Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 51
  1. #1
    Demoted to Low-Fi Carl Reid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    285

    Diminishing Returns?

    Ok I really need to either take some sleeping pills or get a life, but I think I'll start another thread...

    So here goes:

    We always talk about the law of diminishing returns in relation to our audio hobby.... (and for good reason... since double the price clearly does not mean double the quality when it comes to audio upgrades)...

    So I'd love to hear at what price point different people think that diminishing returns really kicks in....

    For a strictly 2 channel audio setup with just one source (whether CD, Vinyl, cassete tape, whatever)... at what retail price (sorry, no ebay specials or used equipment) could you build a competent system that would have most of the sonic performance you need?

    So basically any worthwhile upgrades would cost a LOT more money at that point...

    Note: this setup can be substanially cheaper than what you have now or even more expensive... just base it on set-ups that you've heard, whether at friends, stores, your own setup, etc...

    Ok, I'm sure that many of the audiphiles here will laugh at my price, but I think that between $1000 - $2000 (for the entire setup, including cables) is pretty much where diminishing returns set in....

    So what's your price range?

  2. #2
    Forum Regular anamorphic96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    538
    I would say 1000 is where the point of diminishing returns kicks in with me on everything except CD players. 300 for CD players. Especially if the person listens with a blind fold and eliminates the human bias factor when comparing CD players. Most of the 300 budget players are so good that this where things kick in here.

    Speakers could go higher if you really want to go nuts. But you can get some amazing speakers for 1000 or less. Hell even 500 or less buys some killer speakers these days.

  3. #3
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127

    Which components are most critical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Reid
    ...
    We always talk about the law of diminishing returns in relation to our audio hobby.... (and for good reason... since double the price clearly does not mean double the quality when it comes to audio upgrades)...

    So I'd love to hear at what price point different people think that diminishing returns really kicks in....
    ....
    So what's your price range?
    I think you need to consider first which components are most important; this can then enlighten discussion of peak value point

    Also, I think it's use full to define the listening room where the sysytem will be located: in my view it's most practical to relate to a medium sized room, no smaller than, say 10' x 12', and no larger than 18' x 30'.

    So on the my hierarchy of critical components, in (approximate) order, and peak value prices:
    • Speakers -- US$1800 - 3000.
    • Phono cartridge -- ??
    • Power amplfier -- $1500
    • Subwoofer -- >500?
    • Phono preamp -- ??
    • Turntable & tonearm -- ??
    • Room treatments, (varies with room and furnishing characteristics)
    • CD player or DAC -- $1000
    • Control preamp -- $1500
    • Speaker cables -- $300
    • Power conditioning, (varies with the local power quality) -- <$400?
    • Vibration control, (again, varies by environment)
    • CD transport (if using a separate DAC)
    • Interconnects -- $40/stereo pair depending on type and length.
    I have declined to opine in analog components: I'm too ignorant for the current SOTA. Not to seem like an audio snob, but one needs to move beyond mid-fi -- if one's budget permits, (nobody should go into serious hock for hi-fi equipment).

  4. #4
    Demoted to Low-Fi Carl Reid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by anamorphic96
    I would say 1000 is where the point of diminishing returns kicks in with me on everything except CD players. 300 for CD players. Especially if the person listens with a blind fold and eliminates the human bias factor when comparing CD players. Most of the 300 budget players are so good that this where things kick in here.

    Speakers could go higher if you really want to go nuts. But you can get some amazing speakers for 1000 or less. Hell even 500 or less buys some killer speakers these days.

    I'm totally in agreement on the $300 for CD players.... I find that cables and CD players are where Diminishing Returns kick in the fastest.... but one of the strangest things I've noticed is how many companies sell their 'audiophile' CD players for the same price as their integrated amps... I really have to question whether a combination of a $1000 Integrated and a $1000 CD player is really an efficient allocation of funds.... Just seems far fetched to me....

    So if you spent $300 on a CD, between $500 and $1000 on speakers (so lets say $800)... that leaves you with $900 for an integrated and some cable and speaker wire.... sounds like you could put together a competent 2 channel setup for $2000 or less as well....

