I think for the money there should at least be whitepapers (ala Iconoclast) explaining what you are getting for your money. ZERO is a pretty apt name for a cable given what is actually being said about the product.
1 Like
Totally agree! Except for power cords, my system is now all Iconoclast.
1 Like
@Paul IMO you’re missing a critical part though. Since you’ve always had a dream of offering a complete PSA System, the AQ offerings kinda defeat that. I think PSA would’ve been better off by re-branding a AQ offering so it would be branded PSA rather then another manufacture. Isn’t the whole idea to market PSA? Otherwise, why not just sell (insert speaker company) on your website and you could’be become another Music Direct etc.
Another BIG advantage you have by branding is that if AQ changed their business model in 3 years you could easily change to another company and it is still branded PSA and you could just change the nomenclature to V2 or whatever you choose.
1 Like
cables have a super high markup…just saying…
1 Like
Thank God for people like Paul that like to tinker because there are those
of valued academic approach say the opposite. So for those that swim upstream
against naysayers a big thank you for keeping on keeping on…never giving up
Years ago Roger Russell of McIntosh reknown has some rather interesting findings
which seem quite plausible…but certainly not the final say…
here is a link to his review:
Authorized dealer arranged XLR interconnect for home system trial directly from the manufacturer (not singled out by name because I suspect this common across the industry). Manufacturer (not Audioquest) inadvertently enclosed the dealer invoice showing his cost at $171 (MSRP $450). That’s 62% below MSRP! If the manufacturer is selling at $171 (of course, making a profit) you can imagine how low the cost of producing this cable is (including manufacture, R & D, marketing & overhead, which is factored in). Selling price to me was $315; 84% over his cost (did not buy them; went with a far more expensive cable from another manufacturer (not Audioquest) because it sounded significantly better in my system). One example of cable markups from at least one very well known, very successful cable manufacturer.
I’ve gotten to know many dealers and sales people in the industry through the years; markups are one of the highest profit makers for them, and manufacturers, in audio.
3 Likes
I agree with the OP about culture and match. It is not a good look for a company such as PS Audio to recommend cables that are more expensive than the premier products that PS Audio makes.
Paul has generally built a reputation as being a trustworthy maker who builds products at a good/fair price - perhaps you can do better for less, but you can certainly pay a lot more for no better.
Matching the BHK components to super high price cables is not just a good look - it comes across as sheer ploy for PS Audio to market cables at retail and make $$$. I’m not against a capitalist enterprise, and I know cables are where dealers make a good bit of profit - it is not unlike restaurants selling alcohol at the highest markup. But the PS Audio brand is one of quality AND value - selling super high end cables places the entire value proposition into question and sullies the brand. I suspect this matching will turn away as many buyers as it attracts and ultimately be damaging to the brand.
3 Likes
Does the brand and its history/philosophy fit? Does the way of presenting the collaboration fit? Does the sound synergy really fit in a special way? Does the importance and price relation given to cabling fit to the previously conveyed…or better … perceived PSA image? Or would most have expected a collaboration with a rather lower budget cable manufacturer with a story of perfect synergy and price/performance so everyone can talk himself into not needing anything better? Or that PSA just labels a mass production cable for loyal fanboys?
IMO all those questions have their justification as well as opinions from critical to complaisant and imo Paul explained extremely honest and without unnecessary or exaggerated marketing speech the how”s and why”s. Everyone’s free to make his own thoughts.
Partnering is always too easy to believe in depth, but I think from the strategy point of view it’s valid. And it’s a fact that very good and then mostly expensive cabling (can be close to a component each) not rarely makes the biggest difference if components are at a certain level. The welcome imagination “for top notch sound you need nothing more than our/your great components and some budget insider tips for the rest” simply never was true. The level of cabling matters (most) imo, from a certain level of exchangeable component performance. From my experience I’d much prefer e.g. a setup with great 6k each components like PSA and 20k cabling to a setup with one 20k component (and the rest 6k level). It’s courageous to offer such a mix option between own manufacture and partnered products on trial. I wouldn’t bet on the win if someone compares the difference between expensive cabling + cheaper PSA product to the opposite combination 
Wouldn’t it be nice if there were no markups, no profit, no paychecks, no bills, where we could all live on love?
