Cosmetics versus Performance... What is your 'ratio' ?

JoshHendi

JoshHendi

^ElectroNerd^
Subscriber
So I am curious to get an general consensus from the community regarding cosmetics versus performance of audio gear. This is mainly referring to used/vintage audio, as obviously new gear is perfectly cosmetically.

I am curious to how equipment cosmetics versus equipment performance is important to people of the AK community. For me personally, I am at 90% performance and 10% cosmetics. If the price is right, I'd pay a lower price for something that isn't that great looking, but carries solid performance. For example, I would be willing and excited to get an amp or a pair of speakers at a great low price because it is beat up, but the performance is there.

If an amp or speakers in mint condition are valued at $1,000 but they were ugly and beat up, yet still performed perfectly, paying $200 because it is ugly but still sounds right is right up my ally.

So, if you could leave a reply with your 'importance ratio' I would love to hear everyone's inputs and thoughts. Also maybe leave any real-life examples of when this came into play?

90% performance, 10% cosmetics
 
Do you stare at your gear or listen to it, that is the real question to ask. Most people detest others that nitpick a few scratches or dings to get a substantially lower price on otherwise fully functional fairly priced equipment
 
"
"Do you stare at your gear or listen to it, that is the real question to ask"

I do both all the time and see no reason why anybody can't do it.Plenty of Vintage gear out there with both the looks and sound I want also.Keep searching/seek and you shall find:)
 
I'll take a few minor scratches, especially things that can be fixed, but in general I want the stuff to look good. Cosmetics do affect price and too many people seem to think, "Since I've got an xyz, and xyz seems to sell for big bucks, mine must be worth that." Sorry, if the cosmetics are crap, it's not worth near what you might think. No different than cars or couches. If the performance can't be brought up to excellent, I don't want it at all. So, 100% performance (if serviced) and maybe 80% cosmetics. Hmmm... that's 180%. Flunked math I guess.
 
For me, it's likely more around 40% performance, 60% cosmetics.

It still has to sound "good" to me but the fact of the matter is my ears aren't so great. I'm unencumbered by the whole audiophile thing because my hearing as I get older does have it's limitations. Nothing I've heard in recent years has sounded as good to me as the relatively cheap Nikko rack system (based on a NA-100 amp and Vivid TX-440 speakers) I had 25 years ago. I guess it can be seen as a blessing and a curse but it does save me from the agonies of pursuing that perfect sound.

What really gets me excited is the looks and tactile feel of some of this vintage 70's stuff. Turning the volume knob on my AU-7900 almost gives me shivers. Looking at all those buttons, knobs, and switches on a big receiver and knowing they all do something and I've repaired it to make that happen is a thrill.:rockon:
 
about 12 years ago I sold a 'slightly worked on' sx650 to a fellow vendor at the carlisle truck show...I didnt ask much, the sign said literally 'looks like it was kicked by a scorned woman, but runs great' The silver was good, but the wood was essentially peeled and chewed on.

he saw it and had to have it for his store as he likes the pioneer sound and the sign sold him.

it ran 24x7 for about 3 years and he brought it back to me at the show, it was distorting. It seemed he had it high up on a shelf where it was easier to let it run than turn it off, and it had no air. the diff inputs went wonky. so I rebuilt the power supply with bigger silicon and hotter caps and put in new diffs, and a year later at the truck show (we are from different areas of the country and only fraternize once a year) I gave it back and admonished him to let it breathe and it runs to this day. so this is an extreme example of one where looks matter not one whit, it would be hard to find, let alone look at it, but it must absolutely perform in his store.
 
ConradH said:
I'll take a few minor scratches, especially things that can be fixed, but in general I want the stuff to look good. Cosmetics do affect price and too many people seem to think, "Since I've got an xyz, and xyz seems to sell for big bucks, mine must be worth that." Sorry, if the cosmetics are crap, it's not worth near what you might think. No different than cars or couches. If the performance can't be brought up to excellent, I don't want it at all. So, 100% performance (if serviced) and maybe 80% cosmetics. Hmmm... that's 180%. Flunked math I guess.
Click to expand...

My point was say you have a perfectly functional SX-1280 with broken glass, should you take 50%+ off for said glass? Or a few scratches on an refinish able wooden case?

It was the way the question was worded that prompted my response ie $1000 equipment for $200 because of cosmetics. I can see knocking a few bucks off for minor repairable damage but that much of a discount seems like the seller is getting ripped off by someone who will fix the minor damage and flip it for way more
 
I'm on the side of performance. I like my gear to look good, but I'll take some minor cosmetic damage for performance and cheaper price.

The three prime examples for me are: My Kenwood KD-5066 turntable. Overall nice looking but not mint condition. It's got some very minor scratches and nicks (hardly noticeable but there) and missing the logo on the front. Got it for half price versus a 100% mint one that was for sale at the same time. My Boston Acoustics VR-40 speakers have some pretty serious blemishes on the top, some chips out, and some marks on the grills. They look good enough for me and I saved somewhere around 40%. I also got my Kenwood KR-5060 receiver for under $100 because it had some veneer peeling and was missing 2 feet (the tuner is also out). Pretty easy fix for the cosmetic issues and the tuner doesn't matter much to me in that one cause I have others.
 
Eh, I like aesthetics and design. No doubt that has an effect on my purchases, so I do like it to look good, but not necessarily perfect. The set sits wide open in the main room, and as a result I see it every time I look up. That said, I've gotten more forgiving on little cosmetic issues as I've gotten older. Now I see them as part of the history of the item. 25c/75p.
 
Like many thing I would say it depends. If one is buying less collectible gear then cosmetics should be a matter of what looks acceptable. For collectible gear cosmetics matter a lot because itams in excellent condition will hold and increase their value much better. For me, being a hedonist who loves both beautiful things and beautiful sound they are equally important. My Scott 355.IMG_0109.JPG
 
I'd also say about 80/20 but for me it's more of a case of 'as long as I don't hate the looks' situation.
 
When I bought my Vincent SV 226 MkII it came in silver face or black.. I chose silver, but would have taken black if that was all they had.
Not sure what that says about me. None of my gear really matches anyway. The grills on my ADS 1590s are a little wonky, but keep my grandson's fingers out. Yup, its all about the sound.
 
Function over vanity. I guess 80/20. I do have a set up in my living room where the gear is almost out of sight. The living room set up is actually easier to listen to due to the fact I'm not looking at the system, and concentrating more on the music.
 
If I was looking for a particular set I'd try to buy the highest condition example I can find as I don't mind paying more for a better looking unit.
Aside from the aesthetics the better looking ones have likely lead easier lives.

If I was curious about something or a less than perfect example is all I could find I would take it home to because I'm realistic about the fact that with vintage you don't exactly get to be picky sometimes.
That said, if I liked it I would probably start looking for repair/replacement parts as soon as I decided it's a keeper.

So my ratio is sound first but I'd prefer the best example I could find. So 50/50?
Luckily I've had no problem finding really clean examples of what I've been interested in so far.
 
80/20 performance/cosmetics.

That doesn't necessarily mean a bunch of beat up gear. Rather, I don't need polished chrome or stainless steel or 1/2" thick panels (although I have a little of that too).

Pedestrian appearance like pro amps is fine with me as long as they meet or exceed my performance expectation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bigerik
Is NOS audio equipment even safe?
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
bluesky
bluesky
Sam08861
Separate Curious
Replies
16
Views
220
Sam08861
Sam08861
M
What is the most MUSICALLY SATISFYING component(s) you own?
2 3 4
Replies
61
Views
4K
similost
similost
H
What is your 15K Dream System for both Looks and Performance?
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
Superampman
S
SounderMN
What does "Punches above its price point" mean?
2
Replies
30
Views
859
Djcoolray
Djcoolray
Back
Top Bottom