RA - interesting change of tack?

for many years now the russ andrews catalogue has had an article which pooh-poohed the general regard of the hifi thought train. it read something like this - 'most hifi magazines and stores will tell you that to get the best results from your system you need to put aside 10-15% of your system budget for good quality I/C and speaker cables. here at RA we believe that you should spend mega bucks on cables'

so, how come, his newly released range of pre, power and speakers (£10k all in) comes pre-supplied with some of the cheapest leads they sell?

only one answer - you can't buy the kit without out it , so the option to upgrade is there right away!!!!
jeeez - what?! ten grand not good enough

parasites

my2p

 

why dont' we set up a website criticising the bull propaganda of the hifi mags and name and shame the worst offenders like RA.? I for one would like to burst the bullshitters bubble.

 

the bullshit expose website would be a good call. especially if it was a pop up whenever someone wrote 'hifi' into a search engine.

obviously we would get in trouble.
i would love to see the faces of a jury when they are told to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a silver power cord has lowered the noise floor and provided an inky blackness

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!

 

I have thought about doing this before, the site could easily critisise some of the theories but as soon as it mentions any names of the magazines or companies such as RA then it would be open to legal action.

 

If it was done like a review - albeit negative and with quotes from companies' marketing bumph, there shouldn't be any trouble. No company could take court action without the risk of extreme adverse publicity.

He who dares, wins.

On the other hand, the reviews should be fair and balanced. If you just said that RA equipment is crap and they're trying to rip us of, you'd probably deserve to be sued.

Come to think of it. Isn't that what we're doing here?

 

I sometimes wonder about putting his claims to test in a real manner....

A ''high end'' R.S. system:

RS SJA1 preamp 2750
RS SJA2 pwr amp 3,500
Quave LS1 spkr 3,000
Sugden Masterclass CDP 2,500

RS Powerblock 401
RS Silencer with megaclamp 140
RS Super Purifier 350

Upgraded spkr cable:
Kimber Select KS3038 6,295
Upgraded Interconnect
Kimber Select KS1030 1,091
Upgraded Pwr Cables (3)
PK10 Palladin 2,460

TOTAL: 22,487



I'll throw the gauntlet out, can anyone put together a better system for 22,487? (excluding racks)

 

I have to agree with Muffinman but in RA deffence(?) I think their mains cables are superb, along with their service. I use 'Reference' myself.

 

I think it would be a challenge to put together a worse system for 22,487.

 

I can, use the same stuff, but use pro audio cables for a few quid each, you get the same quality, but at about £13000 without giving all your cash to RA on his cables.

Its not strictly libellous if you use quotes from the catalogues naming them and saying that is a load of tosh, and he is just spouting a load of hot air, without foundation, like a media report, you could say RA declined to comment on the background science behind the designs.

Just quote the quotes and rubbish them with fact.
Its only libel if its false.

 

Well if somebody can explain to me how that earth star block costs so much I shall eat my hat.

What annoys me so much about RA is the fact I didn't think of it first. I mean all you have to do is pay 20p for a plug trade price, polish it, stick a fancy badge on it and charge £10 for it.

 

The Russ Andrews 'spend all of your money on cables' approach is just an extension of the 'spend all of your money on the source' approach that was started by the marketing gurus of Linn and Naim back in the 70s and swallowed whole and then regurgitated by the UK hi-fi press.

Both approaches are nonsense.

The best systems use balanced components that sound good together.

The current UK's over-emphasis on PRaT to the exclusion of timbre, imagery, neutrality, transparency, detail, dynamics or other aspects of sound quality, is another example of an imbalance, born out of the Linn/Naim marketing department. PRaT was sold by Linn and Naim because it was what they thought their equipment did best. The British hi-fi public has been brain-washed with this imbalance in just the same way as with the 'source first', 'cables first' or 'support first' doctrines. PRaT is important but so are the other aspects of sound quality. We can see the 'PRaT first' doctrine extending to a greater or lesser extent through all the UK forums, including this one.

The trouble is that the doctrines we swallow influence the way that we listen to hi-fi. We no longer know any different.

Most professional musicians, who haven't swallowed these doctrines, are capable of making far better judgements on the sound quality than most magazine-reading, forum-participating, card-carrying hi-fi enthusiasts. For some reason, they generally don't bother (maybe they don't like having to wade through all the bull-shit).

As others have pointed out already, balance is key.

 

I understand the desire to challenge the claims RA is making, but the 'web isn't the place they need to be published. There are a large number of very gullible people out there who do nothing but read magazines, and hence believe the cr@p they spout, including the claim that cables can make a massive difference to your system, and that you should spend masses of money on them.
You need only look at some of the systems featured in RA's brochure to comprehensively prove that these individuals don't have a clue about what they're doing with their system, they just buy RA's marketing twaddle - the £9.80 markup on that mains plug is because it's polished by a naked nubile virgin under the light of a full moon, using only clockwise motions to positively charge the metal
If magazines started turning against cables and tweaks, or least the ridiculous markups that many of them carry, you would find people might start changing their mind. But it's not going to happen, because this sort of stuff has been spouted for too long, and no-one wants to loose face by admitting it might be balls.:JOEL:
And besides, what are we winging for? If they buy it, it's their problem. We, on the other hand, know better.:JPS:

 

I guess the problem is money. The maagazines carry adverts for RA stuff so make a lot of money from it. They are not going to suddenly start slagging off people like RA because if they go under or loose a lot of custom they would not afford to be able to take out all those glossy adverts in the magazines they do.

I stopped buying the HIFI magazines along time ago when I realised every new model was ten times better than the old one when in reality is just has a slightly different resistor here and there.

 

Rising to the challenge...

OK, haven't heard the RA system so of course this is hypothetical and to be taken with a pinch of salt, but I'd be very surprised if the following doesn't at least give the pricy RA kit a good run for its money:

Naim CDi: £500 (s/h)
Naim Nait 2: £300 (s/h)
Neat Petite III speakers: £500 (s/h)
Some nice stands: £100 (new)
Interconnects/cables: stock Naim £100ish (new)

TOTAL: £1400
(leaving enough for a decent TT, some nice racks, a dedicated CU with 10mm.sq. spurs, a nice recliner to sit in, a few cases of nice wine or cask whiskies to drink whilst listening, and enough left over to buy lots of cds, vinyl, a laptop and an iPod (for when you're out and about).

I know what I'd do...

jtc

 

So who in the world is going to buy this stuff anyways. It has no track record like Krell, ARC et al. Wouldn't be able to afford any wires after shelling out for that lot! May be shooting himself in the foot by re-introducing such expensive equipment.

 

I feel really sorry for Sugden, they do not deserve to be mentioned in such a daft list.

Tony.

 

STOP THE ROT NOW!!! (sorry for shouting :shame: )

Hang on a second while I put on my flame proof suit. OK, here goes...

Some of you guys make me laugh!!:JPS:

On the one hand a bunch of you dismiss the idea that better cables can make a difference, yet we all spend hours discussing the minute differences that this years XYZ amp has over the last model because the manufacturer changed some capacitors. Really, where's the difference?

OK, I'll accept that some of the rhetoric used to describe cables gets a bit OTT, but then the same is true of lots of other products in this game. That's what this industry is about - desire and emotion, not logic and theories. Logic and ruthlessly provable fact is for buying people-carriers and stain-proof carpet, not Hi-Fi.

What really worries me though is the constant sniping at prices and profit margins.

Profit is what drives this business. I really don't care if someone buys in to R.A.'s marketing spin, and who am I to stand in their way if they have decided to spend their money. Perhaps they are looking for something different to me. You see, as long as R.A. keeps flogging stuff he's also spending money on advertising, and this means that Hi-Fi mags have a better chance of survival. That's important to me because I like reading them, but they have a bigger role to play. IMO they help bring new blood and new money in to the industry. New money that supports dealers, fuels the upgrade market and feeds the second-hand trade.

The worrying trend is that small newsagents won't stock a mag unless it's SOR - Sale or Return. How can you get anything from Cake Decorating for Beginners to Caravan Tow Bar Weekly and no quality Hi-Fi press. It's a crime! But Publishers won't offer SOR on titles with low advertising revenues and low profits; so we're back to that seemingly dirty word 'profit' again.

Talk of naming and shaming companies that make extravagant claims or have seemingly huge margins doesn't make much sense in an industry where normally right minded people are prepared to spend the equivalent of a good family holiday on a CD player. “Hello Mr. Pot, this is Mr. Kettle calling.†It's just different degrees of the same extremist view.

Having an opinion is one thing, but setting out to try to decry a manufacturers claims on something as subjective as how well a bit of wire works is quite something else. This industry doesn't make sense in the conventional manner. My wife would have a fit if she knew how much I spent on a 'needle' for the record player. Just because you can't see the value in an interconnect doesn't mean it has no value, and once you start poo-pooing stuff where do you stop?

Hex

 

Excellent post Hex. After considering carefully what has been going through my mind on RA equipment, I for one am going to hang my head in shame. :shame:

Seriously though - some good points well made.

 

Hi,

Well said Chris (Hex). Some very good points, well made.


SCIDB

 

Yes even the most expensive Naim/Linn etc. Cd player is probably only a couple of hundred quids worth of components (if that) but people are quite happy to spend thousands on it without a second thought. Love to know the profit margins on supposedly 'respected' equipment makers.