|
Post by pinkie on May 10, 2015 15:19:56 GMT
In this case the Grand Price Arm . At a suggested retail price of £15,000 (even with mates rates discounts) its out of the league I play in, and intended as an entry into the "ultimate" showrooms some overseas distributors have access to - but none-the-less exciting to see being developed. This isn't "long-frustrated Pink Triangle" stuff . This is of more recent provenance and is altogether more radical The obvious feature of a variable headshell alignment is not new - nor Arthurs. A working concept was at Munich a couple of years ago. However, incorporating it in an arm that sounds good needs careful use of materials (AK has plans for 2 radically new materials in the structure) and a "secret gizmo" - can't say more, because he hasn't started the patent process yet. But on the basis of a forum being interested in radically new developments in audio - before it gets shown to the world at Munich, here is F1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2015 15:54:38 GMT
Sorry, but it looks like I will be the first to say it:
"The Emperor has no clothes"
£15k is a ludicrous price for a tonearm unless the secret ingredient is platinum and it constitutes the main mass of the arm. I can't see any justification for charging that amount for such an item. All this "new materials" and "secret gizmo" talk puts me in mind of the "mystery cable" debacle some time ago.
I also feel that you are beginning to sound like Arthur's PR division. I thought this forum didn't allow trade promotion. Not that it matters, as I don't see you drumming up too many sales at that price. Quite a few intakes of breath and more than a few titters maybe.
Sorry but I feel it had to be said. This is BS.
|
|
|
Post by pinkie on May 10, 2015 17:06:33 GMT
I understand your points. However,
Funk's marketing department, with all due respect, would not be expecting much attention from this forum - however much I appreciate its qualities.
The products will be featuring at Munich next week, and doubtless picking up press attention. In the past, that has led to their discussion on forums. I was just indulging my vanity as an insider to get a "scoop"
I think the patents once established will demonstrate this to be a radically different arm - but time will tell. The same "dark hints" will apply on the Funk stand at Munich
I agree about the absurdity of the price. It will sell to a small elite - and certainly not me. But it is hardly unique in that respect (Look at the whisky cask Linn LP12's). I think the rational is that it isn't possible for this to be a £50 arm, and there is a benefit to the brand from setting down a marker for a "reference" product
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2015 17:25:56 GMT
I think my frustrations aren't just directed at Funk and I want to make that clear. It comes from many years of seeing what I feel are attempts to milk the absolute maximum price for a product, irrespective of how much it costs to make.
My view is that if a company finds a route to better sound and its not massively more expensive to make than their current product, then they should simply introduce an updated product. Far too often, they decide to release a "higher" model at a massively inflated price. To me, if the new product is "night and day better" then the old product should be obsolete.
I'm sure Arthur is simply following a trend of high end pricing, but it is killing /has already mortally wounded the hifi industry IMO as it drives the hobby into the territory of the super-rich; many of whom may not give two hoots about sound as long as the product and the price tag reflect their status.
I hope that makes sense. I honestly cannot see any justification for a £15k tag other than greed or market placement. If anyone can show how the manufacturing cost of this arm or any similarly priced one can justify it, I will reconsider. Until then I will have to stand by my feeling that this is typical of unjustified pricing which has killed the hifi industry. I hope Arthur reconsiders his pricing. His products surely deserve to be in the hands of more genuine enthusiasts rather than a handful of industrialists, oligarchs and moguls.
|
|
|
Post by pinkie on May 10, 2015 18:06:22 GMT
I understand your frustrations and expressed similar ones to Arthur. However, I think its a bit of a shame the discussion is focussed on the pricing and not the idea that there are some truly new things to do in arm design, rather than reworkings of the same old theme. I think that will be the focus of wider discussion after Munich - the product and its ability to perform, as well as the "cleverness" of genuinely new ideas.
But since you bring up price, I think it goes something like this. In the first place, AK knows how easy it is to underprice, and how hard it is to get a price up afterwards (Pip and the first PT). It is mostly about achieving it as a production item at all. Sadly, it is in the nature of the thing that the price will need to be "high" - higher than I would be able or prepared to pay. Partly that is a function of a vicious circle - production costs fall with volume. Its not the cost of the raw material, but the machining - and in small production runs that is tooling and set up costs.
