Why are TV soundbars so expensive?!

Grumpy_chap

Just using the Curry's offers because I simply do not have the time to look at more options.

The £1,700 TV is available with 
 - £150 trade in 
 - £free £700 sound bar
 - Some free Apple TV months
So, the TV plus Soundbar is £1,550

The cheaper £850 TV is available with
 - £50 trade in 
 - £350 off the same £700 sound bar  (or the 'matched' soundbar is £179 - £50)
 - Same free Apple TV months
So, the TV plus £700 Soundbar is £1,150 (or £1,029 with the 'matched' soundbar)

What starts as a very wide gap for the latest TV is considerably narrowed if also buying the £700 soundbar.
The presentation of the cheaper TV with the £700 soundbar or the 'matched' soundbar is quite a narrow gap, so I suspect many people would select the (obviously better) more expensive £700 upsell than the £129 upsell.

In both cases, I have assumed there is an old TV that can be traded in, or will be acquired from the charity shop for a tenner.

Quite interesting, though, that what starts out as nearly double price narrows quite significantly.

RumRat

Not sure how others buy their TV's, but none of that would make any difference to my purchases.
I research which TV I want, followed by which sound system and go out and buy those regardless of any other offers.
The TV is then set up and calibrated and I'm a happy Chappy. 
Just a quick tip if you shop at Currys (not necessarily a recommendation) don't buy the TV etc for the price on the ticket. There is wiggle room for haggling, dependent on the amount to be spent, so give it a go.

prowla

The built-in speaker of my TV is fine.

I have a Hi-Fi for when I want to listen to music.

Grumpy_chap

I agree on the standard TV speaker being adequate for my use, but then again, Mrs G-C watching EastEnders won't ever become a better experience for her by having a better speaker so we really have no desire to spend on the same.

I also understand that a lot of people like to have the more immersive sound and a good speaker system connected to the TV can make films really come alive, so there is a clear market where the spend on soundbar systems is adding real value.

I do wonder whether the majority of people buying soundbars do so because of the upsell.
I know when I lived at home, Dad once purchased a new TV with surround sound speakers.  It did sound good when TopGun was on the TV but that was about it as few programmes then had the broadcast channels that could make use of the speaker set up.  That may have improved now, but my over-riding memory of the speaker system was a load of wires everywhere and simply too noisy.
The latest soundbars claim to achieve that full surround sound experience but without needing speakers all around the room.  Must be like magic.

I can imagine that we would buy a TV with soundbar if it was cleverly upsold.  I suppose now there are more programmes transmitted with the extra channels that can take advantage.  Or is it still just when TopGun appears every Christmas? 

DullGreyGuy

Grumpy_chap said:

Just using the Curry's offers because I simply do not have the time to look at more options.

The £1,700 TV is available with 
 - £150 trade in 
 - £free £700 sound bar
 - Some free Apple TV months
So, the TV plus Soundbar is £1,550

The cheaper £850 TV is available with
 - £50 trade in 
 - £350 off the same £700 sound bar  (or the 'matched' soundbar is £179 - £50)
 - Same free Apple TV months
So, the TV plus £700 Soundbar is £1,150 (or £1,029 with the 'matched' soundbar)

What starts as a very wide gap for the latest TV is considerably narrowed if also buying the £700 soundbar.
The presentation of the cheaper TV with the £700 soundbar or the 'matched' soundbar is quite a narrow gap, so I suspect many people would select the (obviously better) more expensive £700 upsell than the £129 upsell.

That depends on if you believe the soundbar was ever worth £700 and if your trade in is worth £50 or £150. Ultimately your trade in has a fixed value no matter how good the replacement is so at least 1 valuation is wrong but a trade in rather than trying to sell it privately has a draw.

prowla said:

The built-in speaker of my TV is fine.

I have a Hi-Fi for when I want to listen to music.

And some will think their phone or TV is fine for listening to music and you wasted your money on your HiFi. I think you are missing out when watching movies but accept your choice to do so.

Grumpy_chap said:

I do wonder whether the majority of people buying soundbars do so because of the upsell.
I know when I lived at home, Dad once purchased a new TV with surround sound speakers.  It did sound good when TopGun was on the TV but that was about it as few programmes then had the broadcast channels that could make use of the speaker set up.  That may have improved now, but my over-riding memory of the speaker system was a load of wires everywhere and simply too noisy.
The latest soundbars claim to achieve that full surround sound experience but without needing speakers all around the room.  Must be like magic.

I can imagine that we would buy a TV with soundbar if it was cleverly upsold.  I suppose now there are more programmes transmitted with the extra channels that can take advantage.  Or is it still just when TopGun appears every Christmas? 

I generally dont like to speculate but... probably

As to the final question? Depends on how you watch content on "TV", through more modern methods a large percentage of content is available at standards equal to or far higher than Top Gun on BBC1. Physical media remains the best option in almost all cases but digital services are a fairly close second unless you have invested a large amount in kit. 

We have friends who ask to come round to watch content on our projector/sound system so clearly they appreciate it but at the same time they dont buy the same for their home so its clearly limited

FarmerHorse

Interesting thread…

The days when consumer goods cost anything relative to the cost of production plus margin are long gone. Goods cost what the manufacturer / retailer believes the market will stand; that’s been the case for years. 

Sound bars add to the experience of watching tv. The thinnest tinniest speakers do the basic job of producing sound but almost everyone requires more. It’s a basic tenet of tv production that in the right circumstances - e.g. live news reports from a war zone - poor picture quality is acceptable, poor sound quality less so. At a base level audio trumps pictures, as we move up the ladder that gap closes but retailers know that offering a much improved audio package is a winner for most buyers at the point of purchase. Once we get out of the shop and get it home, the sales uplift opportunity has gone. 

So it becomes a matter of how much? How much improvement, how much cost? Make the audio improvements uplift a ratio of the cost of the new tv and you’re nearly there, the sales assistant’s job is almost done. Why do sound bars cost what they cost? Because enough people are willing to pay that much. Economics 101. 

Ibrahim5

I remember wiring the speakers for my home cinema and saying "That's it for 50 years". The front floor standing speakers are bi-amped and are great for listening to music on. There's a good chance a good AV amplifier could last nearly as long. It's not expensive when you see it as a long term investment.

jshm2

SneakySpectator said:

Some of them cost half as much as the damn TV. I was looking at a 55 inch LG OLED TV and it was £1,800 and then it suggested an "ad on" purchase of a soundbar valued at, wait for it, £899! What the hell is that. 

£900 for enhanced sound? Seriously how good can it be. All my life I've only ever listened to TVs through their inbuilt speakers so maybe I just don't know what I'm missing but I can't imagine ever dropping that much just to get better sound quality. 

They do sell some in the £180 - £350 price range but even that still seems excessive.

They aren't. Samsung tend to give their soundbars for free with their larger TV's. A soundbar is essentially a miniaturised speaker set. So instead of buying 2 or 3 stand speakers you buy one soundbar. 

Not all are quality, obviously. But you can get smaller JBL soundbars if you really need it. You can even repurpose old speakers by upgrading them to Bluetooth.  

DullGreyGuy

Ibrahim5 said:

I remember wiring the speakers for my home cinema and saying "That's it for 50 years". The front floor standing speakers are bi-amped and are great for listening to music on. There's a good chance a good AV amplifier could last nearly as long. It's not expensive when you see it as a long term investment.

Speakers yes, AVR no.

Dolby Digital didnt exist 50 years ago, since 1991 when it was created we've had DD then DD+ then DD-TrueHD and now DD-Atmos, there are similar stories with DTS getting to DTS-X. Whilst I wouldn't necessarily run out and replace my system as soon as a new format comes out they have represented significant improvements, Atmos and DTS:X in particular moving to object modelling and a much better implementation of height. 

Additionally, the original home systems you used to have to get a tape measure out and manually input the distance of each speaker from the seating position and then manually adjust the volume for each speaker. Now you use an omni directional mic where you are going to sit and the AVR will work out the distances, the positions, volumes etc and adjust for both the fact one speaker is really close but its mirror side one is much further away, now there is object sound the system will also work out where it the speakers are to know where the sound should be coming from to get the effect of the helicopter flying over you... you no longer just miss out if you have no ceiling speakers.

AVRs typically do more than just decode the sound and amplify it, they're also switches so you can go from watching Sky on your TV to watching Netflix on a Projector or listening to a CD. How we transmit video has equally changed from composite to s.video to component to HDMI 1.0 and now HDMI 2.1. Along with that we've had copy protection 

Maybe you are happy with your Dolby Stereo system (which actually wasnt necessarily just stereo) and having to do something else to switch your source and output. Personally would say you are missing out. 

In theory you could split the AVR in half and buy a processor that does all the wizzy electronic stuff that will age over time and separately power amps that you can keep for 50 years but you may have trouble when you go from your original 5.1 to 5.1.2 as you won't have amps for ceiling speakers. The only problem is that processors are typically more expensive than AVRs and then you have to add on the cost of amps on top. In principle you could by an AVR with pre-outs and use them to your amps but you are paying for an amp section in the AVR that you arent using. 

FarmerHorse said:

The days when consumer goods cost anything relative to the cost of production plus margin are long gone. Goods cost what the manufacturer / retailer believes the market will stand; that’s been the case for years. 

When was it ever?  

The problem of production costs plus margin is that it gives no value on R&D. You can spend hundreds of millions on researching a new medicine but after finding an elusive cure you may be able produce 100 tables for 1p

Similarly if you invest in making your production more efficient in absolute terms you'd simply be cutting your profit and you also start creating a race to the bottom on pricing

RumRat

Samsung have just introduce Eclipse sound into their new TV's and soundbars to rival Dolby Atmos. Not experienced it yet, but will at the first opportunity.
The point is if you enjoy cutting edge tech then you will buy it, for everyone else there are cheap speakers and soundbars.
It's not important to everyone and neither should it be, however. once experienced I doubt there is any going back.