A Little 'Make-Up' Makes The Difference


Active Member
or Cosmetic Changes Push TMA Price Up... (Can't decide on the title...)

I'd be fascinated to hear what other ex-TMA employees - especially Dr Udo - think of the 'sentiments' attributed to Nick Clarke of current IAG allegiance in a review of the new 8000 Series. I've linked the article here; the quote comes from the second page of the pdf (their page 53), first column, second paragraph. Here goes:

Nic Tatham of Audio & Video Lifestyle Magazine writes, "Nick Clarke has been involved with Audiolab for the past 20 years. He worked for the original company and helped design products such as the 8000S remote controlled integrated amplifier, then he was heavily involved with the design work on the crop of AV products that came about during TAG McLaren Audio's reign."

So far so good, but here comes that 'comment':

"A lot of the work that was done on those TMA products are still used in the new Audiolabs as Nick has pointed out, the cosmetic changes were what really pushed the price up...(!)" [exclamation mark supplied by me!!!]

As a devotee to Audiolab of old who made the transition to TMA based on perceived and understood engineering excellence and leading edge innovation, I find this comment to be, how can I put it, a bit strange. So am I to believe that the increased prices we paid for TMA gear in comparison to old Audiolab were due to 'cosmetic changes'? If the copy is accurate, is that the opinion of ex-TMA employees? What was it that truly distinguished and differentiated TMA from Audiolab - cosmetics/branding/image; is that what we paid for?...

Your comments and opinions are sought...


As an ex employee of both TMA and IAG:

IAG seemed to want to distance themselves from TMA as much as possible, TMA stood on many toes to get to the top of the pile (many of those 'toes' needed to be stood on!) and suffered when things went bad.

I know Nick very well ( although it has to be said that I havent spoken to him since I left) and he is a very loyal to something he put a lot of work into (no matter what brand name is attached).

Before Nick's input, IAG's Quad brand was never capable of producing it's own AV processor as they simply did not have the skills or the talent available.

As to TMA's products themselves - rather than repeat pages and pages from this very forum - Some of TMA's products were unique with huge amounts of money and time invested in each product.

OK, there is some re-branding - but TMA's Audiolab range never suffered some of the foibles of Audiolabs products - and (as a 'get out of this arguement free' card) why isnt it seen as an honour to have your products continued rather than completely discarded?


Active Member


Active Member
Fabric is pretty expensive.....



Standard Member
roversd1 said:
As an ex employee of both TMA and IAG:

why isnt it seen as an honour to have your products continued rather than completely discarded?

RoverSD1, I welcome you input on this, I too like KT loved the later original Audiolab gear and after a little trepidation, got to appreciate the improved resolution offered by the TMA revisions. For me, the AV32R was the quantum leap for TMA (and for me - never looked back!). I hope IAG will not let all the hard work in this product go to waste.

As an electrical contractor, I do a fair bit of 'mains' work for Audiophiles and the odd Audio Dealer in this neck of the woods. I've recently heard the 'new' Audiolabs; and to my ears, the 'eqivalent' TMA products have a far superior sound. Also, sorry to say, I believe the original late-model Audiolabs(8000S for example) also sound better. Can't say i'm really suprised, but I am a little dissapointed.

Incidentally, my local dealer hasn't sold a single new Audiolab box yet...

Maybe it's the colour ?



The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Sky Glass, Epson Laser Projectors plus Home Cinema Subwoofers and More…
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom