Who would you consider to be an Ethical Manufacturer in the Audio Business?

[dorakeg]

General theme in this thread feels like:

1. go with pro audio
2. go with small private consumer audio

I would say that there are still plenty of brands for consumer. Brands like Cambridge audio, Denon, marantz. Even arcam and roksan and etc are pretty ok. For speakers, elac, monitor audio, wharfedale and others..

Numerous brands that doesn't sell gears at cut-throat prices.

Even if you talk about cables, brands like QED, supra are fine. There is also belden (if you don't mind DIY) I started out with qed original and belden.

 

[bboris77]

This is from my personal experience:
1. JDS Labs by a very wide margin
2. Yamaha - specifically their speaker amplifiers as well as their instruments division
3. Sennheiser

Edit: Had you asked me this question a couple of years ago, I would have put Schiit in the top 5 simply because of their price/performance ratio but the jury is still out for me based on their recent tendency to sweep under the rug multiple reports of premature product failures reported by customers - Lyr 3+, Hel 2E, as an example. I prefer much more transparency on the subject as witnessed by JDS Labs super-detailed update on their early Element III knob issues:

On EL3 Manufacturing – JDS Labs Blog

blog.jdslabs.com

 

[blueone]

It really shouldn't be like that and I don't know why Revel/Harman/Samsung thinks its a clever idea to screw over their customers when they need help, especially after only a decade or so. To me, it makes no sense, especially for statement, excellent products. The opposite is what wins you customers, makes loyal ones and spreads good publicity.

A pair of Salon 2s should realistically have a 15 year warranty with spare parts available during that time on a warranty replacement with returned faulty driver basis, and rejected warranty purchases at a nominal cost+ freight. Not some giant profit centre at the expense of the poor customer.

I agree. Harman annoyed me years ago with a Levinson No39 CD player/preamp. It was silly expensive, but like a Rolex watch an ergonomic delight, so having more money than sense I bought it and enjoyed it for several years. Then, after it was out of warranty, the digital board blew out. (Another example of a capacitor failure. I hate capacitors.) Harman wanted $1400 for the board back when $1400 was a lot of money, and there was shipping there and back to their authorized repair center. I was so annoyed with Harman that when I got it back I immediately listed it for sale and sold it at a high percentage of the original cost to someone as silly as I was. I replaced the CD drive aspect of the Levinson with a $300 Tascam CD player and got a Benchmark DAC as a digital preamp. I still use the Tascam, the Benchmark DAC1 became a DAC3 for the more precise volume control. Benchmark is a joy to deal with, Harman is not.

And, no, I didn't learn my lesson and later bought the Salon2s in 2009. Lucky for me they still work like new.

 

[muslhead]

Not knowing the pro market and therefore basing my opinion on non-pro ... RME

 

[Sokel]

Decent is a rather difficult to measure. It's even more difficult in audio industry because it's niche and low in volume.

Ultimately, a company must make enough profits to survive. If they can't, they go bust. Despite the price of the equipment, manufacturers are not making that much money from it.

Say, there is an amplifier that cost $10,000, 40-60% goes to dealer. It's low volume item, if the margin isn't there, they aren't even interested to sell it. This is rather typical of electrical/electronics market too. Stuffs like your washing machine, fridge etc are all low volume items.

Assuming $5000 to dealer, out of that remaining $5000, you still need to




3-5%


How do you define what is ethical or unethical?

1. As consumer, cheaper is better
2. As investor, higher ROI is better
3. As employee, higher salary is better
4. As CEO, higher profit is better
5. As dealer, higher margin/more sales is better.
6. Employee working for dealer, higher salary/commission is better.

Now look at this:

1. Cheaper price, good for customer, bad for dealer/manufacturer since profit margins affected.
2. Lower margins could mean lower ROI, bad for investor.
3. Lower profits means lesser salary and bonus for employee. Worse may lose job if business really poor.
4. Lower profits means CEO needs to answer to investors, board of directors. May also mean cost cutting measures needed. Eg. Salary cut, retrenchment etc.. bad for employees. Worst of all, company go bust and all jobless...
5. Dealer has to pay rental for shop space, salary for workers. So margin and sales matters.
6. Workers all need salary to feed family. Same as no.3

Give you a few scenarios:

1. I am customer. This xxx company sucks, unethical. Overpriced!! Its daylight robbery!! Should go bust!!

2. I am employee. This xxx company gives me good salary, good benefits and really care for employees. Great company!!

3. I am ceo. This xxx company is having way too little profit. Investors are not getting the returns. Operational cost is too high. I need to cut people and benefits etc to reduce cost.

4. I am the investor for xxx company. I invested millions into it but I am not getting the returns I am supposed to get.. time to fire the CEO!!

5. I am dealer. This xxx company is good. They are giving me good margins for their products. So I will continue to sell their products.

6. I am working for my boss in abc hifi shop. The boss sucks. He is giving me way too little salary and my working hours too long. He told us we are not earning enough. We are giving discounts and providing free delivery and installation is eating up our profits. Customer like it? Sure! But it's costing us.

My purpose is to show that we are in a inter-related world where what others do will affect us indirectly and vice versa. Depending on whose shoes you are in, you will see things differently. Every industry has its own list of "unethical" companies, but employees in these companies are still getting paid and able to feed their families. I am sure there will be some who treat employees well too.

Btw, I am not in audio industry (in case you are wondering).

Agreed for the different angles of view,thing is that some of the companies seem to follow my "rules" and still survive and getting better and better (no need to call names).
Of course it's a market,no one is a saint,not even us,buyers,but we can at least choose the lesser evil and not push things to the point that the only thing that matters is price.

The later will be like training them to be their only goal to the expense of quality,durability,even safety.
Lastly,what is grossly overlooked is the certification and responsibility,we may forget it some times but insurance companies don't.

 

[sofrep811]

@Sokel 's post is the only sensible reply here. All the rest are just people yelling out their favourite brands.

If I was to attempt to answer, I can only think of Accuphase for the following reasons:

They are a small, ultra high quality manufacturer, using the best parts available.
They retain a highly skilled small workforce.
Their range is not driven by trends and products remain in production for many years. Obsoletion is not an issue.
Spare parts are available for many decades. I ordered and received a volume knob for the first amplifier made in 1972.
They have zero debt, are fully funded and private- they answer to no-one except themselves.
Their products last forever- seriously, they just don't fail and if they do, they can be fixed at a reasonable cost.
You can send back any Accuphase product to Japan and they will fix it (at a cost).
They are fiercely loyal to their dealers in each country. Sure that keeps prices up, but competition on their own parallel imported gear is not what they are after.

Maybe they underpay their workers, discharge chemicals into a local stream and don't fix the leaking staff toilet, but I like to think otherwise.

Absolutely. I know it’s difficult to pare down to true ethics of a company. Making money is not unethical. Putting out a device to plug into a USB socket to alleviate dirty noise for $55 is absurd, IMHO. However, someone might think it’s a good deal and works well beyond it’s price.



Just interested what people think when you hear an audio name company and whether you feel they sell a lot of snake oil or they sell product they believe in whole hearted.

 

[sofrep811]

I don't believe there are many wrong answers. There are plenty of snake oil companies out there as shown on the snake oil thread on here.

 

[JustJones]

One of the first come to mind when I think of snake oil or unethical.

Synergistic Research

 

[sejarzo]

It really shouldn't be like that and I don't know why Revel/Harman/Samsung thinks its a clever idea to screw over their customers when they need help, especially after only a decade or so.

There's a major red flag LOL.

Given my experience with Samsung products and support, it's only going to get worse. The only Samsung product I have owned with which I've been satisfied long-term was one cellphone (the other Samsung phone was awful.) I went through months of grief trying to get them to replace a monitor that failed within 6 weeks of purchase, which they repeatedly replaced with a used monitor with obvious cosmetic flaws. Totally ignorant responses to my complaints, time and time again.

 

[sejarzo]

I am impressed by GoldenEar, in spite of their name. See, for example, https://www.goldenear.com/about-goldenear/goldenear-voice.

This part confounds me:

"Many speaker designers have different ideas about how a speaker should be voiced. Some voice their speakers to be more like studio monitors, which intentionally heighten the listeners’ awareness of potential recording flaws—a lousy recipe for speakers whose first job is to deliver the thrill and beauty of music and soundtracks."

So if flat is bad, then how do you "voice" a speaker to be "accurate" but at the same time hide "potential" flaws, which can be in any part of the frequency range?

 

[MaxBuck]

@Sokel 's post is the only sensible reply here.

Bite me.


I mean that in the nicest possible way.

 

[Chaconne]

I'm guessing Mobile Fidelity is out?

 

[devopsprodude]

I would have added Blue Jeans Cables to the list, but then they started selling snake oil cables.

 

[Saturn94]

I would have added Blue Jeans Cables to the list, but then they started selling snake oil cables.

As a prior BJC customer, this surprised me. I took a quick look at the website, but nothing stood out. Perhaps I missed something. Do you have an example of snake oil cables they are selling?

 

[fubarnow]

I don't have any problem buying Denon or Marantz for Electronics.
I buy speakers that are a good value and would not buy some
where the price is unjustified.

 

[Saturn94]

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/blue-jeans-cables-jumps-the-shark.10347/

Well that’s disappointing.

However, I find it interesting BJC doesn’t make any claims about audible superiority of those cables; essentially just saying it’s up to the buyer to decide. There also doesn’t seem to be any real push on their website to steer customers to these expensive cables.

 

[Head_Unit]

YO to Blue Jeans. The straightforwarness on this page https://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/hdmi-cables/hdmi-cable.htm, and good luck with their products, makes me a fan. And I gotta also kudos* Buckeye amps for transparency and commitment to help customers.

*you saw it here, folks, first use of "kudos" as a verb!

 

[Deleted member 58865]

Musk is a con man.

I don't know whether that is true, but Elon Musk is still not driven by money.

The point is if people in a manufacturer treat money as their God or the priority, we can be sure that their products are going to suck.

 

[pagan84]

Fiio headphone amps are cheap and work as intended.
I own E10k(bought in 2018), K5pro(2019), K7(2023). No quality problems so far.

 

[Capitol C]

This part confounds me:

"Many speaker designers have different ideas about how a speaker should be voiced. Some voice their speakers to be more like studio monitors, which intentionally heighten the listeners’ awareness of potential recording flaws—a lousy recipe for speakers whose first job is to deliver the thrill and beauty of music and soundtracks."

So if flat is bad, then how do you "voice" a speaker to be "accurate" but at the same time hide "potential" flaws, which can be in any part of the frequency range?

I had taken that to refer to the notion that studio monitors are often thought of being near-field reproducers of sound, which may or may not be as successful in a real room. You are right, though, if we take a broader view of a monitor, that is the goal we should go for. One of the things that also impresses me more than the quote I linked to is that the company uses anechoic testing in their design.