
      > in my Sanders Magtech amp review,
      > to spend more money on an amplifier than that
      > on an amp is really just conspicuous consumption.
      > But I think it is important to know about the
      > economics of manufacturing before throwing stones.
      >
      > First off, the AR1s are essentially hand-built as far
      > as the woodwork is concerned. Maybe you do not care
      > about this, but if you have priced solid wood handmade furniture
      > recently, you will know it costs a lot. (I paid $1500
      > for a mattress and box spring ten years ago--just off the floor
      > mass produced stuff no wood just department store mass market.
      > Furniture is expensive--and the Sony are solid wood).
      >
      > Second, Sony expects to sell many fewer than one sells
      > of a car. Cars are cheap because a great many are made in atuomated form.
      >
      > The AR1 is a luxury product. As I said in the review,
      > Sony has in mind to make less expensive speakers using similar ideas.
      >
      > Note however, that many of the speakers of the past that cost a lot
      > were actually losing money. I know for a fact that
      > Infinity lost money selling the IRS. It functioned to demonstrate credibility at the top level, not to make money. And
      > yet many people said it was way over priced!
      >
      > From a certain viewpoint the AR1s are in fact inexpensive. Compare for example to the larger Wilson models(which in my view are not better speakers).
      > Of course the Wilsons have what is supposed to be a super good cabinet and probably is. But the Sony cabinet is super good too--and
      > I doubt it is a lot cheaper to make. In fact, it may be more expensive to make in that it is hand made in effect.
      >
      > I am not pushing for high prices. But I would be very surprised if
      > Sony is making a bundle on the AR1. I think they are more establishing a presence than cashing in.
      >
      > People really ought to know what they are talking about before
      > they start griping, if I may say so. Of course there are speakers
      > that offer more obvious value for money perhaps. Maybe you do not want handmade in Japan and are happy with mass produced in China. Some of the latter are really good in fact. But if you want a product like the AR1, I think the price is not out of line. As fancy speakers go, it is actually cheap!
      >
      > REG
      >
      > PS My estimate is that even the crates for the AR1s cost quite a lot to make. And there are five or six coats of hand rubbed lacquer finish on the speakers and so on and on. Yes of course you can make
      > the speakers yourself cheaper--if you are an expert woodworker and have a lot of time on your hands. But so what?
      >
      >
      > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, ymm <yipmangmeng@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Just a wooden shaped box and some drivers and they cost so much?
      > > How much does a normal car cost?
      > >
      > > mm
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ________________________________
      > > From: ymm <yipmangmeng@>
      > > To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
      > > Sent: Sunday, 26 June 2011 11:52:33
      > > Subject: Re: [regsaudioforum] Re: Sony SS-AR1
      > >
      > >
      > > http://www.ultimateavmag.com/content/sony-ss-ar1-speaker
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ________________________________
      > > From: Martin Wax M.D. <mbw817@>
      > > To: "regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com" <regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com>
      > > Sent: Sunday, 26 June 2011 11:35:08
      > > Subject: Re: [regsaudioforum] Re: Sony SS-AR1
      > >
      > >
      > > Makes sense. Too bad TAS won't pay for free airfare to Cincinnati. I'd love to
      > > get your impression of JV's system at his place. On another note, the review of
      > > the SS AR1 was so favorable one wonders, will it replace your revered Harbeth's
      > > as your primary system at home and if not, why not?
      > >
      > > ________________________________
      > > From: Robert <regonaudio@>
      > > To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
      > > Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2011 6:32 PM
      > > Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Sony SS-AR1
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Old time readers of TAS will remember that a comment system
      > > was in place in the past. The majority of what were considered major products
      > > got a review plus a comment by another reviewer. Many of these comments fell in
      > > the "right on, brother" category--but far from all. Sometimes there were
      > > acrimonious disputes!
      > > At the very least, this gave speakers a chance to be heard in two different
      > > listening rooms and electronics and source components in two different systems.
      > >
      > > Unfortunately, this comment system has had to go away for the simple reason of
      > > practicality: that are such a great many more serious products nowadays
      > > that keeping up with them with single reviews is already hard to do and would
      > > become truly hopeless if each had two reviewers
      > > auditioning.
      > >
      > > In a sense, this system remains in localized informal form, however. I often
      > > hear Paul and Neil's review samples(we live all three fairly close together)for
      > > example. Formal comments are not written, but if for instance Neil ,who heard
      > > the Sony's at my place, had felt that I was really missing the boat, I would at
      > > least have been warned
      > > to consider them more carefully. (In fact, he liked them,too and regarded them
      > > in the same way as I did with only the most minor variations).
      > > And of course Robert Harley often has views of things from shows
      > > so he can watch for reviews that seem off the wall.
      > >
      > > But still, I agree that a systematic comment system as before would be nice.
      > > Unfortunately, it is really not practical. When major speaker
      > > efforts were few, it was doable. Today, when High End has exploded,
      > > it in good part is not. But the Los Angeles contingent do in an
      > > informal way check out each other's stuff, and I would suppose
      > > that something similar happens with other reviewers who live in close proxmity
      > > to each other. Of course the reviewer has the final say but at least many of us
      > > do have a chance for the views of others to be exposed.
      > >
      > > I have to admit that I , being as I am a rather independent person and a busy
      > > one, do not do this perhaps so systematically as I might.
      > > Neil did hear the Sonys, and Paul heard them at shows. But sometimes time
      > > pressure just gets in the way. But I do try. And as I have mentioned in the
      > > past, I do try at least two rooms in my own house,
      > >
      > > at least when I can(the Sonys were too heavy and too beautifully finished in
      > > their woodwork to take a chance on moving them--as it happened, that was a one
      > > room review. But it was a review where the manufacturers had had a
      > > representative to listen on site to be sure that they were happy with the set
      > > up).
      > >
      > > I too found the comment system interesting. Even when, as usually happens, I
      > > felt confident of my conclusions, I was always interested to see what another's
      > > impression would be, in good part to figure out how my colleagues regarded
      > > things. I miss it. But we just cannot arrange it, with rare exceptions.
      > >
      > > REG
      > >
      > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Martin Wax M.D." <mbw817@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Reg,
      > > > I just read your excellent review on the Sony SS-AR1 in TAS and enjoyed it very
      > > >much. You clearly thought highly of the speaker. A few pages later, I see JV
      > > >thought equally highly of the Magico Q5, which is roughly double the cost of the
      > > >SS-AR1. If I normalize for the fact that he sprinkles more "bests" and other
      > > >hyperbole in his reviews than you do, I still come away thinking that you each
      > > >thought very highly of the speakers you reviewed. I wonder if you might suggest
      > > >to TAS the following. In some car magazines, specific staff members may review
      > > >one automobile, but they will often have an inset box that provides comments of
      > > >that car from other members of the staff. Generally one or two sentence comments
      > > >are provided and they can be general, specific and provide either similar or
      > > >markedly different assessments from the primary reviewer. I'd love to see
      > > >something similar in TAS. I'd enjoy seeing a brief set of comments from you
      > > >about the Q5, and from JV
      > > > on the SS-AR1. It would make for interesting reading and be very informative
      > > >for the reader.
      > > >
      > > > Of course, those of us who read you regularly don't need to see it in print to
      > > >know what you might say about a $30,000 pre-amplifier, but perhaps we should
      > > >save that subject for another time.
      > > > Marty
      > > >
      > >
      >
    • Robert
      You and me both. I have lived in Los Angeles now for 40 years. Paige teases me about how if she brings up some kind of food, say Japanese, I ll say There is a
      Message 46 of 46 , Jul 1, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        You and me both. I have lived in Los Angeles
        now for 40 years. Paige teases me about
        how if she brings up some kind of food, say
        Japanese, I'll say
        "There is a good Japanese restaurant at
        [some address or another}"
        and it turns out that the last time I went
        there was say 18 years ago.
        Surprisingly often, it is still there, however!

        But it is true that time tends to become one thing
        after a while.

        Maybe this is what has happened to the old vinyl birds.
        CD has been out for 30 years but maybe they think of it
        as a "new-fangled" item that they do not like.

        REG

        PS I know for a fact that some at least of the vinyl
        records that vinyl people have admired so much
        were in fact run through CD standard A to D to A before
        being put on vinyl....


        --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Ken Holder <ken_holder@...> wrote:
        >
        > At 05:58 AM 6/30/2011, Edward Mast wrote:
        >
        > >Best wishes and thanks for telling us about these recordings.
        >
        >
        > Sorry I took so long to do it. First listened to the CD of
        > 1 & 4 three or four (or five or six!) years ago. My brain
        > doesn't seem to run on ordinary time -- I remember thinking
        > yesterday about I should read those recent TAS articles on
        > the RCA Living Stereo SACDs. Golly, that was 7 years ago!
        >
        > Ken Holder
        > Just a Poor, Old, Simple, Country-Living, Music-Lover
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.