Any Shindo 604 AlNiCo owners here?

[Jerome W]

yep...But that's pretty much how everything works. It seems especially bad in audio right now where high prices (extremely high) seem to dominate. On the other hand, the sound for dollar value equation is pretty much up to the buyer and, in my experience, much of the $$$ gear leaves me cold. At least with Shindo I get the sound I want in the manner in which the maker intended. Jerome derisively refers to the importer and dealers in a manner which surely suggests some evil intent to price gouge. I, on the other hand, cast my vote the other way and found the fee for the product and their service to be reasonable.

If one views the speakers as a simple box with an old driver and a solid state power supply and nothing more, then, yes, 65k is an insane price to pay. If one views it as a piece of artistic expression as a component of a Shindo system, and, of course, the sound suits your taste, then it may be for you.

There are other avenues, so keep an open mind. That said, at the end of the day the men and women behind Shindo are the best ambassadors of the brand if you are looking to optimize the gear and their advice is a professional service for which conpensation is warranted. I think a few have tried hard to prove they were smarter and learned the Harbeth way that they did not have all the answers.

Hard way. I meant hard way.

Kev,

I am not pointing any responsability of importers / dealers in the very high price tag of Shindo speakers.
I am just saying that their price is not related logically to costs of production like for speakers as Wilson, Magico, Verity and so on.
Now the most important thing for a buyer is to be happy. The price paid is then forgotten.
I am happy the "hard way" with my set up !

 

[Smile]

A 30 yo design that looks like a $600 DIY speaker with limited resale value: it takes a lot of confidence to write that check!

*Now reading other posts in this thread, I see I am piling on. Still, you believe in your ears to go this route against the formidable and more mainstream offerings.

 

[kev313]

A 30 yo design that looks like a $600 DIY speaker with limited resale value: it takes a lot of confidence to write that check!

*Now reading other posts in this thread, I see I am piling on. Still, you believe in your ears to go this route against the formidable and more mainstream offerings.

I recognize that there are many paths to audio happiness but contained within this post is possibly the basis for compulsive need to roll gear. First of all, apprearance is in the eye of the beholder and I find the Shindo to be beautiful as they fit into my mid century home quite nicely. Wilson not so much. That said, it is totally unrelated to performance. Buying into this mentality allows companies to put a premium on flashy looking boxes. Appearance as performance? Perhaps in the case of speakers. Magico and Wilson, for example, certainly suggest that form follows function. At that point, though, we are comparing sound to sound, which is a bit easier. In the case of Magico and Shindo, it is very easy for me as I have owned speakers from both.

As to the point about it being 30 year old technology, it is a bit older than that. So what? If we are comparing sound, sound is what counts. Not age. Altec probably had 1000 engineers plugging away at those speakers for more time than Alon Wolf has had been building gear. Yes, technology improves, but does that necessarily equate to an improvement in sound *in a way which is personally meaningful and significant to the listener*? If you answer "yes," congratulations. You know what approach works for you. But assuming the answer is yes is the entry point to a lifetime of Audiogon ads.

I prefer the sound of a Shindo system to that of Magico. This does not mean that I need Shindo speakers. I could buy old Altec, for example. But to hear the system at its optimized best, I got Shindo speakers. The value proposition was quite easy. I don't really consider resale value as I do not approach the purchase of gear with an eye towards its sale. I realize that others differ. If I did, history tells me that the used market for Shindo is quite healthy with fans of this approach all over the world.

A final word on value, and without going into that much detail, my thoughts are somewhat aligned with those expressed by Jules C. in his original Shindo reviews on 6moons. When I purchased a Krell component, for example, I felt as if I purchased a piece of fancy consumer electronics. That is not a dig; I simply feel like I purchased a piece of gear. A nice one. When I purchase Shindo, I feel a bit different. If you approach system building as an art in and of itself, Shindo can be for you. This is highly subjective, highly personal and, I recognize, Myles and miles away from the typical US approach to hifi.

 

[Smile]

As to age, I believe, in many instances modern knowledge can lead to better outcomes at lower costs. To ignore that, and arrive at a different conclusion is bold.
Clearly, we all get emotional gratification beyond the sonic ones from our hobby. I am only saying your path is at the outer edge of an already niche hobby... and I enjoy reading your comments, for my expanded understanding. Thanks.

 

[Jerome W]

I recognize that there are many paths to audio happiness but contained within this post is possibly the basis for compulsive need to roll gear. First of all, apprearance is in the eye of the beholder and I find the Shindo to be beautiful as they fit into my mid century home quite nicely. Wilson not so much. That said, it is totally unrelated to performance. Buying into this mentality allows companies to put a premium on flashy looking boxes. Appearance as performance? Perhaps in the case of speakers. Magico and Wilson, for example, certainly suggest that form follows function. At that point, though, we are comparing sound to sound, which is a bit easier. In the case of Magico and Shindo, it is very easy for me as I have owned speakers from both.

As to the point about it being 30 year old technology, it is a bit older than that. So what? If we are comparing sound, sound is what counts. Not age. Altec probably had 1000 engineers plugging away at those speakers for more time than Alon Wolf has had been building gear. Yes, technology improves, but does that necessarily equate to an improvement in sound *in a way which is personally meaningful and significant to the listener*? If you answer "yes," congratulations. You know what approach works for you. But assuming the answer is yes is the entry point to a lifetime of Audiogon ads.

I prefer the sound of a Shindo system to that of Magico. This does not mean that I need Shindo speakers. I could buy old Altec, for example. But to hear the system at its optimized best, I got Shindo speakers. The value proposition was quite easy. I don't really consider resale value as I do not approach the purchase of gear with an eye towards its sale. I realize that others differ. If I did, history tells me that the used market for Shindo is quite healthy with fans of this approach all over the world.

A final word on value, and without going into that much detail, my thoughts are somewhat aligned with those expressed by Jules C. in his original Shindo reviews on 6moons. When I purchased a Krell component, for example, I felt as if I purchased a piece of fancy consumer electronics. That is not a dig; I simply feel like I purchased a piece of gear. A nice one. When I purchase Shindo, I feel a bit different. If you approach system building as an art in and of itself, Shindo can be for you. This is highly subjective, highly personal and, I recognize, Myles and miles away from the typical US approach to hifi.

There is no relation between price and sound satisfaction. To many, a VOT or a JBL 4312 sounds better than Wilson Alexias.
To me, the Harbeth 40.1 sounds also better.
But at least, the price tags of both speakers are justified by the technology involved.
The price tag of Shindo speakers is not.
Wood boxes and Altec drivers. Nothing very "sophisticated " there.

 

[kev313]

There is no relation between price and sound satisfaction. To many, a VOT or a JBL 4312 sounds better than Wilson Alexias.
To me, the Harbeth 40.1 sounds also better.
But at least, the price tags of both speakers are justified by the technology involved.
The price tag of Shindo speakers is not.
Wood boxes and Altec drivers. Nothing very "sophisticated " there.

There is a lot to unpack in the statement, but how is that not the same as a Harbeth? Or even a Magico in some sense. I'm not arguing that the Magico isn't more "high tech" (although many Magico speakers were "wood and drivers."). Magico sends some aluminum to the CNC. Shindo has to hand build speakers. There are limited "hands" at Shindo and those hands could otherwise be building electronics. Everything has a cost.

At the end of the day, it's not for you Jerome. That's ok. You found a sound you enjoy. But you get really worked up about Shindo - prices, distribution, recommended associated components, materials. Honestly - forums have blown up over this (rest in peace AA Shindo forum).




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Schmitt]

In most high end sound systems a rule could be applied:

Knowledge can not be fully compensated by money (even if its a lot of money). But money can often be fully compensated by knowledge. So thats what people should strive after. The more knowledge, the better as it can replaces money to a great degree.

A combination of powerful money and knowledge is unbeatable but crazy spend insane amounts of money without knowledge will often results in poor listening as people who know nothing must believe anything.

 

[Mike]

If the Shindo guys ever start talking about digital jitter, clocks and regenerators, I know I'll need a steady supply of Advil.

 

[Bongo]

I think that this discussion is very interesting and pertinent. The intersect of money and hobbies or soulful pursuits can be challenging to negotiate and raise important issues that are meaningful to consider.

To be honest, my Shindo speaker post-purchase feelings range from satisfaction and joy at finally allowing myself to get speakers that suit my system to guilt. That is a different issue, a subjective and personal one, versus a discussion of speakers' objective value. For the moment, I'm ignoring the value chain for audio products - distributors, dealers, etc.


I suppose that the dichotomy between personal and objective value is similar to and partially based-on the dichotomy between subjective impressions and objective measurements of audio equipment. I presume it's an ongoing debate precisely because it seems very difficult to develop measures for subjective auditory and psychological experiences. How do we align the two? I surely don't know, but I'm dubious of over-reliance on objective measures of what are, ultimately, subjective human experiences. I don’t mean to negate the value of measures at all, but they are designed to serve our enjoyment of music. In other words, our enjoyment isn't defined by or dependent on objective measures.

It occurs to me that the same applies to the relative worth of audio equipment. Some comments here indicate a belief in a linear relationship between the price of a component and costly production processes or perceived advances in technology and materials. However, it seems that most people agree that a product resulting from those things does not necessarily equal fantastic sounding gear.


It seems that the best gear results from innovation, which operates in the service of values and goals.


I'm reminded of a great Netflix series call Chef's Table, that focuses on some of the worlds greatest chefs and their restaurants. It shows the remarkable dedication and innovation that led to these chef's being recognized for food that people connect with deeply in their senses, their mind, and even their soul. It's almost impossible not to view their cooking is an embodiment of their souls, which is an amazing thing. They are somehow able to create amazing integrity among their beliefs, their tastes, their intellects, the quality of the ingredients, the presentation of dishes, etc. It's astounding how much work and thought and pain and joy goes into it all. It's about humanity, dedication, skill, self-expression, and a profound effort to create something that will bring pleasure to others. By the way, none of these restaurants are cheap...


Shindo fans recognize that Ken Shindo was a true innovator. His creative and production process created products that give great pleasure and somehow cause owners to become emotionally attached to the equipment. This, I like to think, is because Shindo integrated his values and humanity into his work. His work is a manifestation of his soul and our connection to the gear is a connection with the man himself and what he represented. I think that’s what kev313 means when he calls his work art.


Shindo gear aligns with my values and goals, which are kind of difficult to describe here. It involves beauty, humanity, pleasure, connectedness, sincerity, excitement, creativity, humility. Sure it’s intangible, but it’s not mumbo jumbo. It’s just difficult to objectify and to assign monetary value to. Still, I feel good about my investment. That’s not to say I’m totally comfortable with the cost. It would sure suck for it to get even more expensive, especially just to benefit distributors or dealers. I don’t need Shindo gear to have soulful experiences. But I may never sell my gear. My values don’t really change, and why “roll” equipment if it doesn’t align with my values?

 

[Schmitt]

Eletronic engineering is not art in itself as it is reproducable. Real art is a unique event or work which may be reproduced but not in its full quality.
Maybe the choice of components or working conditions of parts and circuit could be artistical from a point of personal tonal fondness and does not correspond to a normal engineering process (but even that way of creating has and is been done by dozens of other companies) in the case of Shindo Labs, so it is still clearly reproducable for production purposes.

And thats exactly what is done there, may it be in small numbers or larger quantity. It is a product that easily could be reproduced and duplicated for production. So at the end those Shindo products are still industrial products maybe created with a personal choice of sound by the Shindo guys. It could be duplicated by everyone who owns the parts and production process knowledge.

Thats one reason customers wouldnt receive any more information about the gear in terms of schematics or building and production facts. Its this knowledge that makes the products worthy and in combination with a clever marketing and a little bit audio guru wisdom and stories people are willing to pay the price. It has nothing to do with the real value of the product. But exactly thats what some customers want to know: is there a proven and accepted proportion between the production costs and the market value and price.

As this couldnt be the case with a modded old Altec speaker in a simple wood enclosure for a price of a Mercedes Benz 300E people need to use its emotional value alternatively and believe in the words who praises them as a unique master product and a work of art.

 

[kev313]

Eletronic engineering is not art in itself as it is reproducable. Real art is a unique event or work which may be reproduced but not in its full quality.
Maybe the choice of components or working conditions of parts and circuit could be artistical from a point of personal tonal fondness and does not correspond to a normal engineering process (but even that way of creating has and is been done by dozens of other companies) in the case of Shindo Labs, so it is still clearly reproducable for production purposes.

And thats exactly what is done there, may it be in small numbers or larger quantity. It is a product that easily could be reproduced and duplicated for production. So at the end those Shindo products are still industrial products maybe created with a personal choice of sound by the Shindo guys. It could be duplicated by everyone who owns the parts and production process knowledge.

Thats one reason customers wouldnt receive any more information about the gear in terms of schematics or building and production facts. Its this knowledge that makes the products worthy and in combination with a clever marketing and a little bit audio guru wisdom and stories people are willing to pay the price. It has nothing to do with the real value of the product. But exactly thats what some customers want to know: is there a proven and accepted proportion between the production costs and the market value and price.

As this couldnt be the case with a modded old Altec speaker in a simple wood enclosure for a price of a Mercedes Benz 300E people need to use its emotional value alternatively and believe in the words who praises them as a unique master product and a work of art.

Not an unreasonable position I suppose. Yet I wonder why the source has devoted so much time to the subject. Where lies the truth between marketing, claims of a guru and a cult, and an actual talent. Industrial art, visual art, functional art, what is the difference?

"It could be duplicated by everyone who owns the parts and production process knowledge." A statement that could be applied to anything from the baking of a cake to the creation of heaven and earth.

Consider the source of all statements, mine included.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bongo]

I think that there is an arguement to be made that Shindo equipment is like art. It isn't art, but it is valued in a way we value art, versus valuing diamonds because of the market value of diamonds. I think that some audio equipment is created to approximate diamonds - impressive shiny objects of our egos. It's easier for me to view these things as overpriced, since they seem more dressed to impress than to emerse their owners in musical pleasure.

Schmitt, art can be reproducable and also very valuable - think photography and music and printmaking. Uniqueness or rarity mean nothing on their own. Rare and original junk is still junk.

At the same time, some crudely created original art that seems like junk is priceless because of its originality and its conceptual and historical value. Marcel Duchamp signed a urinal "R Mutt" and declared it art. That changed the history of art by de-emphasizing the art object and proposing that the idea, the innovation, was the art. You might scoff at that, but if it came up for acution, it would stlll sell for millons.

I really doubt that many Shindo designs are strictly reproducible. They are hand made by the artisan that concieved of them. Even if they were copied, the innovation, care, and spirit contributing to their design can't be - and that's what I value. It's pretty clear that Shindo is considered innovative mainly because his gear sounds so good, not because of clever marketing.

Sure, if you were an insightful engineer, you could copy Shindo gear, but it wouldn't approximate the original and people wouldn't value it. You can masterfully cover Stairway to Heaven all you like, but who really cares? You didn't create it. When it comes down to it, we value the manifestation of innovation, not knock-offs.

 

[Schmitt]

Maybe Shindo products could have a status as "reproducable art" like prints of a photography which were reproduced in small numbers and people pay high prices for them.Their rarety should make them worth the money, this is a strategic decision the producer/ distributor has been done to stablilize and reach a special price point within the market. Otherwise they could be produced in larger numbers.

What I called a unique kind of art were works for example like paintings or music events. No one else could reproduce them in original style. The only method of reproduction is way cheaper than to be in the presence of the original painting or event. Someone can listen to a record or have a print from the original or a fake painting. But in all cases its not the original artwork and its content couldnt capture the fascination of the original for 100%. Thats a fundamental difference to reproducable products build by the industry. Every product of that category is fundamental reproducable once the parts and the way to build them is shown to the builder.
Only originals have their high value and that could be seen in many product categories. Fake products of any given quality are worth very little in most cases.
But those facts and fundamentals show the true nature of Shindo products: like a reprint they gain value only by their scarcity and the value as originals, not by the fact that they are unreproducable which they couldnt claim proven by their method of construction.

 

[Bongo]

Maybe Shindo products could have a status as "reproducable art" like prints of a photography which were reproduced in small numbers and people pay high prices for them.Their rarety should make them worth the money, this is a strategic decision the producer/ distributor has been done to stablilize and reach a special price point within the market. Otherwise they could be produced in larger numbers.

What I called a unique kind of art were works for example like paintings or music events. No one else could reproduce them in original style. The only method of reproduction is way cheaper than to be in the presence of the original painting or event. Someone can listen to a record or have a print from the original or a fake painting. But in all cases its not the original artwork and its content couldnt capture the fascination of the original for 100%. Thats a fundamental difference to reproducable products build by the industry. Every product of that category is fundamental reproducable once the parts and the way to build them is shown to the builder.
Only originals have their high value and that could be seen in many product categories. Fake products of any given quality are worth very little in most cases.
But those facts and fundamentals show the true nature of Shindo products: like a reprint they gain value only by their scarcity and the value as originals, not by the fact that they are unreproducable which they couldnt claim proven by their method of construction.

The value of scarcity is secondary to and dependent upon a poduct's quality. You overstate the role of rarity and fail to mention quality, probably because it's an easier argument to make in a forum than arguing that Shindo gear is of low quality. I agree that Shindo products are produced and marketed in a way that maintains high prices for new and used gear. Absent of high quality, though, the value (financial, emotional) of Shindo products evaporate.

 

[Schmitt]

OK, lets look at the value of quality in a given Shindo product, for example a loudspeaker.
We have seen that the price tag on the product could be far away from the production price. If the rarity, glamour and sought after factor of a product is high enough a high price makes it even more desirable for customers who regard status and name as important factors. People who claim the ratio of end user price vs. production price as important factor they have been long out of the game. They are the ones that declare a modded Altec speaker for 65K as insane.
So we have only this kind of customer left who is willing to spend high $$$ for a special sound quality, scaresity of product and fame and glory of a brand name.
As its common sense in many products, a car for the price of a house is overpriced for most customers.
Here we have the same situation in regard to its production price. Everyone could know easily what a used Altec speaker is worth on ebay. Given a company who will modd the chassis to field coil by removing the alnico ring magnet and putting a field coil into it (nothing kinda rocket science), having a carpenter doing a nice custom housing for the speakers and bringing a new frequency dividing and field power unit in the mix that shouldnt cost a fortune at all, even with low numbers of production units.
Bringing it all to a community who is keen for the word "Field Coil Speaker" in combination with the name of a famous company and you have the right mix to yield high $$$ profits if the quality is adequate. And the quality should be excellent, but thats not a mystical thing. Its real physics and anybody who knows how to do could do it that way. But when Mr. anybody have done it, its worth no high $$$, its only the brand name that pushes the product in that price league.
So its understandable that people who strive to quality should think about buying that product which is excellent first. In this case, its obvious that they have to pay a high obulus for the name and image of the brand, too. But as most high end companies did work out their marketing models this way its actual no exception.

 

[kev313]

What's your point, Uwe? You feel the price is high. Do you believe Shindo should charge less?

I should add that I agree with many of the things posted here. I find the price to be extraordinarily high for the "product" received. I've had these very same discussions in my head about the purchase! That said, at the end of the day, I can't build it myself. If I did, I'd probably lose $65,000 of my time. I also get the benefits of getting my speaker from a brand that's been tuning their approach for decades (using my same electronics) as opposed to a fly by night operation.

Also, and a point missing from your discussion, I could not reproduce the sound as Shindo intended. I put a purchase premium on that. Right or wrong doesn't apply to that value analysis. That's just my opinion. You might attribute such sentiments to marketing or false guru-ism. That's ok, and I can honestly appreciate the critique. I simply find the sound to be an enjoyable modern version of historical techniques.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jerome W]

I think that Shindo electronics are priced in normal relation to the work they represent and the sound quality. A Shindo Giscours for example is actually better than a McIntosh C1000P preamp + an ARC REF phono 2. And it is much cheaper.
Well you loose a remote, balance controls, multiple EQ curves, various settings of load and capacitance. But you gain more music.
Shindo electronics are competitive.

I guess that Shindo speakers are also excellent. But being hand made does not justify their price imho. Their price is dis connected from reality.
As to the argument that the very few people who build them could be making electronics during that time, it just makes me laugh. Lots of speakers are hand made.
Like a lawyer who would justify his fees by " listen, I could be playing golf at this time or work for a big company that would pay me more ".

 

[kev313]

I think that Shindo electronics are priced in normal relation to the work they represent and the sound quality. A Shindo Giscours for example is actually better than a McIntosh C1000P preamp + an ARC REF phono 2. And it is much cheaper.
Well you loose a remote, balance controls, multiple EQ curves, various settings of load and capacitance. But you gain more music.
Shindo electronics are competitive.

I guess that Shindo speakers are also excellent. But being hand made does not justify their price imho. Their price is dis connected from reality.

As I've said, there are many good points and criticisms here. Ironically, I was just looking at the Stereophile site as they've posted about a visit to the new Magico factory. As far as I know, there can be no debate that Magico is in another dimension when it comes to materials and equipment expense. I may be wrong as to the material cost (and certainly there is a cost associated with having one of the Shindo employees building speakers), but by that standard the speakers prices cannot be compared.

I honestly cannot add to what I've posted. If one judges value by high tech production and materials by costly machines, yes, the Shindo price is odd. As I've said, the whole package suits my taste. Especially the sound. Of course I also find the price high. I remember being very surprised when Matt told me the premium for field coil as it had jumped quite a bit from the last price I had heard. Whether that increase was associated with currency (or what role currency plays in this) or materials, I do not know. I love my speakers very much and have no thought to sell them. But any sane individual - let me repeat: ANY SANE INDIVIDUAL - will pause and carefully consider whether a field coil modification in worth $30,000. I did. Any reasonably sane individual will also come to the conclusion that it probably doesn't cost $30,000 to modify the speaker. Given the high cost of the regular Shindo 604, it would be fair to see purchasing the FC 604 as doubling down on stupid as compared to the "value" offered by magico. That's a legitimate POV. Again, as I've said, it's a highly personal - read non objective - value analysis.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kev313]

I think that Shindo electronics are priced in normal relation to the work they represent and the sound quality. A Shindo Giscours for example is actually better than a McIntosh C1000P preamp + an ARC REF phono 2. And it is much cheaper.
Well you loose a remote, balance controls, multiple EQ curves, various settings of load and capacitance. But you gain more music.
Shindo electronics are competitive.

I guess that Shindo speakers are also excellent. But being hand made does not justify their price imho. Their price is dis connected from reality.
As to the argument that the very few people who build them could be making electronics during that time, it just makes me laugh. Lots of speakers are hand made.
Like a lawyer who would justify his fees by " listen, I could be playing golf at this time or work for a big company that would pay me more ".

To the last point, it's actually a lot closer to those clients who get billed at my hourly rate for travel. They pay the same for a drive to a far flung court as if I was sitting at my desk writing a brief or working on something else. Why? Because I otherwise would have been sitting at my desk writing a brief or working on something else.

Again, though, I'll admit that I'm speculating as to the basis for the price. I got a bill for my speakers, not an itemized bill.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Schmitt]

Again, though, I'll admit that I'm speculating as to the basis for the price. I got a bill for my speakers, not an itemized bill.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The basis for the price you paid has been already described earlier.