I've done this elsewhere with lids. The perspex in a pink triangle lid would cost about £5. The mould - since it weighs over 1 tonne - would cost about £35,000 to have made - and there would be a run set-up cost of about £5000 (or substantial storage charges) - if you are making 35000 lids - they can sell ex-works for £15. If you are making 100 lids...
So say at expected volumes (maybe 50 units world wide) you are going to end up with a retail cost of £6000. I'm still not going to be buying one at that price - but maybe 50 people would. Chances are, only 10 of those wouldn't if the price is £15000. So when your market is so small, and so price insensitive, it makes sense to try to get a living from the few you will sell. And actually you get what is known as an inverted demand curve (or the Irish exception) where demand increases on percieved value. The more expensive it is - the better it must be in the eyes of some consumers - typically the ones who will pay that much money in the first place
Don't get fixated on the price. I repeated it because that is the official figure in the Munich blurb. Once in production, maybe that would change. But it is never going to be cheap.
So - hopefully, we can forget the price, and get interested in some genuine innovation. I think that is what wider press reports after Munich are likely to looking at.
|
|
|
Post by julesd68 on May 10, 2015 18:16:54 GMT
Personally I never take these type of product launches too seriously.
It wasn't long ago I remember Naim raising some eyebrows with some outlandishly priced fancy amps ... Whilst I am sure there will be some 'innovation' involved, as Pinkie suggests, the main priority is to open doors in terms of ultra-high end press and distribution ...
To be fair, Funk has worked hard at the other end of the market for some time, with the Flamenca and Little Super Deck etc If the Grand Prix arm is a success then maybe some of the 'top secret' technology will trickle down to products that us mere forum mortals might be able to afford.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2015 18:32:36 GMT
To me, it kind of taints the other products Funk make. If a designer can make something a lot better than what they feed the masses, then why not share it with the real enthusiasts?
It suggests the items that are affordable to ordinary punters are clearly inferior if the "top" product is so massively more expensive. Who would want a poor second best? Not me, I can have an SME V for a fraction of that price and it looks like it was hewn by God himself. Not to mention that it's engineering pedigree is beyond reproach.
Knowing you're buying something that the designer himself feels is clearly inferior to his best efforts devalues a product to a point where I would t want to own it. Funk aren't alone so I don't want to make out they are a one-off here. If anything they appear to be following a trend so they cannot be alone.
|
|
|
Post by jazzbones on May 10, 2015 18:54:26 GMT
Just woken up from me arvo nap, Its not April 1st is it!!!!!!!!!!! Egads and gazooks, I've time travelled again !
|
|
|
Post by pre65 on May 10, 2015 19:01:54 GMT
In many thing in life, there is progression in price and technology.
Would you not buy a VW Polo because the Bugatti Veyron was technically better, but astronomically more expensive.