  5. #5
    Audiophile Wireworm5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Rupert's Land, Canada
    Posts
    496
    I estimate diminishing returns is around $9000 cdn. This is just with 2-channel setup.For me to improve on what I have at this price point would mean getting way better speakers,better power amps. Some kind of room correction equalizer. And to do this is beyond my current budget. And I would only expect a marginal improvement in sound, but I could be wrong!
    At any rate what I have now sounds better than some live venues I've been to. And if its better than that, then I think that I have acheived what I set out to do. Which was to build a Kick butt HT system.

  6. #6
    Forum Regular anamorphic96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    538
    Well my system comes in at a tad over the 2000 mark. I feel it's a pretty balanced allocation of funds. If I where to upgrade anywhere in the future it would be to some larger speakers and possibly a larger amp if the room became significantly larger.

    Room is currently 11' x 11'. Room treatments in this current situation will make the biggest changes in sound.

    Speakers - Dynaudio Audience 42 - 850.00 out the door.
    Amplifier - NAD C352 - 600.00 out the door.
    CD Player - NAD C521BEE - 300.00 out the door.
    Stands - VTI 24" - 119.00 out the door.
    Cables - Audioquest - Diamondback Interconnect and Type 4 Speaker Cable (16ft) 160.00 out the door.

    I recently had my dealer play the Rotel 1072 CD player and my NAD in a blind comparison. I could not tell a difference. However when my speakers where bumped up to the Focus 110's I could here a very noticeable difference. I guess what this babbling is trying to say is that speakers have the slowest point of diminishing returns.

  7. #7
    Super Moderator Site Moderator JohnMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Central Ohio
    Posts
    6,307
    Good thread Carl. I would like to say that I agree with your choice of cd player and price point. One of the changes I would like to make in my two channel system are my speakers. I have enjoyed the SuperOne's longer than any other speaker I have owned. I like the overall sound but would enjoy a little more refinement to the sound. I would like more detail in the mids and highs without the speaker being bright or forward. I have heard speakers that I like more but their cost is out of reach. So I am trying to reach that next level at moderate expense and not have to change my current components to work with the speakers. I very much enjoy my current system but would like to inch it closer to diminishing returns.

    My compnents are not expensive by audiophile standards but form a very nice two channel system. As far as price points with companies like Cambridge Audio, NAD and Rotel who make integrated amps in the $500-$600 range and the Marantz CD5001 cd player combined with a quality pair of speakers in the $800-$1,000 range would make a good system. Combined with Alpha Core, Kimber or Audioquest cables, stands if needed and attention to speaker placement in the room I think this system could satisfy for years. I think you would have to spend a great deal more money to get to the next level. Believe me if I win the lottery I do have my dream system picked out.
    JohnMichael
    Vinyl Rega Planar 2, Incognito rewire, Deepgroove subplatter, ceramic bearing, Michell Technoweight, Rega 24V motor, TTPSU, FunkFirm Achroplat platter, Michael Lim top and bottom braces, 2 Rega feet and one RDC cones. Grado Sonata, Moon 110 LP phono.
    Digital
    Sony SCD-XA5400ES SACD/cd SID mat, Marantz SA 8001
    Int. Amp Krell S-300i
    Speaker
    Monitor Audio RS6
    Cables
    AQ SPKR and AQ XLR and IC

  8. #8
    test the blind blindly emorphien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    919
    I wouldn't waste money on overpriced cables, I guess that's just my opinion. Tried em and can't say there's a difference, and electrically there shouldn't really be much audible difference after proper gauge and shielding are addressed.

    As far as CD players go, I'd say after $500 it diminishes quickly. Amps vary depending on the speakers you intend to drive, but for all the speakers I've heard it definitely starts to drop off in the $4000-6000 a pair range.

  9. #9
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    I will probably end up sounding like one of those elitest Jerks here but.... maybe I don't understand what you mean by diminished returns.

    You all sound like you are trying to reassure one another. How can you even comment without having experienced the upper end you say is diminished? Why talk about audio as an investment anyway? Is your car, or any appliance or a pet?

    You are trying to say a $300.00 CD player sounds so close to my $3,200.00 Krell, that $300.00 is the your limit? Keep telling yourself that. We all wish we could afford to have the gear we want, let's take a reality check here guys.

    I had a $900.00 Kenwood CD player, then an $1,800.00 Arcam. The Arcam was night and day better. Then a Krell 250cd which was around $2,500.00. The 250cd was not necessarily better than the Arcam, just different. Then a Krell 280cd, $3,200.00, this unit was vastly better than the 250. Then a $1,500.00 DAC which is not necessarily better, just a different presentation.

    Rotel is fine gear for what it is but it's not close to diminished returns.

    My thought would be;

    There are very good preamps in the $2,500.00 range.
    CD about the same $2,500.00. You would be amazed at how good CD playback can be. Listen to the $8k T+A or the Krell 25S, astounding.
    A good power amp, at least $3k.
    $1k for a turntable without cartridge.
    Speakers are so subjective, but I'd say about $3-4k
    I believe at these prices I could put together a true "high end" system. Anything less may sound good but it won't compare, and it certainly isn't going to give you an idea of what the multi-thousand dollar systems can do.

  10. #10
    Demoted to Low-Fi Carl Reid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
    I will probably end up sounding like one of those elitest Jerks here but.... maybe I don't understand what you mean by diminished returns.

    You all sound like you are trying to reassure one another. How can you even comment without having experienced the upper end you say is diminished? Why talk about audio as an investment anyway? Is your car, or any appliance or a pet?

    You are trying to say a $300.00 CD player sounds so close to my $3,200.00 Krell, that $300.00 is the your limit? Keep telling yourself that. We all wish we could afford to have the gear we want, let's take a reality check here guys.

    I had a $900.00 Kenwood CD player, then an $1,800.00 Arcam. The Arcam was night and day better. Then a Krell 250cd which was around $2,500.00. The 250cd was not necessarily better than the Arcam, just different. Then a Krell 280cd, $3,200.00, this unit was vastly better than the 250. Then a $1,500.00 DAC which is not necessarily better, just a different presentation.

    Rotel is fine gear for what it is but it's not close to diminished returns.

    My thought would be;

    There are very good preamps in the $2,500.00 range.
    CD about the same $2,500.00. You would be amazed at how good CD playback can be. Listen to the $8k T+A or the Krell 25S, astounding.
    A good power amp, at least $3k.
    $1k for a turntable without cartridge.
    Speakers are so subjective, but I'd say about $3-4k
    I believe at these prices I could put together a true "high end" system. Anything less may sound good but it won't compare, and it certainly isn't going to give you an idea of what the multi-thousand dollar systems can do.
    Yes you do sound like an elitist jerk, but I doubt that you are.... when I started this thread I expected a lot more heated debate than what has been happening so far.... since Diminishing Returns is highly subjective.....

    So I can understand why you might come to the conclusion that this thread is about reassuring each other that our "humble" setups sound great.... but that is far from the point of this thread....

    And even though you make an excellent point with your question "How can you even comment without having experienced the upper end you say is diminished?"... it is based upon at least one SUBSANTIAL assumption... which is that you assume that no-one in this thread with a "humble" set-up has heard mutli-thousand dollar high end setups....

    Also.... diminishing returns does not mean that you will get NO improvement by spending more money... I am not implying that my Rotel setup sounds as good as a Krell setup... what is being said is that the most dramatic increases in sound quality occur below a certain price.... after which you find that you have to spend a lot more money to get a big improvement in sound....

    So let's say I decided to sell my Rotel preamp & amp and slap another 500 on my budget, would I really get a substantial improvement in sound quality? or would I have to double my budget to take my setup to another level? From MY experience.... I would have to double my budget to get a significant improvement....

    And yes I agree that music is an investment, and you should look for the best setup that your financial constraints will allow.... but that does not mean that dimishing returns haven't already set in well below your budget....

