Does it really matter where it’s made?
Audio brands are a truly international affair
Andrew Everard 1:34pm GMT 25th May 2010
IAG: A safe pair of hands for famous British brands in China
I was pulled up by a reader the other day about the news story in the April of Gramophone issue regarding the return of the Castle brand: he was miffed that I hadn’t made it clear this was not the “original” Castle, but the revived, now-owned-by-IAG, company.
I could see his point, but were it not for IAG stepping in and reviving the brand, Castle could have become another one of those lost British audio names.
As it is, like Audiolab, Mission, Quad and Wharfedale, the Castle brand will go on – and having visited the massive complex where all these brands are produced, in Shenzhen, China, I know those involved in the design and engineering are fully aware of the heritages they are dealing with. Production facilities able to start with raw materials and turn out finished products ensure quality is maintained throughout.
That famous British brands are now owned or manufactured overseas is now a fact of life: last year, having taken delivery of a new Land Rover, I was amused when my local convenience store owner took his cue from that old comedy show and deadpanned, “Nice car – Indian, you know…”.
Increasingly the products reviewed in these pages come from just such brands: last month we had the Quad amplifier, this month the Cambridge Audio Blu-ray player, designed and engineered in the UK but made in China. Even the Epoz speakers merely say “Designed in Australia”.
Much though we’d like to hang on to those famous British firms of the past, times have changed. The legacy is products with familiar names – and impeccable quality.
Comments
Just what is being saved when a large company buys a brand name simply to use it as a commercial tool to sell product?
If, like Land Rover, there had been some sort of continuity with the past, there would be an argument for it being helpful to the consumer. The more cynical interpretation may be that it appears to be a matter of commercial self interest, allowing a company access to a market that has been built up over many years by the acquired brand.
If either case was a mere matter of 'a commercial tool to sell product', then I might agree, but several of the IAG brands have seen a continuity with the past – such as the newer Quad amplification and speakers, and the continued development of the Audiolab brand.
This is a very interesting article and position Andrew and whilst there is some truth that audio engineering has now become an international affair, using Chinese manufacturing plant to produce designs from companies with long heritage, specifically English brands, I do have several concerns that as a consumer would probably mean that I do not buy from these brands:
1. A major reason that manufacturing is done in China is of course the cost; it's cheaper than production in Europe, USA or Japan. So, you'd imagine that the new Quad tube amp (shown in G last month) ought to be affordable; but in the region of £4000, is it really? For that money you can invest in designer tube amps made in the US or Japan by US and Japanese craftsmen (think Leben and Luxman, who recently moved manufacturing back from China to Japan); even our neighbours the French make their own! (Not sure outside of Audio Note and Papworth (I think), who is making tube amps in the UK). Looking at the units themselves, I cannot believe that Quad amps, etc...couldn't be made in the UK. So, somewhat cynically, there is a rather large mark-up to be made here at the expense of the consumer, is there not?
2. I also believe that a lot of these mass-produced, high cost items are not good value for money and as a consumer, I do make every effort to source HiFi components that are exactly the opposite; hand-made, low turnover, simple designs...if you can find these companies, then they deserve your support as more often that not their goods are labours-of-love. (I won't name any, lest you think that I am advertising for them!).
3. Can a product survive on a brand name? Yes I think it can; but a Chinese Quad amp is a Chinese Quad amp and not a British one, regardless of the high levels of quality control in new production plants. So if it didn't carry that badge, (say it read Szechuan push-pull amp) it would cost you half as much!
Sorry if I have come across a a bit cynical, but personally I do believe that our manufacturing heritage and branding should not be surrendered so readily. Should we be thinking of a 'Campaign for real audio'? Regards, Myron.
From Volkswagens made in Mexico to ‘European’ designer clothes made in Thailand to computer parts made all over the place, offshore manufacturing is a fact of life and is here to stay as long as there is such a huge disparity in labour costs from one country to another. At its worst, the claim that this necessarily results in a lowering of quality standards is somewhere between a mild form of racism and old-fashioned protectionism. Sure, indigenous standards of quality control in, say, China, are not up to those of most of the developed nations. But any company worth its salt is going to set up its own quality control mechanism to ensure its standards are met, regardless of where its goods are made. And emerging nations have demonstrated that it doesn't take them long to rise to, and surpass, the highest existing standards. I'm old enough to remember when "Made in Japan" meant cheap, inferior. Today, we rifle the shelves looking for products with that label.
As for the assumption that “British is best”, I’d find it laughable if I hadn’t met parallel claims all over the world. Years ago Britain lost its worldwide car markets, not to mention most of its domestic market, because it made a shoddy product. The U.S. followed suit because its products, while certainly better-designed and made than its British counterparts, lacked imagination and features that people wanted. The consumer rules and, when all’s said and done, knows value-for-money when he or she sees it.
Britain does make, or has made, some excellent hi-fi products whether in offshore facilities or not. I’ve owned for years Quad amps and speakers, and still haven’t found hi-fi products to match them. The KEFs that run my home theatre system are excellent. But I also own British hi-fi equipment, from a well-known manufacturer who shall remain nameless, which is poorly put-together and designed for a quick sale rather than longevity. Troll the internet, attaching the word ‘problems’ to the names of some manufacturers, for examples.
Railling against offshore manufacturing is rather like bemoaning the demise of the steam engine.
Interestingly, just reading a story in the Japanese press that Honda workers at a transmission plant in China are on strike, demanding a wage increase to 2000-2500yuan (£200-£250) a month from their current 1500yuan (£150).
Honda has had three big strikes at its Chinese factories in the past six months, and is seeing wages rising at around 6% a year.
That's hardly the kind of sweatshop rates people mistakenly associate with Chinese manufacture, but rather reflects local employment market conditions: even after recent double-digit wage public sector wage rises, the Shanghai municipal goverment's minimum wage is only around £112 a month, and in Guangzhou – an area with considerable large-scale manufacturing – the minimum wage for public employees is about £110.
Re Andrew's comments about striking Honda workers: we are seeing a repetition of the pattern in post-war Japan. With economic growth and inflation as demand increases, pressure for higher wages builds up, making the country less competitive internationally as the advantage of cheap wages disappears. Like Japan, China could outsource its manufacturing to keep down labour costs: Africa would be one obvious destination.
I agree that it is pointless to turn the clock back and go back to traditional manufacturing of the type that wilted away in the 1980s. We need to identify what we are good at (with the creative arts being an apposite example to make here) and go for it.
Indeed: some automotive companies are reportedly already looking at increasing automation in their Chinese plants, using robots to replace increasingly expensive local workers.