Magico Q7

[edorr]

Damn! Edorr do you have to come up all the time with such truths?? No better way to put it. Can I use it in my signature? .

Be my guest. I'd be honored.

Oh and Please I know I am not immune. I recently had to try a very expensive headphone cable after a freind told me how good it was .. Quickly returned it since I could not hear any difference and that from a person who is supposed to be a non-believer in cables affairs ... Obsessive Compulsive behavior ? You bet

I'm worse than you - I own lots of expensive stuff I'm pretty confident I could not identify as better sounding in a double blind but decided to keep anyway just to rule out the possibility I'm leaving performance on the table. The anxiety would be unbearable

 

[stereo]

The interesting thing in the past few reactions is that nobody is even considering that they sound so much better to justify 44k price increase.
People keep focusing on price, nobody cares about value and how a product sounds.
Nobody is considering how much it did cost Magico to develop these 2 new drivers. Nobody also cares about how much it costs now to produce goods in California: one of my friend has a machine shop in the valley, he is increasing salaries 10% a year and cannot retain his employees. US job market is getting crazy in tech.

And btw, when Magico introduced the Q5 for cheaper than the M5, all posters said it was a crime to dare selling a better speaker at a lower price....

 

[stereo]

the car business it totally different on this subject. when a car manufacturer invests in an upgrade to a particular model, they must project it's volume to amortize the (typically 2-3 billion dollar cost) over the lifespan of that model. and this volume is very sensitive to price. if a Honda Accord sells 1.3-1.5 million over it's 5 year cycle then it is very profitable and the market share is protected. so price and market share are equally valuable. if they raise the price to cream the profit but lose market share then eventually that will change everything. both are critical to get economies of scale and amortize continued research, product development, and capital investments.

they have to get it fully right the first time, every time or hell will pay.

there many smart people who make their living predicting the annual auto sales numbers because so much is depending on it. it's at least 15-20% or more of our economy.



because they cannot see over the next small hill. the marketplace for high end audio is so unpredictable that there must be an immediate return and nothing is long term. even the dealers or marketing is all over the board. there is no rudder deep in the water of a huge consistent market. just observe the shakeout of high end companies whenever there is a downturn in the economy. only the strong (or light-footed) survive since the market expands and contrasts so severely. it why now so many products are sold direct, with very small footprints and low overhead. the high end industry is at the tail end of the economy and will be among the first to feel consumer reluctance or panic.



no; you would be pissed off big time if they changed your $185k speaker but not the price and you were left holding the bag. you would demand the change for free. i'll bet Magico dealers were taking heat for the 'higher tech' of the 'M' and this drove this decision to some degree. at lower price points brick and mortar marketed high end speakers do this all the time. and they just expect that the customers will upgrade. but with their flagship speaker a little more sensitivity is required or those 'whales' will leave the brand and not return. it's just how different price points work. look at Wilson and all the upgrades to their top of line speakers, and brand loyalty.

very well said

 

[edorr]

The interesting thing in the past few reactions is that nobody is even considering that they sound so much better to justify 44k price increase.
People keep focusing on price, nobody cares about value and how a product sounds.
Nobody is considering how much it did cost Magico to develop these 2 new drivers. Nobody also cares about how much it costs now to produce goods in California: one of my friend has a machine shop in the valley, he is increasing salaries 10% a year and cannot retain his employees. US job market is getting crazy in tech.

The discussion just happened to focus on the economics of high end audio. All stuff get better due to innovation, but most get cheaper or don't increase in price in the process. A 2015 Honda Accord is a lot better than the 2000 model, but in real terms it probably costs the same. Using your logic you could argue the new model is "worth" more than the old - does not work that way. The same applies to most consumer electronics - better performance, same or lower price.

And btw, when Magico introduced the Q5 for cheaper than the M5, all posters said it was a crime to dare selling a better speaker at a lower price....

Very true. Which goes to show that there is little to no relation between cost / performance and price, and pricing decisions are based on marketing consideration.

