QAcoustic Concept 500 ... success or flop?

drummerman

New member
Jan 18, 2008
540
3
0
Visit site
I think it'll be a flop.

No matter if it sounds decent no one is going to spend nearly £3.6k for a QAcoustic.

It looks quite nice but the drivers still seem to come from the same bin (they are not, well it uses refined versions as the company calls it).
 

seemorebtts

Well-known member
Feb 2, 2013
66
0
18,540
Visit site
drummerman said:
I think it'll be a flop.

No matter if it sounds decent no one is going to spend nearly £3.6k for a QAcoustic.

It looks quite nice but the drivers still seem to come from the same bin (they are not, well it uses refined versions as the company calls it).
yes I'm with you.i hope they do well as Q acoustic is a great company but I think they are punching way above there weight.
 

macdiddy

Well-known member
Sep 3, 2010
87
3
18,545
Visit site
have to expand their range to include higher end models, they can't keep bringing out budget/ lower end, a comparison would be Cambridge audio, started with lower end but recently having great sucess with their higher end CX series.

I think the Concept 500's look great and I would love a pair but at the moment I don't have that kind of money to spend on any new hifi.

*music2*
 
drummerman said:
Nad have a similar problem. It's not that they can't do 'High End' more the association with budget products.

The simplest way might be to set up a new division like Toshiba did with Aurex, at least I think it was then, instead of calling it NAD Master Series. This would remove any ideas of the budget side of things.
 
macdiddy said:
have to expand their range to include higher end models, they can't keep bringing out budget/ lower end, a comparison would be Cambridge audio, started with lower end but recently having great sucess with their higher end CX series.

I think the Concept 500's look great and I would love a pair but at the moment I don't have that kind of money to spend on any new hifi.

*music2*

I keep thinking of Cambridge, as they are now, as cheap stuff from Richer Sounds. ;-)
 

drummerman

New member
Jan 18, 2008
540
3
0
Visit site
Al ears said:
drummerman said:
Nad have a similar problem. It's not that they can't do 'High End' more the association with budget products.

The simplest way might be to set up a new division like Toshiba did with Aurex, at least I think it was then, instead of calling it NAD Master Series. This would remove any ideas of the budget side of things.

Good idea. Lexus/Toyota is another one
 

Frank Harvey

Well-known member
Jun 27, 2008
567
1
18,890
Visit site
I think they might be quite successful - of any speaker manufacturer associated with budget speakers, I think Q Acoustics probably have a better chance of breaking into that market than anyone else. Manufacturers like Wharfedale and Mission have tried for years to get known for anything other than budget speakers, but it just hasn't worked for them. Q Acoustics now have a decent enough customer base to be able to appeal to them to upgrade - and most people tend to stick with the same brand.

The drawback I see is that that section of the market is a pretty fierce one, dominated by manufacturers who have been doing this for a lot longer than QA, who also have speakers in higher ranges from which to draw technology from.

A manufacturer either has to rely on their name and reputation to break into a different sector, or prove they're as good or better.
 

manicm

Well-known member
I disagree, B&W, KEF, Monitor Audio have budget models, as well as high end ones. Q-Acoustics, I would think, has gained a pretty good reputation in the past 5 years for producing excellent products. I don't see any reason why those with bigger wallets would disregard them.

The BX2 speaker had a pretty indifferent finish - I had a pair.

For someone to simply associate Cambridge Audio with Richer Sounds seems a bit pompous to me. Naim's Muso is too. Let's assume CAs blu ray players sold well for example - well they were patently not budget productsl

I think it speaks more of one's prejudices than anything else.
 

manicm

Well-known member
drummerman said:
Al ears said:
drummerman said:
Nad have a similar problem. It's not that they can't do 'High End' more the association with budget products.

The simplest way might be to set up a new division like Toshiba did with Aurex, at least I think it was then, instead of calling it NAD Master Series. This would remove any ideas of the budget side of things.

Good idea. Lexus/Toyota is another one
Aurex? I've never heard of them. The Lexus analogy has expired. Nobody in Europe buys a Lexus instead of a 7 series or S class anymore. Technics was a good higher end front to National Panasonic, until they squandered it.
 

MrReaper182

Well-known member
Apr 6, 2014
189
36
18,620
Visit site
Why is it a flop? all companies have to start some where and Q Acoustic's chose to play it safe in the budget sector which worked out well for them. They moved two the £1000 mark a couple of years ago with their floor stand speakers and they were very well received across the board so why should they not step up and move in the premium brand sector? Maybe they can conquer that sector as well. They will never know unless they give it a try. Had they gone only for the high end sector from the start and failed it would had been a bigger disaster for them then falling in the budget sector. Their success in the budget sector gives the compainy somthing to build upon.
 
manicm said:
drummerman said:
Al ears said:
drummerman said:
Nad have a similar problem. It's not that they can't do 'High End' more the association with budget products.

The simplest way might be to set up a new division like Toshiba did with Aurex, at least I think it was then, instead of calling it NAD Master Series. This would remove any ideas of the budget side of things.

Good idea. Lexus/Toyota is another one
Aurex? I've never heard of them. The Lexus analogy has expired. Nobody in Europe buys a Lexus instead of a 7 series or S class anymore. Technics was a good higher end front to National Panasonic, until they squandered it.

Research is a wonderful thing isn't it. ;-)
 

wilro15

New member
Jan 19, 2012
74
1
0
Visit site
Well if they are a flop, I am looking forward to picking some up at a discounted price in the not too distant future. *biggrin*
 

spiny norman

New member
Jan 14, 2009
293
2
0
Visit site
drummerman said:
It looks quite nice but the drivers still seem to come from the same bin (they are not, well it uses refined versions as the company calls it).
From what I've read I got the impression that the drivers had been custom-made for this model, not just refined versions of existing units: both tweeter and woofer seem to be all-new. And the team behind it seems to have quite a bit of 'previous'!
 
spiny norman said:
drummerman said:
It looks quite nice but the drivers still seem to come from the same bin (they are not, well it uses refined versions as the company calls it).
From what I've read I got the impression that the drivers had been custom-made for this model, not just refined versions of existing units: both tweeter and woofer seem to be all-new. And the team behind it seems to have quite a bit of 'previous'!

+1

Unlike some I am not going to denigrate their efforts until I have actually heard it. There seems to be an increased number of forumees these days ready to dismiss any new incentives out of hand. Go audition folks, that way you can understand why some things cost more than others and why some high-priced additives are pure horse sh*t.
 

drummerman

New member
Jan 18, 2008
540
3
0
Visit site
Al ears said:
spiny norman said:
drummerman said:
It looks quite nice but the drivers still seem to come from the same bin (they are not, well it uses refined versions as the company calls it).
From what I've read I got the impression that the drivers had been custom-made for this model, not just refined versions of existing units: both tweeter and woofer seem to be all-new. And the team behind it seems to have quite a bit of 'previous'!

+1

Unlike some I am not going to denigrate their efforts until I have actually heard it. There seems to be an increased number of forumees these days ready to dismiss any new incentives out of hand. Go audition folks, that way you can understand why some things cost more than others and why some high-priced additives are pure horse sh*t.

This was never about SQ. They may well sound decent but I doubt many will want to spend that amount of cash on QAcoustics. No Kudos in the high end (yet). It may well be their loss but I for one wouldn't either ... probably ... yet.

Still, it is their 'Statement' product. Most have one and I guess if nothing else it shows what the company can do if money is not tight (Though personally I think it is more impressive what, according to reviews and users, they can do if it is)

And, as 'forumees' there is nothing wrong with discussing new products, heard or not.
 

manicm

Well-known member
Al ears said:
manicm said:
drummerman said:
Al ears said:
drummerman said:
Nad have a similar problem. It's not that they can't do 'High End' more the association with budget products.

The simplest way might be to set up a new division like Toshiba did with Aurex, at least I think it was then, instead of calling it NAD Master Series. This would remove any ideas of the budget side of things.

Good idea. Lexus/Toyota is another one
Aurex? I've never heard of them. The Lexus analogy has expired. Nobody in Europe buys a Lexus instead of a 7 series or S class anymore. Technics was a good higher end front to National Panasonic, until they squandered it.

Research is a wonderful thing isn't it. ;-)
Well who else has?
 
drummerman said:
Al ears said:
spiny norman said:
drummerman said:
It looks quite nice but the drivers still seem to come from the same bin (they are not, well it uses refined versions as the company calls it).
From what I've read I got the impression that the drivers had been custom-made for this model, not just refined versions of existing units: both tweeter and woofer seem to be all-new. And the team behind it seems to have quite a bit of 'previous'!

+1

Unlike some I am not going to denigrate their efforts until I have actually heard it. There seems to be an increased number of forumees these days ready to dismiss any new incentives out of hand. Go audition folks, that way you can understand why some things cost more than others and why some high-priced additives are pure horse sh*t.

This was never about SQ. They may well sound decent but I doubt many will want to spend that amount of cash on QAcoustics. No Kudos in the high end (yet). It may well be their loss but I for one wouldn't either ... probably ... yet.

Still, it is their 'Statement' product. Most have one and I guess if nothing else it shows what the company can do if money is not tight (Though personally I think it is more impressive what, according to reviews and users, they can do if it is)

And, as 'forumees' there is nothing wrong with discussing new products, heard or not.

I didn't see any discussion that you mention. Purely personal opinion and the need to stick ones oar in when it has nothing to do with the thread or is entirely irrelevant.

One often wonders why one needs to reply to these threads.
 
manicm said:
Al ears said:
manicm said:
drummerman said:
Al ears said:
drummerman said:
Nad have a similar problem. It's not that they can't do 'High End' more the association with budget products.

The simplest way might be to set up a new division like Toshiba did with Aurex, at least I think it was then, instead of calling it NAD Master Series. This would remove any ideas of the budget side of things.

Good idea. Lexus/Toyota is another one
Aurex? I've never heard of them. The Lexus analogy has expired. Nobody in Europe buys a Lexus instead of a 7 series or S class anymore. Technics was a good higher end front to National Panasonic, until they squandered it.

Research is a wonderful thing isn't it. ;-)
Well who else has?

Many by the look of it.
 

drummerman

New member
Jan 18, 2008
540
3
0
Visit site
Al ears said:
drummerman said:
Al ears said:
spiny norman said:
drummerman said:
It looks quite nice but the drivers still seem to come from the same bin (they are not, well it uses refined versions as the company calls it).
From what I've read I got the impression that the drivers had been custom-made for this model, not just refined versions of existing units: both tweeter and woofer seem to be all-new. And the team behind it seems to have quite a bit of 'previous'!

+1

Unlike some I am not going to denigrate their efforts until I have actually heard it. There seems to be an increased number of forumees these days ready to dismiss any new incentives out of hand. Go audition folks, that way you can understand why some things cost more than others and why some high-priced additives are pure horse sh*t.

This was never about SQ. They may well sound decent but I doubt many will want to spend that amount of cash on QAcoustics. No Kudos in the high end (yet). It may well be their loss but I for one wouldn't either ... probably ... yet.

Still, it is their 'Statement' product. Most have one and I guess if nothing else it shows what the company can do if money is not tight (Though personally I think it is more impressive what, according to reviews and users, they can do if it is)

And, as 'forumees' there is nothing wrong with discussing new products, heard or not.

I didn't see any discussion that you mention. Purely personal opinion and the need to stick ones oar in when it has nothing to do with the thread or is entirely irrelevant.

One often wonders why one needs to reply to these threads.

Of course its opinion, my opinion, my thread.

Feel free to disagree :)
 

Andrewjvt

New member
Jun 18, 2014
99
4
0
Visit site
About the new q acoustics 3grand speaker i also thought similar that it is a bit highly priced.

But having just been blown away from the performance of the 2000i 5.1 and stereo sound with a cheap av amp, i can only think what a quality product it will actually be regardless of stigma.
I hope it does well
 

Samd

Well-known member
Loosely! translated

Q ACOUSTICS Concept 500: Supertest in HiFi & Records

In these weeks, the brand new, high-end loudspeakers from the English manufacturer Q Acoustics, which are expected to be available from April 2017, will be on tour through the demonstration rooms of local hi-fi fairs. For example, there were first hearing impressions at the North German HiFi Days in Hamburg on the first weekend of February. The high-end magazine HiFi & Records had the opportunity to experience the Concept 500 in detail in the editorial listening room and is absolutely enthusiastic:

"Their performance was expected by the amplifier pairs Audionet DNP / EPX and the monobloc AMP as well as the combination of McIntosh CA2600 AC and the monoblocks MC75 AC. Since the inner cabling of the 500s originates from QED, I used as feed line the XT400 from the same house. After some testing, the Q Acoustics stood slightly angled towards my listening position. What then followed is an example of how high expectations can sometimes be fulfilled.

First of all there is the completely homogeneous image of the stage. Despite the correct base width, I have the feeling, with some speakers, of sitting opposite three sound sources: left, center, right. Not here, the Concept 500 play from a single cast. The location of individual voices and instruments succeeds perfectly, in many cases with more air between the signal sources than usual. Added to this are clarity, transparency and almost incredible plasticity. Example compliant? Alan Parson's Projects, Tales Of Mystery & Imagination ', I've heard so many times that I've taken a cognitive brand. Whether it is the dotted bass tones at the beginning, the striking voice of Orson Welles or the many acoustic details that suddenly appear, is in itself far less important than the concentrated energy with which the music in the listening room spreads. Impulses are coming quickly, but more importantly, they have disappeared just as quickly. The "Fall Of The House Of Usher: II. Arrival" is a good example of the fact that the signal does not come with chassis loudances and / or distortions of medium-sized chassis. The piece begins with rain and the sound of the organ, which winds in popping drone impulses. I can not recall having ever heard of such a realistic drama.

But what happens when changing from the monumental to a microcosm? Caroline Glaser plays her title 'Drive'. The acoustic guitar, the drums and their gentle voice sound with a high degree of authentic cleanliness. Class is that the bass is well audible and even does not mute in the approach grumbled afterwards or in another form leads a life of its own.

Can two 17-centimeter chassis for a Bassfundament lay? 'Gemini Feed' is the prelude to the current album 'The Altar' by US singer Banks. Phantastic keyboards, beats of the drum computer and a energy-consuming, deep chord, which always comes up again, often force sound transducers to their knees. Either a drone is added or the tweeter reaches audibly its physical limits: The Concept 500 take this Stolperstein with a sovereignty, which should not exist in this price class. I have the impression that apart from the music, I hear nothing but the desired sounds - and at the latest I know that these speakers will accompany me for a long time.

Conclusion
This is a blow to the Kontor: With the Concept 500, the triumvirate standing behind Q Acoustics has created a nice, impressive sounding and in addition still favorable high-end loudspeaker. I am sure the Concept 500 will be one of tomorrow's classics. Absolutely listen! "Google Translate for Business:Translator ToolkitWebsite Tra
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts