OK, here is a digital only system which I think would compare well to any 50,000-100,000 system

Linkwitz Orion active dipoles 8,2000

Logitech Transporter Street price 1,500

500gb external HD for your computer 89.00

less than 200.00 for BluJeans cables.

This is a great time to be an audiophile.

rich: i generally agee with what you are saying. if it makes you happy and is in your budget - go for it. also, many people have put together very clever systems for small budgets. for some, part of the fun is chasing down improvements at little cost and they are out there or getting a bargain on a piece of equipment.
what you speak of is called the law of diminishing returns. if you spend $1000.00 on piece of equipment X,say a cd player, you will not get a 100% improvement with $2,000.00 cd player Y. Likely, your improvement will be about 10%. It tends to be geometric, so that last little 5% is how you end up with a $20,000 cd player. Also, some people won't want to hear this, but the maker probably spends 5 times the time and effort and has only his best people work on the $20,000.00 unit.
what is great about the time we live in is how incredible the under $1,000.00 gear sounds today compared to 10, 20, 30 or 40 years ago. your $5,000.00 system of today would probably best a $20,000.00 system of 1989 vintage and the money was worth more in 1989. also, look at all the choices we have today.
it's a good time to be involved in this hobby.

Quote:
what you speak of is called the law of diminishing returns. if you spend $1000.00 on piece of equipment X,say a cd player, you will not get a 100% improvement with $2,000.00 cd player Y. Likely, your improvement will be about 10%. It tends to be geometric, so that last little 5% is how you end up with a $20,000 cd player.

A sad truth that has not changed over the 40+ years I have been chasing better sound quality from my system. :-)

Quote:
what is great about the time we live in is how incredible the under $1,000.00 gear sounds today compared to 10, 20, 30 or 40 years ago. your $5,000.00 system of today would probably best a $20,000.00 system of 1989 vintage and the money was worth more in 1989. also, look at all the choices we have today.

Especially when it comes to loudspeakers. A typical pair of $1000/pair speakers in 2009 is both more accurate and more musical than pretty much anything you could buy in 1979 at almost any price.

Quote:
it's a good time to be involved in this hobby.

Indeed it is!

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

The diminishing returns concept is pretty observable.

But I imagine that nearly all of us buy things for a price that gives us diminishing returns. Once you get a system that plays music - say a shelf system - I just seriously doubt you're getting a %100 improvement by spending twice as much. Once the music plays without any ear-splitting errors, any improvement is very likely to have diminishing returns. Sure, you can get better frequency response, etc., but since it played music before, a 100% improvement is a very tall order.

There is the problem of measuring sound for $$. Diminishing returns makes much more sense in investments where you put in $X and you get back $X. With sound, it has to be more fluid.

My $4,000 system (or something), no doubt, does NOT sound twice as good as a $2,000 system. And a $2,000 system doesn't sound twice as good as a $1,000 (unless the $1,000 system is really, really bad for the price). For all of us, the last dollar we spent on the system did not give us the return that the first dollar did.

The more important question is whether the improvement is worth it to you, the buyer. While the last improvements I made to my system weren't as dramatic as the first, I feel they were well worth it and I would do it again.

Great thread. I think it brings us very close to the sacred bleeding heart of Hi Fi.

The whole crux, for me, is seeing just how far up that curve of diminishing returns I can get for my buck.

I almost appreciate a piece of gear that gets me 80% of the way there for 300 bucks more than I do a 10 kilodollar piece that goes 90% of the way!

The system I am spending the most time with right now is sub-2500, but I am love love loving it.

The tragedy of Hi Fi, to me, is that so few people realize just how far we can climb that curve for not that much cash.

JA mentions the progress we've made in both sound quality and price these last years. I agree whole heartedly and would add - it can be done either retail or second hand.

Lots of value in the hobby right now.

Quote:

Quote:

JA mentions the progress we've made in both sound quality and price these last years. I agree whole heartedly and would add - it can be done either retail or second hand.

Except for tuners. Many FM tuners of the 1970s are better sounding than present day ones. Or is it just my vintage bias?

Tuners are probably the sole exception. Current tuners, except the Magnum Dynalab and Fanfare (which are admittedly pricy)vary between being mediocre or completely sucking. I would say that unfortunately we can't blame the manufacturers it's a lack of interest on the part of the buying public.

Quote:

The more important question is whether the improvement is worth it to you, the buyer.

Exactly!!!

"Likely, your improvement will be about 10%. It tends to be geometric, so that last little 5% is how you end up with a $20,000 cd player."

There seems to be this common "understanding" that has persisted among audiophiles for decades - that the best audiophile systems are within, say, 5% or perhaps even 3% of the Absolute Sound.

There are lots of related audio axioms - Live Music is the Final Arbiter of sound; components and speakers can only improve so much; distortion inherent in speakers is the limiting factor, etc.

This is simply NOT TRUE! There's no Audio Ceiling! HELLO! You aren't within 10, or 5 or 3 percentage points of some immoveable, impregnable Audio Nirvana Ceiling.

There's a story of a climber who reached the Summit of Everest then hiked all the way back down to Base Camp 10,000 feet below to tell the assembled climbers he'd reached the Summit. The climbers at Base Camp were in shock and disbelief as they were CONVINCED Base Camp WAS ALMOST the summit. They were just unable to see the real peak from their position, thinking it was just above them, out of view.

Am standing by for the Harrumph, Harrumphs....

Cheerio

Quote:

There's a story of a climber who reached the Summit of Everest then hiked all the way back down to Base Camp 10,000 feet below to tell the assembled climbers he'd reached the Summit. The climbers at Base Camp were in shock and disbelief as they were CONVINCED Base Camp WAS ALMOST the summit. They were just unable to see the real peak from their position, thinking it was just above them, out of view.

Am standing by for the Harrumph, Harrumphs....

Cheerio

There's another story about a guy with a jar of pebbles that forgot he had them in his pocket while driving home in his car. He stated that he was listening to his car stereo and couldn't figure out why it sounded so much better than he remembered. Then it came to him......he reached into his pocket and realized that the jar of pebbles were there and they were the reason for sonic nirvana. BTW, This is a true story.

GK: i hope you realize that i was not speaking literally, but figuratively. of course the degree of improvement can not be scientifically measured. my point was simply to demonstrate the principal which holds true in all sectors of the economy. consider dieting. if you are 30 lbs overweight, most people would agree that getting rid of the first 20 to maybe 25 lbs is not that bad, but that last 5 lbs are a bitch. enough said.