Thread: The Best Loudspeaker Brands for Both Luxury and Performance: The Definitive List

Sorry Jeff... but these two statements means that the list has no value what so ever in my view.

"Price matters. By definition, a low-priced product cannot be a luxury product. For the purposes of this list, any company that doesn’t make a loudspeaker model costing north of $100,000/pair (all prices USD) is excluded.

Cones and domes only. Although I’ve spent years listening, at audio shows and in dealers’ showrooms, to horn, planar-magnetic, electrostatic, ribbon, and hybrid speakers of all sorts, I’ve never heard any that produced what I thought was the very highest-fidelity sound. If any of those types of speakers are your thing, that’s great -- but they’ve never been mine, so I can’t include them here."

Really, so KEF does not qualify... well maybe it does because they have one model that is a quarter of a mil, but then their next closes is what, $32k... so a company that makes one over the top model qualifies even if all their rest top out at 1/3 the requirement.

Avantgarde doesn't qualify... nor does Sound Lab, Martin Logan, Magnepan, Klipsch, JBL, B&W, MBL, T+A, MC, Vandersteen, etc., etc. Many of the longest standing and top customer loyalty brands in the world...

Just got to say, while I enjoy your writing skills and descriptions I disagree with the entire premise of the article. It excludes far too many of the longest standing and normally highest rated speaker manufactures. And again, you state top speaker brands, not top models, and then excludes many, dare I say most, of the longest standing most renowned brands in the world from even being considered.

I’ve typically enjoyed Jeff’s articles. This one, gets two thumbs down. Why? There are many brands that are in the top tier of audio that are not considered; Stephen (Puma Cat) mentioned just a few.

PS - What’s the value of such a writing? In my view, this is a partial list.

Jeff, very interesting. Correct me if I’m wrong, but what you’re saying here is that speakers must be both incredible sounding, well engineered, a heritage and elegant so as to earn the true meaning of luxury. Speakers which aren’t mentioned are akin to saying a Tesla Model X might be fast, but it won’t win any beauty contests, doesn’t have much of a heritage and is difficult to consider it “luxury” against a Ferrari or Bentley.

So basically, the non-audiophile is seeking true luxury in a speaker and therefore, they tend to look more at the criteria you laid out. An audiophile might be ok with paying a lot of money for average build quality, average appearance, if they simply love the sound.

Would I have this correct?

Mike, your avatar is of a speaker that simply is not luxurious enough because it is hybrid and uses God awful ribbons (ok, Radialstrahler) in their design.

Originally Posted by Randy Myers

Mike, your avatar is of a speaker that simply is not luxurious enough because it is hybrid and uses God awful ribbons in their design.

I don’t think they use ribbons. I think he’s referring to ribbon speakers like Alsyvox perhaps?

Originally Posted by Mike

I don’t think they use ribbons. I think he’s referring to ribbon speakers like Alsyvox perhaps?

I know they are not true ribbons, but very similar; however they are definitely a hybrid design which are specially eliminated from consideration.

I think if we all take a step back from the outrage that our favorite speaker brand isn’t mentioned and try to understand the point Jeff is trying to make.

I’m wondering if Jeff is thinking about the non-audiophile, true luxury buyer. I have had the pleasure of working with many of those folks. I can assure you, they would never consider a speaker that doesn’t at least look similar to what everyone envisions a typical speaker looks like - a box. I can assure you someone who doesn’t understand panels, horns, etc., would look at an Alsyvox and think of them as a room divider, chuckle and say “no way”.

Let me give you a REAL life example. I had a call from a very wealthy gentleman in the north west. He said he had just heard his friends system in California. He knew nothing about high end audio. Our conversation, went like this: “what can I get for $100,000?” I put together a system. He looked at it online, researched a little. He called 24 hours later and said, “what can I get if I double it to $200,000?”

I ended up putting him in a full MSB, Magico M2’s system, cabling, conditioning, rack, etc.

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

Right there with ya, Randy.

It appears that...Gamut, Dynaudio, Wilson, Borreson, Raidho, etc. don't qualify either. Why no Wilson Chronosonic, for example? And anything Dynaudio doesn't know about loudspeaker design is probably not worth knowing.

And..what's with the light grey font on a dark gray background? Not a model with respect to print design for readibility and legibility. There's a reason books have been printed with black ink on white paper for over...500 years.

Hmmm... Wilson offer the WAMM at $850k... ... Why I didn't put them on my list 😜.

Originally Posted by Mike

I think if we all take a step back from the outrage that our favorite speaker brand isn’t mentioned and try to understand the point Jeff is trying to make.

I’m wondering if Jeff is thinking about the non-audiophile, true luxury buyer. I have had the pleasure of working with many of those folks. I can assure you, they would never consider a speaker that doesn’t at least look similar to what everyone envisions a typical speaker looks like - a box. I can assure you someone who doesn’t understand panels, horns, etc., would look at an Alsyvox and think of them as a room divider, chuckle and say “no way”.

Let me give you a REAL life example. I had a call from a very wealthy gentleman in the north west. He said he had just heard his friends system in California. He knew nothing about high end audio. Our conversation, went like this: “what can I get for $100,000?” I put together a system. He looked at it online, researched a little. He called 24 hours later and said, “what can I get if I double it to $200,000?”

I ended up putting him in a full MSB, Magico M2’s system, cabling, conditioning, rack, etc.

I do see your point but I do not agree that elimination an entire brand because they do not offer a model over $100k is silly. That same customer that you described would as often as not end up with a full McIntosh system maybe even including their speakers, but would also enjoy a JBL or some other speaker they have seen at a concert. They would probably be extremely happy and believe that they purchased pure luxury.

Most of the brands that have been mentioned here have the legacy and are known for quality, and consider luxury products maybe even more so then some of the products that made Jeff's list.

I guess those are speakers that could be included on any list but it is far from complete

The issue, I think, is with the word “definitive” on the title. Indeed, SF and Tidal wood work and related accessories are just plain beautiful. The others manufacturers on the list are definitely high quality but do not necessarily exceed the beauty and finish of other speaker lines.

Lastly, not a big deal to me. I look forward to more articles and perspectives from Jeff.

Originally Posted by Ritmo

The issue, I think, is with the word “definitive” on the title. Indeed, SF and Tidal wood work and related accessories are just plain beautiful. The others manufacturers on the list are definitely high quality but do not necessarily exceed the beauty and finish of other speaker lines.

Lastly, not a big deal to me. I look forward to more articles and perspectives from Jeff.

That might have been the initial issue for me as well. I saw definitive list and then read limitations that made it anything but a definitive list. Also the references to the entire brand not specific models. When considering a definitive list of luxury brands I do not believe an entire renowned brands should be eliminated because of one design facet or another, especially when considering some of the most long standing and highly respected manufactures.

I do look forward to reading additional articles by Jeff however.

Originally Posted by Dre_J

I think what's being overlooked in these responses quoted above is this is one person's list, one person's limited experience, and one person's definition of luxury/performance for his definitive list. If he's being honest (I have no reason to believe he's not), he can only list what has been heard, in context, and what he likes in terms of fitting in his list.

It may not meet with your idea of a similar list using your definitions. That is mostly to be expected with any list put together by any individual. Try putting a list together and see how many will agree with it. We all look at and pursue this hobby differently.

Mike B. has good points and a more objective perspective. He see's the difference and acknowledges it, whether he agrees or not.

Sometimes it's helpful to observe another person's perspective even if it's not your own. If anything, it makes part of the hobby less than boring for some.

I don't particularly care for the list one way or another. It's something to read and it certainly drew enough interest to elicit the responses quoted above. (Although, I'm not sure what the out of context website font and background comment has to do with the subject of the thread's post.)

If he wanted the article to get a response, he accomplished his task with some.

Dre

This is true with one rather large cavoite. When the title of the thread/article starts with "The Best Loudspeaker Brands" and ends with "The Definitive List" it is implied that it is a whole lot more than one person picking a list of his favorite few companies. It would have been easier to be recognized as such if something identifying it as such was in the title. Other than that you are absolutely correct.

The catch is “luxury”. If you study the appearance of the four certain nominees, you will notice the design and materials aspects of those speakers that differentiates them. Certain others mentioned may equal them in performance but fall short on the luxury side of the equation.

The Best..

cheers,

AJ

Originally Posted by Ritmo

The issue, I think, is with the word “definitive” on the title. Indeed, SF and Tidal wood work and related accessories are just plain beautiful. The others manufacturers on the list are definitely high quality but do not necessarily exceed the beauty and finish of other speaker lines.

Lastly, not a big deal to me. I look forward to more articles and perspectives from Jeff.

NOTE: Bold added



That’s a good observation Mike.

Yes. One imagines that a “definitive list” – where the term “definitive” is correctly used to mean authoritative and conclusive – should also be more exhaustive.

In this situation entitling the article as “The Definitive List” is a stretch because the results are clearly delimited by the number of speakers fitting the determinants that Jeff has actually auditioned – which does not appear to be many.

To be fair, I see this more as Jeff’s “personal” view on the best loudspeaker brands based on determinants that he adjudges to be most important – and indeed he says as much with his comment “This month, it’s personal.” Jeff's chosen determinants may hold little or no relevance to readers.

With that in mind no one should be disappointed if their favourite speaker brand doesn’t get a mention.

Originally Posted by kiwi_1282001

To be fair, I see this more as Jeff’s “personal” view on the best loudspeaker brands based on determinants that he adjudges to be most important – and indeed he says as much with his comment “This month, it’s personal.” Jeff's chosen determinants may hold little or no relevance to readers.

Exactly. it's really just Jeff's preferred speakers that he's reviewed over the years. Yawn.

Originally Posted by Jeff Fritz

Hi guys,

Thought the crew around here would enjoy this one:

The Best Loudspeaker Brands for Both Luxury and Performance: The Definitive List

Thanks, and enjoy your Sunday!

Jeff

This is an interesting list, Jeff. But it’s a bit problematic.

Looking for the best speakers, dome and cone only, is like picking the highest performance car, but arguing it needs to be naturally aspirated. It’s possible to set such rules, but that basically would mean forgoing the major developments in performance car evolution in the past 20-30 years. Therefore, the question is whether it’s meaningful.

In terms of speakers, it’s the tweeter that poses the biggest challenge. While there are good dome/ cone tweeters, e.g. of the diamond-coated or other Beryllium variety, they just are not on par with the best in the industry. E.g. most ribbon, amt, electrostat, radial or plasma tweeters outplay them with ease (horns are mostly just domes behind a megaphone).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This is one fellows list. Deeply flawed in my opinion or very shallow experiance. I know how I will treat this writer's opinion in the future.

Perfectly reasonable and valid list. Of course it is only the author's opinion, and others will have different opinions, which is fine.

Seemed very clear to me what Jeff’s criteria was. I thought it was a well thought out and reasoned, and written, article. Even if my speakers (Magico) were not on the list I would still have enjoyed it. Chill, lads.

Originally Posted by Kuoppis

This is an interesting list, Jeff. But it’s a bit problematic.

Looking for the best speakers, dome and cone only, is like picking the highest performance car, but arguing it needs to be naturally aspirated. It’s possible to set such rules, but that basically would mean forgoing the major developments in performance car evolution in the past 20-30 years. Therefore, the question is whether it’s meaningful.

In terms of speakers, it’s the tweeter that poses the biggest challenge. While there are good dome/ cone tweeters, e.g. of the diamond-coated or other Beryllium variety, they just are not on par with the best in the industry. E.g. most ribbon, amt, electrostat, radial or plasma tweeters outplay them with ease (horns are mostly just domes behind a megaphone).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Kuoppis,

You are not wrong. But I don’t think Jeff was advocating the perfect speaker. I know a few guys with lots of money who are not audio guys but want a toy and can afford it - they all want cone and dome, because that seems... ‘normal’

Andrew

Originally Posted by Jeff Fritz

This is an excellent point, and why I laid out those determinants at the outset, before the list.

Even still, you guys are correct: These are my views, so those determinants are judged through my eyes, ears, and overall experiences and therefore are aligned completely with my biases.

One last point on "definitive." It sounded better to me than "one guy's opinion that you may not care about."

The title really was problematic to me. Definitive, etc. I expected a review or comparison, or differences between several high end brands. It was obvious when you followed the link and read the first couple of sections. It was also highly disappointing to me.

The title could have been more indicative as to what the article was about... maybe my definitive list, or my favorites, etc., even indicating that it was literally five brands that you determined to qualify. My short list of definitive... etc.

Media doesn’t work this way

Thank you to Jeff Fritz at Soundstage. Always a fun time.

Suncoast Audio on Selling Luxury Hi-Fi - SoundStage! Talks (November 2020) - YouTube


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Originally Posted by Mike

Thank you to Jeff Fritz at Soundstage. Always a fun time.

Suncoast Audio on Selling Luxury Hi-Fi - SoundStage! Talks (November 2020) - YouTube


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

An interesting interview. I was surprised to learn that about thirty percent of your customers fit into the luxury segment in which the customers primary focus may be aesthetics, ease of use or size profile (as some examples) rather than outright performance.

Originally Posted by Kuoppis

This is an interesting list, Jeff. But it’s a bit problematic.

Looking for the best speakers, dome and cone only, is like picking the highest performance car, but arguing it needs to be naturally aspirated. It’s possible to set such rules, but that basically would mean forgoing the major developments in performance car evolution in the past 20-30 years. Therefore, the question is whether it’s meaningful.

In terms of speakers, it’s the tweeter that poses the biggest challenge. While there are good dome/ cone tweeters, e.g. of the diamond-coated or other Beryllium variety, they just are not on par with the best in the industry. E.g. most ribbon, amt, electrostat, radial or plasma tweeters outplay them with ease (horns are mostly just domes behind a megaphone).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Sorry...there are no "best tweeters" for obvious reasons. One must always look at individual drivers in the context of a whole system.

Originally Posted by Gene

Sorry...there are no "best tweeters" for obvious reasons. One must always look at individual drivers in the context of a whole system.

Nonsense, of course there are. It just based on personal preference. Some prefer dome, some ribbon, some radial, some emt etc.

What is in turn a challenge, is to insinuate that there would be an absolute in best in something defined by taste, personal preference, or just some other individualistic factor.

Within categories it might be easier to discriminate though. Luxury and performance however still include all tweeter types. Hence the comment to Jeff: difficult.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

You don't need to go to a track to really enjoy performance. Yes - for that last 5% you do but, not for the majority of the performance.

Originally Posted by nicoff

Quite true particularly of Porsches. Many of those are hardly ever driven; they end up as garage queens and never set tires on a track.

I'm into Audio. Have been all my life. So it's really hard for me to understand the luxury stereo.

But . . . . If I was to buy a luxury watch, I would go to a trusted dealer and buy one that had clout and that I liked the way it looked. Spend my $$$ and go home happy.

I do know people that buy grand pianos because they have a room that it would look good in. They don't buy a cheap one even tho it will never be played. Yamaha or Steinway at minimum

Same with art. People buy what is hot at the time. Hopefully something that they like -- but not always, as long as it impresses.

Why not the same thing w audio?

Agreed

Originally Posted by nicoff

Yes, you can enjoy a high performance car under normal driving conditions, but really that is just a hint of what they can do. At a track, you are allowed to do things that you cannot do on normal roads. That’s when you demand much more from a car: acceleration, hard braking without fading, car balance, etc. That is when you can really appreciate what that car was designed to do. That has been my experience.

Originally Posted by LVB

+1

Kuoppis forgot he is trying to sell a speaker he just bought based on the “best tweeter” approach. Turns out it takes a whole speaker to make good sound

Do we have yet another angry old man outburst here?

Interestingly enough, you are again talking about gear you have never heard. Baseless assumptions are of course also an opinion.

But I do indeed have speakers with excellent tweeters, mids, and bass. They are in fact so good, that I stepped back from an amp replacement, which would have ultimately lead to me changing my speakers.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by LVB

On the contrary, always a pleasure to point out the dichotomies in your posts

Ever tried to be smart and pleasant? Some people say that goes a long way.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk