REGISTER NEW USERLOST PASSWORD? WELCOME, Logout

Swiss army knives

Paul's Posts — 03 September 2012

By

Swiss army knives

When you buy a Swiss army knife your expectation is greater functionality and utility in a single package – it is not that you believe you now have the world’s best screwdriver, knife or saw blade.  The miracle of a Swiss army knife is how much they can pack into a single package not how good any one piece of it is.

In the same sense, when a manufacturer builds a preamp or integrated amplifier that includes a multitude of non-essential features it is more than likely what you will get is “good enough” for the task, not spectacular in its own right.

That’s the thing with separates – they must stand on their own.  If I build a separate DAC for $1,000, it had better be as good or better than every other separate $1,000 DAC or it will fail.  If I include a pretty good DAC in a $1,000 integrated it is not expected to compete with the standalone crowd.

This is the paradigm of separates vs. integrated solutions.  But it doesn’t have to be that way.  Most of these “truths” are simply marketing driven and technically they need not exist.

Years ago automobiles came with courtesy radios built in – you wouldn’t buy a car without a radio, yet the radio’s performance didn’t matter because they all sort of sucked.  Then an entire industry came into fashion building separates for the aftermarket automobile sound systems to fix this issue.  Those separates were better than what the auto makers were giving you.  But then the auto makers decided to up their game and integrate better stereos into their cars and charge you for them at the time you bought the car.

Today a premium sound system that’s integrated into the car is almost always better than what you can purchase as separates and the aftermarket separates industry barely exists anymore.  Why?  Because manufacturers are finally taking advantage of the benefits of integration – actually designing the interior of the car with a sound system in mind.  When you use integration to your advantage you’ll always benefit over a collection of separate pieces cobbled together to form a whole.

What would happen if high-end audio manufacturers starting taking advantage of the benefits integration offers in their products and comparing the results to separates?

email Swiss army knives Forward to a friend and help us engage more readers

Get new and fresh stories like this each morning by joining the folks reading Paul's Posts. Click here

Related Articles

Microphones Serving it up Rolling it off What’s all the fuss about?

Share

About Author

Paul McGowan

Paul McGowan is the CEO and co-founder of PS Audio Inc. a Boulder Colorado design and manufacturing company of high-end audio products and services. McGowan has been designing and building high-end products for nearly 40 years. Hobbies include skiing, music, hiking, artisan bread baking, kick boxing and cooking. He lives in Boulder Colorado with his wife Terri and his 4 sons.

(7) Readers Comments

  1. paulsquirrel

    September 3, 2012 at 5:54 am

    Hi Paul.

    Your Swiss Army Knife analogy is a bit bizarre and not totally congruent as most analogies. But your final conclusion is most appreciated.
    The keyword is “synergistic integration” meaning that the sum/result is (offers) more than the pure addition (stacking) of the parts (components/separates). In this sense the Swiss Army Knife shows synergies not offered by a bundle of similar sized tools.

    But in our world of profit maximization a customer focused approach is a nice headline in a marketing story but has nothing to do with the (hidden) business models (of minimizing costs sacrificing (sound-) quality or maximizing profits/ROI) by fooling the customer).

    In a (business-) world dominated by the core value “profit” is is good to see that there still are owner- (not financial-management-team-) managed companies as PS Audio that are driven by additional values.

    • September 3, 2012 at 8:28 am

      Thanks Paul. I am curious why you think the Swiss army knife analogy didn’t fit. I was really happy with it. I wonder if it’s because I am picturing one thing – a receiver with every bell and whistle in the world – while you’re perhaps picturing something else? Always curious and wanting to improve – that’s why I ask.

      • paulsquirrel

        September 4, 2012 at 3:25 pm

        Hi Paul.

        IMHO the weakness of the Swiss Army Knife analogy lies in the different design goal: the Swiss Army Knife is designed primarily for “mobile” application and secure “transport” in the pocket without destroying it – sacrifying best handling of the individual tools and maybe the material’s quality.

        Separates and one box designs are both designed for stationary use in the same environment. Both should handle identical “inputs” with the same degree of high fidelity according a common ISO standard.

        I doubt that anyone would expect being able to handle/ to tool the same “work pieces” with the same quality with both the Swiss tool and the professional stand alone tool.

        However every analogy is only valid within the defined limits so maybe my aspects were not in your focus when choosing the Swiss Army Knife analogy.

  2. Soundminded

    September 3, 2012 at 7:20 am

    A major advantage of an all in one system that should not be overlooked is that it is completely engineered from end to end. All sound systems are engineered whether by actual engineers or by audiophiles. For audiophiles it’s like a tossed salad, a never ending effort of trial and error. It’s usually an expensive, disappointing, and fruitless effort. That’s why they’re always shopping for something better. The only good news for people trying to roll their own is that most products of the same type are so similar it hardly matters which of them you pick. All the real tools professionals use to adjust performance like graphic equalizers has been taken out of the audiophile paradigm of what a sound system should be. The results have often been so weak it’s been put back in partially under another name, “room correction.” Based on my experience, by itself it’s rather ineffective and because it doesn’t take the variables of the source into account even if it worked it would be insufficient.

    We’ll see what product Paul has in mind when he brings it to market. At the very least, there will be economies of scale and a lot of money saved on products that aren’t needed (audiophile wires) and design overkill such as 500 wpc amplifiers for high efficiency speakers.

    • September 3, 2012 at 8:30 am

      Thanks Mark, you’re absolutely spot on with this. The integration factor is key – making something whole from the ground up and making choices based on the whole SHOULD produce advantages – but not always. I know manufacturers who take a very different approach – “what’s the least I can do to achieve my goals”.

      • Soundminded

        September 3, 2012 at 8:47 am

        All engineering efforts are a matter of choices, compromises, decisions. Do you make a product more expensive or cut a corner to contain cost? Where and how? Do you really need a more powerful amplifier? A better loudspeaker driver? There are points of diminishing returns and points where improved performance offers no benefit to the user. Once a long time ago I used to think like an audiophile. Get the best of everything no matter what it costs. Then I realized some products offer little or no return for the buck, others much more improvement. It’s only when you have complete control over the entire system that you can make an intelligent decision. Buying that 400 wpc Marantz receiver made no sense for me. It offered power that would NEVER be used. Why pay for it when a better turntable was a much smarter investment? The advantage an engineer has over an audiophile who is not an engineer is that engineers can make informed decisions and if you own a credible manufacturing company that develops its own products you can test different ideas to limit your products that offer the most performance for money.

  3. oliver T. Finch

    September 3, 2012 at 10:03 pm

    Since we can not duplicate the sound of the real thing every one (audiophiles) has a system which to him or her sounds closest to the real thing and no two of them sound the same.Another bit of evidence that we all do not hear the same even if we listen to the same performance. With this reality even the best integrated will be a failure for people who like to voice their systems according to their liking.And for those who are perfectly satisfied with MP3s,I phones and other similar gadgets the best integrated will be of little interest. There will certainly be a market for the best integrated but it will not be earth shaking.Regards.

Leave a Reply