 

[stereo]

I'm worse than you - I own lots of expensive stuff I'm pretty confident I could not identify as better sounding in a double blind but decided to keep anyway just to rule out the possibility I'm leaving performance on the table. The anxiety would be unbearable

Hahaha, sounds so true. But I can guarantee you that it would be very easy in a blind test for you to hear that the Q7 Mk2 is sounding better than the Mk1. Significantly better. I am probably one of the only one who heard it (or at least a prototype of it), when work brought me to the Bay area last month. I still have to hear better highs than with the new tweeter. Mids are also more transparent. Bring your best recording and you will hear things you never heard on any system.

 

[cannata]

The discussion just happened to focus on the economics of high end audio. All stuff get better due to innovation, but most get cheaper or don't increase in price in the process. A 2015 Honda Accord is a lot better than the 2000 model, but in real terms it probably costs the same.

This is simply not true. Cars prices has risen about 25% since 2000 and SUV over 50% (adjusted for inflation)

Very true. Which goes to show that there is little to no relation between cost / performance and price, and pricing decisions are based on marketing consideration.

Really? So why would you sell a better speaker cheaper?

 

[stereo]

The discussion just happened to focus on the economics of high end audio. All stuff get better due to innovation, but most get cheaper or don't increase in price in the process. A 2015 Honda Accord is a lot better than the 2000 model, but in real terms it probably costs the same. Using your logic you could argue the new model is "worth" more than the old - does not work that way. The same applies to most consumer electronics - better performance, same or lower price.

It is not so easy. Car is different because there is no inventory in the channel, at least not in high end cars like Ferrari. In high end audio, if one player introduces a Mk2 version of a component at the same price as MK1, you get 2 effects:
1) dealers with stock complain to OEM that their inventory instantly lost 20% value.
2) customers complain that they just ordered a speaker which is already outdated 3mths later.
Bottom line, you cannot get a new model competing at same price point against a old one. Any new model needs to bring a significant improvement, but at a higher price point for the system to work.
And btw, calculate the evolution of selling price of Ferrari cars over time, you will see they are far from costing the same.....

Last, when reading most comments, sounds like most people believe OEM make tons of money in high end audio. It is just not true. It is a very small market of crazy people, with high development cost amortized on small production series, if you want to introduce true innovation. Just have a look at how many companies are barely surviving- not the right field to play in if you want to get rich. An interesting analogy is restaurants: you would be much richer selling pizza for 15 bucks than meals in a French Michelin 3 stars restaurant for 400 bucks (that's why 80% of 3 stars restaurants are losing money in France, and just surviving with the hotel attached to it...).

 

[edorr]

This is simply not true. Cars prices has risen about 25% since 2000 and SUV over 50% (adjusted for inflation)

A base model Honda Accord in 1990 cost $12,000. In 2015 is cost $21,000 (Mike correct me if I'm wrong). This is annual price increase of 2.3% which is about the rate if inflation. I believe median family income has been flat during that period, so as a percentage of income a median income family (about $50K), spends about the same on their car as 25 years ago, which seems plausible. Obviously, the 2015 Honda is a much better car.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

A base model Honda Accord in 1990 cost $12,000. In 2015 is cost $21,000 (Mike correct me if I'm wrong). This is annual price increase of 2.3% which is about the rate if inflation. I believe median family income has been flat during that period, so as a percentage of income a median income family (about $50K), spends about the same on their car as 25 years ago, which seems plausible. Obviously, the 2015 Honda is a much better car.

the problem with your point is the added value over time. some of it dictated by legislation, some by culture and life-style, and some by technology.

today's cars do so much more, are dramatically safer, pollute much less, are quieter and more comfortable. they have much more technology. I could easily argue that some cars on the market are better deals for the money in total value than 10 or 15 years ago when you start comparing content.

and auto manufacturing has really become efficient and elegant. they can build better cheaper to allow for the costs of better technology. the marketplace is so competitive that prices are kept in line too.