Both produced by the VW group.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2015 19:02:52 GMT
I understand your frustrations and expressed similar ones to Arthur. However, I think its a bit of a shame the discussion is focussed on the pricing and not the idea that there are some truly new things to do in arm design, rather than reworkings of the same old theme. I think that will be the focus of wider discussion after Munich - the product and its ability to perform, as well as the "cleverness" of genuinely new ideas. But since you bring up price, I think it goes something like this. In the first place, AK knows how easy it is to underprice, and how hard it is to get a price up afterwards (Pip and the first PT). It is mostly about achieving it as a production item at all. Sadly, it is in the nature of the thing that the price will need to be "high" - higher than I would be able or prepared to pay. Partly that is a function of a vicious circle - production costs fall with volume. Its not the cost of the raw material, but the machining - and in small production runs that is tooling and set up costs. I've done this elsewhere with lids. The perspex in a pink triangle lid would cost about £5. The mould - since it weighs over 1 tonne - would cost about £35,000 to have made - and there would be a run set-up cost of about £5000 (or substantial storage charges) - if you are making 35000 lids - they can sell ex-works for £15. If you are making 100 lids... So say at expected volumes (maybe 50 units world wide) you are going to end up with a retail cost of £6000. I'm still not going to be buying one at that price - but maybe 50 people would. Chances are, only 10 of those wouldn't if the price is £15000. So when your market is so small, and so price insensitive, it makes sense to try to get a living from the few you will sell. And actually you get what is known as an inverted demand curve (or the Irish exception) where demand increases on percieved value. The more expensive it is - the better it must be in the eyes of some consumers - typically the ones who will pay that much money in the first place Don't get fixated on the price. I repeated it because that is the official figure in the Munich blurb. Once in production, maybe that would change. But it is never going to be cheap. So - hopefully, we can forget the price, and get interested in some genuine innovation. I think that is what wider press reports after Munich are likely to looking at. I think the real shame here is that if there are new design elements that could lift this arm well above the performance of others, AK has chosen to limit it to a dozen super rich people, most of whom won't likely appreciate it. What point is innovative design if it's not put to use? If it's priced beyond reach and wrapped up in voodoo smoke screens and patents, it will never see the light of day in terms of changing the listening experience. In the meantime, the people who have the capacity to appreciate AK's innovation are to be fed products he knows he can easily better. If I was a Funk buyer I'd feel like I'd been treated with contempt.
|
|
|
Post by pinkie on May 10, 2015 19:13:22 GMT
You are free to make your buying decisions on any basis you choose. Personally I find it bizarre to think someone would be happy to spend £2700 on a sme v, rather than £1500 on an fx3 if the fx3 were the better arm out of some avenging philosophy. I have heard both arms extensively. If I wanted a thing of engineering beauty I'd buy the sme. If I want to listen to music, I'd buy the funk. Most reviews I've read appear to agree with me.
F1 cannot be implemented cheaply. If you guarantee Arthur a minimum order of 2000 off, I am sure he could review the price.
The unworked metal in an sme v, melted down, is worth less than a fiver.
But nobody is asking you to buy funk. Just noting that some interesting new technology is about to be launched (actually I think product sale won't be before December)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2015 19:26:10 GMT
To me, technology would only be of interest if it was going to be available to more than, say, ten people on planet earth. Alternately if there were going to be lessons for others to build upon. Sadly, because of the insane price and the secrecy/patents neither seems to be the case here.
I feel a 15k tonearm will be an insult to existing Funk owners and another nail in the coffin of the UK Hifi industry. I sincerely hope AK reconsiders and instead looks to bring better sound to affordable products. As things stand, I just can't look the same way at someone who feels it's OK to try and charge 15k for tonearm. Nor can I have any respect for anyone who supports such a product.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2015 19:36:29 GMT
To me, technology would only be of interest if it was going to be available to more than, say, ten people on planet earth. Alternately if there were going to be lessons for others to build upon. Sadly, because of the insane price and the secrecy/patents neither seems to be the case here. I feel a 15k tonearm will be an insult to existing Funk owners and another nail in the coffin of the UK Hifi industry. I sincerely hope AK reconsiders and instead looks to bring better sound to affordable products. As things stand, I just can't look the same way at someone who feels it's OK to try and charge 15k for tonearm. Nor can I have any respect for anyone who supports such a product. But you are happy to buy an arm from a company that charge £16.5k for a turntable without an arm?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2015 19:45:37 GMT
I wouldn't be buying any TT at 16.5k. My point was that if I was buying expensive hifi, I'd want the best arm that company made, not a poor second or third best when I knew they were capable of far more,
As for SME, at least their products are well made. Almost everything I've come across from AK has had reliability/build issues. At least an SME V is top of their range, the best they can make and built as well as anything out there. It's also not anywhere near £15k. It's no use coming on here with a great technological innovation that nobody will be able to afford and no details can be shared for.
|
|
|
Post by pinkie on May 10, 2015 19:57:07 GMT
Just suppose the arm tube was ultra-thin walled boron formed like the technics u 205 cantilever by vapour deposition. Any idea what that process would cost?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2015 19:57:23 GMT
For me, I want the best HiFi I can afford. There is always something "better". The SME range seems to be quite established (or old? I don't know how long they have been around). If they were to engineer a new arm that was better than the V, which they probably could, I am sure in todays environment, it would work out to be quite expensive.
I guess I have been lucky then. All the Funk products I have seem to work fine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2015 20:27:40 GMT
Just suppose the arm tube was ultra-thin walled boron formed like the technics u 205 cantilever by vapour deposition. Any idea what that process would cost? As I Said above, if you or anyone can justify the cost then I'm all ears. I sincerely doubt AK would invest those sort of sums on a first working prototype, without having any idea of results. More likely he's been tinkering and applying that active mind of his and come up with something novel. There are far more choices available to him than the one he has chosen. Firstly, why spend thousands in patents which will only inflate the price of the arm and make it something nobody can afford. Better to be revered and imitated than protected and unrecognised. secondly, why not sell direct instead of paying the other parasites in the selling chain? That would probably take two thirds off the price. Thirdly, if there are significant start up costs why not use kickstarter? He's a well recognised figure with a strong core of support. If the only alternative is charging £15k then he will only produce a handful of rich man's playthings rather than a legendary tonearm. That's a real pity if it's something special.
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on May 11, 2015 6:02:16 GMT
Please will everyone remember the definition of value: the price YOU are prepared to pay for a product or service. In marketing terms, Value = Benefits / Cost. Also remember that you are rarely paying just for the cost of the components plus a mark-up (this is a simplistic and inaccurate view to take). You are also paying for the R&D invested in the product, which can sometimes add up to many man-years of time.
Now, I am not defending the Grand Prix arm because I haven't heard it. Perhaps it's truly the best arm ever created, I will never know until it's demonstrated to me. However, I've had people tell me that my Dynavector arm is a ludicrous cost and it's just a 'gantry' WITHOUT EVER HEARING IT. They simply have no idea. My response to such views is to treat them with contempt, and will always be.
Very few people will ever drive or own a Veyron. Some will experience envy, others won't care. But should you deny Bugatti the right to make and sell them, quite successfully it would appear?
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on May 11, 2015 6:46:46 GMT
Moving away from the discussion of price..... Richard is treading a fine line between being an enthusiast with insider knowledge and appearing to be acting as Arthurs advertising agency. Richard is aware of our rules and I think we can see that he is trying to respect them while having a discussion about something that ought to be interesting to most of us. Care is still required though! This design then, Richard: It looks like it incorporates a variation on the Burne-Jones pantograph idea, but done with string? Some folks might remember that, and others may know the Garrard Zero 100 SB
|
|
|
Post by pinkie on May 11, 2015 7:22:59 GMT
Oh 'Evans Chris. Don't go getting all technical on me when the man who knows is in Germany. Yes. The actual inspiration for that visually obvious feature was a German arm exhibited at Munich in 2013 by Daniel Schuh www.schuchtronic.de/Daniel and Arthur discussed collaboration, but nothing came of it. The problem with the Schuh arm was that whilst it achieved the geometry, structurally it was "less effective". AK had his ideas for tackling the structural issues, which are the core of the F1 idea, but without wanting to be too coy "the gizmo" even more than the materials works well with this variable geometry idea. I apologise if this becomes too much of a "fan dance" sort of tease - but I clearly am not going to disclose information Arthur is not yet prepared to put into the public domain. He is "exposing" this arm at Munich, and there is a tiny bit more information in the Munich flyer (very marketing style). To air a harmless bit of dirty linen in public, the story is thus. After the usual series of last minute let-downs for planned meetings, I saw him last Wednesday in a state of high excitement and the usual administrative chaos - and actually got to see and fondle some F1 parts in readiness for the show. His strengths are in Physics, and innovation - not Business (or any other) administration. "What do you think of this? My scoop for Munich. I've bought the best advertising spot at the show and I'm hitting them with this" The best advertising slot is the floor mat on the main entrance "This" was an advert saying "Funk Firm Innovation blah blah blah", and a CGI of F1 I got a text yesterday "Major f*** up - I put the wrong image on the advert - it's FX3 not F1" As I said to him - "never mind - they'll see the ad, visit the stand, and its F1 they're going to be talking about"
|
|