6 Likes
Just imagine…“it’s easy if you try…”
2 Likes
There’s profit & there’s gouging. Pay full retail for cables, you’ve been gouged. Wouldn’t it be nice to be smart enough not to allow yourself to be gouged? It’s easy if you try.
A ten-foot pair of speaker cables costs more than an all-wheel-drive Tesla Model 3 … that’s a good one! 
2 Likes
It does sound just stupid, doesn’t it?
My nephew recently bought a new BMW M2 Coupe. He paid $56K. He’s deliriously happy with it.
With the rest of the money, he could also buy some Iconoclast cables, although he’d probably be out of control with glee-osity.
2 Likes
I thought Audioquest were quite reasonable. One reason I chose it was because for cut lengths they provide their suppliers with their own terminations and equipment and they get tested.
Checked out those cables. a 3m pair can cost up to $70,000, but I’d have to get a pair of full range speakers first to make use of the bass cable.
agree with you on this one @jazznut. Paul and Scott certainly do and certainly for what they do for the Hifi industry and the great products we own.
After all we are all grown ups and if this is a direction PsAudio want to go then that’s fine we don’t all have to follow that direction - there are pages and pages of views around power cables, speaker cables and accessories guessing not everyone is selling up to jump on AQ.
If we take its as a guide for those who want some direction then that’s fine if it leads to focus in other areas of the business like development rather than cable manufacturing in my mind then that’s probably even better as for Impact to the culture pretty sure the overall culture of PS audio and the credit they deserve is way bigger than a partnership on some recommended cables.
1 Like
As someone who run my own business the most important thing is to stay in business. Turnover is vanity profit is sanity. If money can be made from people who are willing to spend heavily on audio cables - and if PS Audio can strengthen business, benefit financially from supplying said high-end cables, then why not, if a market is there to make money. “One doesn’t have to buy the expensive cables when buying PS Audio equipment!”
The problem with many audiophiles is paranoia. PS Audio are tapping into this. PS Audio recommend X cables with such and such product so that’s it - they have to buy the recommended cable(s) or the sound/performance of the PSA product will be seriously compromised…!
My friend Bob is a classic case! With each and every new product he has to look towards buying ever-more exotic cables and fuses to complement his latest new toy. He sells them for a mere fraction of what he paid for them and/or usually passes his castoffs to me. Cables that cost much more than the products they connect together…! Absolute nutjob…! Still a great friend.
I have several exotic cables lying around here that I haven’t even tried.
I wish someone would have the balls to start an audio cable business and name it ‘Condiment Cables’
14 Likes
I think what goes along with the counter-culture argument is a psychological element also. Paul and Co. sell gear that can get you to that audio nirvana for what in audiophile land is considered reasonable/excellent
value for one’s money. If you have theirs as core gear, you have a knockout system sans pareil. Your psyche can rest assured you have accomplished that goal. Sit
back, relax, and drink the nectar. However, with the introduction of the AQ items that one will need to have everything sounding their best, this (I would argue important) psychological satisfaction of the core gear
in and of themselves is potentially greatly diminished, in addition to possibly causing one to re-evaluate the gear’s value proposition. Isn’t everything in audiophile land like this, down the rabbit hole of improvement/tweaks/upgrades, if you dare to look
and venture down? Yes. But Paul was selling a different version of this reality, and it seems many were happy with that.
I’d see it that way: PSA has some of the best price/performance ratios. It’s 6k gear as an example justifies biggest effort in accessory and enables customers with more money available, to invest e.g. in top range cabling. No one has to, but the option is present to double the performance (or however one wants to rate this).
I agree with you, that the perceived reality so far was „no noticeable expense needed except PSA gear for best possible sound“…this was nice to hear, but just not true…you can improve PSA gear even more with good accessory than less resolving gear.