of course; it's possible that the political agenda requiring super high fuel economy will dramatically change the auto business over the next 10-20 years....stay tuned for that. i'll be retired....it will be my kids who won't be able to afford a car anymore, or their kids.

if we look at my speakers from 10-15 years ago; Wilson Watt-Puppy 6, Kharma Exquisite Reference 1D, and the VR9SE.....they certainly are competitive with similar speaker priced the same today. not much real change in performance.

at higher price points there are more clearly capable speakers, but not at that same price.

a 10-15 year old Honda or Toyota is not nearly the package todays same models are.

of course; cars get all the best possible research and assembly technology. they are the rock-stars of manufacturing. economies of scale really offer the consumer value....as long as legislation does not ask too much.

 

[ack]

The Q7MkII should be a triumph; I've been waiting for graphene to make it into the high end for quite a while, and who else but Magico could do it first!

 

[andromedaaudio]

yeah yeah and will it be 1 atom thick thats pure graphene it says " graphene based " , thiel accuton has been growing pure synthetic diamond cones for ages according to the CVD proces , any insight what a 1 atom thick layer is gonna do

Graphene (/??ræf.i?n/)[1] is pure carbon in the form of a very thin, nearly transparent sheet, one atom thick.

File:Graphene and Dirac Cones.ogv
Graphene and its band structure and Dirac Cones, effect of a grid on doping
Graphene is remarkably strong for its very low weight (about 100 times stronger than steel[2]) and it conducts heat and electricity with great efficiency.[3] While scientists had theorized about graphene for decades, it was first produced in the lab in 2003.[4] Because it is virtually two-dimensional, it interacts oddly with light and with other materials. Researchers have identified the bipolar transistor effect, ballistic transport of charges and large quantum oscillations.

 

[Elberoth]

The Q7MkII should be a triumph; I've been waiting for graphene to make it into the high end for quite a while, and who else but Magico could do it first!

Carbon nanotubes are made of graphene.

Nanotubes are members of the fullerene structural family. Their name is derived from their long, hollow structure with the walls formed by one-atom-thick sheets of carbon, called graphene.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_nanotube

There are also other types of nanotubes ... silicon, boron nitride, inorganic.

If the nanotubes that they have been using in the Magico drive units were carbon based, then one could argue, that they have already been using graphene technology .... for years.

 

[ack]

A little off topic, but don't sell graphene short; it has many undiscovered properties, beyond nanotubes. Read this for example, announced just yesterday http://www.gizmag.com/graphene-led-display-flexible-electronics/35884/

 

[PeterA]

Still think the Q7 is one of the finest speaker out there ... Would love to hear a "M". Would travel to do so.

Frantz, I have a good friend who owns the M Project, and I have heard it twice. It is a fantastic speaker. Though they are not really any longer available, the price was $130K, considerably less than either the Q7 or Q7 MkII. Considering the size, form and price difference, the M represents a very good value relative to the Q7, IMO. Add considering the uniqueness and limited quantity, it should also hold its value very well, as a collector's item.

The M, though difficult to move around, is much easier to live with than the massive Q7 and it can fit in a smaller room. It is the most elegant large speaker I've ever seen. I think it is Magico's best achievement to date and I hope the form and technology finds its way into future, smaller models with curved baffles and curved side walls.

 

[number95]

Frantz, I have a good friend who owns the M Project, and I have heard it twice. It is a fantastic speaker. Though they are not really any longer available, the price was $130K, considerably less than either the Q7 or Q7 MkII. Considering the size, form and price difference, the M represents a very good value relative to the Q7, IMO. Add considering the uniqueness and limited quantity, it should also hold its value very well, as a collector's item.

The M, though difficult to move around, is much easier to live with than the massive Q7 and it can fit in a smaller room. It is the most elegant large speaker I've ever seen. I think it is Magico's best achievement to date and I hope the form and technology finds its way into future, smaller models with curved baffles and curved side walls.

+1

There is a reason why before renewing Q5, oldest Q model, Magico went for Q7.

 

[PeterA]

EVERYTHING gets superseded by a newer/better model.

Most people are weak and can't stand the thought of that, so the manufacturers raise the price to help them feel better about their newly obsolete purchase.

The Magico Q1 replaced the Mini 2 and even cost less. I am still listening to the obsolete Mini 2. Obsolete never sounded so good.

The same will be said of the Q3 and M Project when they are no longer in production.

 

[XV-1]

no; you would be pissed off big time if they changed your $185k speaker but not the price and you were left holding the bag. you would demand the change for free. i'll bet Magico dealers were taking heat for the 'higher tech' of the 'M' and this drove this decision to some degree. at lower price points brick and mortar marketed high end speakers do this all the time. and they just expect that the customers will upgrade. but with their flagship speaker a little more sensitivity is required or those 'whales' will leave the brand and not return. it's just how different price points work. look at Wilson and all the upgrades to their top of line speakers, and brand loyalty.

I disagree Mike

If I owned the mk1, I would be pissed off that Magico want to charge me 44k for an upgrade that should be in reality a lot less.

I would be pissed off that Magico increased their price for the Mk2 for no reason other than marketing. As others have mentioned, new models are released all the time and they need not be more expensive for no reason other than marketing and profit.

Perhaps if I had the discretionary funds I would think differently in being happy to be ripped off by manufacturers

cheers

 

[stereo]

I disagree Mike

If I owned the mk1, I would be pissed off that Magico want to charge me 44k for an upgrade that should be in reality a lot less.

I would be pissed off that Magico increased their price for the Mk2 for no reason other than marketing. As others have mentioned, new models are released all the time and they need not be more expensive for no reason other than marketing and profit.

Perhaps if I had the discretionary funds I would think differently in being happy to be ripped off by manufacturers

cheers

or you would be pissed if Wilson would sell you a X2 as the "best of the best".... and introduce 3mths later a XLF as the "new best of the best", without an upgrade path???

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I disagree Mike

If I owned the mk1, I would be pissed off that Magico want to charge me 44k for an upgrade that should be in reality a lot less.

ok; lets say that instead of Maxx3's you owned the original X-2 Alexander Mk1's. you had in the last year purchased these for $125k. today they come out with Alexander Mk2's for $150k, or you can upgrade for $50k.

would you rather that they don't offer the upgrade????

of just pound sand and suffer having the old model with no recourse.

no doubt the value of your Mk1's used is much higher to a buyer knowing they can upgrade them. and likely you can work out some sort of 'deal' with your Wilson dealer who loves you on the upgrade. either way you stay a loyal Wilson customer. spend a little more money and stay current for a few more years.

and that is exactly what happened over two series of Wilson top-of-line speakers with lots of quite happy campers, and the template for Magico. the customers see that their viewpoint is considered and not just ignored.

I would be pissed off that Magico increased their price for the Mk2 for no reason other than marketing. As others have mentioned, new models are released all the time and they need not be more expensive for no reason other than marketing and profit.

I think it's clear there is some value in performance to the upgrade. it's also logical that the Mk2 Q7 likely does not likely cost more to build. but getting your panties in a bunch on the cost factor of products like this is a waste of energy. it's all perceived value. and if you are not a Magico fanboy then you won't ever 'get it' anyway.

Perhaps if I had the discretionary funds I would think differently in being happy to be ripped off by manufacturers

cheers

products like this require a bit of lust over logic for sure.

 

[ack]

If I owned the mk1, I would be pissed off that Magico want to charge me 44k for an upgrade that should be in reality a lot less.

$44K is the difference in retail price between MkI and MkII, so I am not sure why you'd be pissed; if I were a MkI owner, I would be elated that I can upgrade mine at a total cost exactly that of a new MkII. That's what I call a great and fair upgrade path. Can you explain why you would expect to spend A LOT less? If the upgrade were a lot less, as you say, then the MkII owners would actually be pissed, because they could buy a used MkI and upgrade it for less out of pocket cash. I am bit perplexed...