  11. #11
    Forum Regular Florian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,959
    Diminishing returns is the excuse for those who cant afford the Elite. *g
    I had to do it, LOL dont take it so seriously. I have been too nice for a while
    Lots of music but not enough time for it all

  12. #12
    Demoted to Low-Fi Carl Reid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by Florian
    Diminishing returns is the excuse for those who cant afford the Elite. *g
    I had to do it, LOL dont take it so seriously. I have been too nice for a while
    LOL.... Now that's more the kind of response I'm expecting...

    But on a serious note.... from what I remember from your thread about replacing the Apogees, you're looking to drop $50K on a pair of replacement speakers...

    So just out of curiosity.... do you think that a $50K pair of speakers sounds twice as good as $25K set of speakers... and sounds 50 times as good as a $1K pair?

    I won't even pretend that I've heard anything close to a $50K pair.... so that's why I'd love to get your feedback on this....

    My own GUESS is that your $50K speakers will make a $1K pair sound like a pile of crap... But I doubt that the amount you spent is directly proportional to the increase in sound quality....

    That's just the point of the thread....

    I base it on my own humble experience..... My first setup was a $400 all Technics setup... my current setup is almost $4K.... And though my current setup sounds Substantially better than the Technics and I never realized how much I was missing out on when I had the Technics... I really don't think that my current setup sounds anywhere near 10 times better than the Technics.... I've also recently gone listening to a number of $16K setups and though I find that they sound substantially better than my existing one... I'm not overwhelmed to the point where I can never enjoy my setup again....

    So I believe that dimishing returns sets in fairly quickly in the audio world....

    So do you believe that diminishing returns exists? and if so what price point do you find it sets in? (Don't feel ashamed to say $30K for a set of cables if that's what you really think)...

  13. #13
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127

    This is the crux of the matter

    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Reid
    ....

    Also.... diminishing returns does not mean that you will get NO improvement by spending more money... I am not implying that my Rotel setup sounds as good as a Krell setup... what is being said is that the most dramatic increases in sound quality occur below a certain price.... after which you find that you have to spend a lot more money to get a big improvement in sound....

    ....
    One would bloody well hope that the $3500 Krell would sound better than, say, my
    $250 Sony. The point is that I am essentially content with the sound of the Sony, in fact with an excellant recording, it sounds as good as I need to.

    That is to say that while the Krell might sound better (even to me) than the Sony, it really doesn't sound all that much better -- and I'd be a jackass to spend the difference on the Krell. Of course, if one has a great deal of money, (or at least more money than brains), then any improvement (really or imagined) might be worth it.

  14. #14
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127

    Ah! The real Florian

    Quote Originally Posted by Florian
    Diminishing returns is the excuse for those who cant afford the Elite. *g
    I had to do it, LOL dont take it so seriously. I have been too nice for a while
    Elitist by his own admission, and jerk because he believes the rest of us ought to respect him for it.

  15. #15
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    A few problems with the basic assumptions of diminishing returns:

    1) an assumption that spending more will get you better -- while it is certainly true it is also certainly not true that this happens all of the time or even most of the time. You can certainly find a $600.00 componant that will perform far better than almost everyone elses $2000.00 unit -- but this too is subjective based on experience and preferences. What is it that you value in the system and what is practial for your living space -- if your room is 20 by 15 then you are far better off with a system designed for that space than spending $200k on a speaker designed for a 50X75 space -- no matter how good the speaker is it will royally suck in the small room it was not designed for.

    Componants are far more system dependant -- saying that X amplifier at $3000.00 is better than Y amplifier at $1500.00 might be true in one system and completely untrue or opposite in another.

    Diminishing returns you have to define in qualitative versus quantative terms in my view. You can spend little money and get a system to cover the human hearing frequency spectrum and get relatively flat response. So in terms of bass output, treble output and midrange output and other technically satisfying terms like imaging sounstage and other sonic feats then yes spending 10k on that subwoofer to go from 20hz to 10hz looks great on paper but not really a big improvement on what you can actually hear or relavent to the vast majority of recordings.

    Sound quality improvements though are more subjective usually smaller in total difference and more subtle. The question though can;t be reduced to some number -- it is subtle and subjective and so if someone wishes to pay triple for something that offers - to the buyer - a subtle but important improvement that makes him able to listen longer with less fatigue then it is a critically important upgrade whether it is noticeable in 30 seconds of a track though may not occur.

    The trick is to not be swayed by anything but your own compass. Reviews, neighboritus (keeping up with the Joneses or other forumers spending), technobabble etc will only serve to make this more about a hobby than actually providing you with a good sounding system.

    I have heard some breathtakingly expensive systems that do not live up to the hype and some that do but don;t mistake the toy factor in audio -- A honda Civic is practically a much better reliable form of transporrtation than a Ferrari which will need continuous service to keep running. I could make many cases as to why the Civic is a MUCH MUCH better car than a Ferrari -- but the Ferrari is a vastly superior car for the intended purpose behnd the Ferrari -- it'll go damn fast and handle. Too often though people look at the price and forget about the intent.

    In other words many people know the price of everything but the value of nothing.

  16. #16
    Mutant from table 9
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,205
    Quote Originally Posted by Florian
    Diminishing returns is the excuse for those who cant afford the Elite.
    And imperceptable differences that cannot be duplicated reliabably in double-blind testing are an excuse for those who have spent what they know to be too much regardless of purchasing ability.

    That's okay Flo, I predicted it before and I'll predict it again. It's only a matter of time before you cash in your whole kit and put the money into a new intrest. Like motorcycle racing or something.


    Sorry, I had to. Right back at ya.
    ______________________
    Joyce Summers: "You've got really great albums!"
    Rupert "Ripper" Giles: "Yeah... they're okay..."


    "Tha H-Dog listens easy, always has, always will." - Herbert Kornfeld (R.I.P.)

    "I lick the mothra moniters because they pump up the base!!" - Dusty Beiber

  17. #17
    Forum Regular blackraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    St. Paul, Minnesota
    Posts
    5,421
    This subject is so subjective, no pun intended. I've heard $30,000 systems and thought whats the big deal. For me the most important piece of equipment are speakers and I'd say the diminishing returns start at about $2,500. CD players about $600-1000 and amplifiers about $1000 maybe less when I compare my $500 JVC AV reciever to my $2,000 adcom receiver.
    Pass Labs X250 amp, BAT Vk-51se Preamp,
    Thorens TD-145 TT, Bellari phono preamp, Nagaoka MP-200 Cartridge
    Magnepan QR1.6 speakers
    Luxman DA-06 DAC
    Van Alstine Ultra Plus Hybrid Tube DAC
    Dual Martin Logan Original Dynamo Subs
    Parasound A21 amp
    Vintage Luxman T-110 tuner
    Magnepan MMG's, Grant Fidelity DAC-11, Class D CDA254 amp
    Monitor Audio S1 speakers, PSB B6 speakers
    Vintage Technic's Integrated amp
    Music Hall 25.2 CDP
    Adcom GFR 700 AVR
    Cables- Cardas, Silnote, BJC
    Velodyne CHT 8 sub

  18. #18
    test the blind blindly emorphien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    919
    I know what you mean about systems being a let down. I heard Aerial 20Ts hooked up to Ayre components and was thoroughly bored to death by it.

  19. #19
    Mutant from table 9
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,205
    Here's my honest input. Diminishing returns is a phrase taken from the financial investment world and applied, in this context, to consumer products that are subject to artificial markup, price controls, and instant depreciation once it leaves the shop door. Yes, I know what Carl is referring to, and I'm not trying to be a smart ass. But it is an inapplicable concept.

    The real question is not "When do components start to sound the same, or at least not be worth the difference?" That is not the question because any answer I give would be inherently colored by my financial position, ethics, priorities, past, present and future. The answer will invariably be "This is how much I would spend on X." The real question is "What dollar value do I put on hi-fi reproduction of music." I don't think the question of a $5k speaker being only half as good as a $10k speaker cannot be separated from a persons overall financial bent.

    I know Flo was half taking the piss, but he also half wasn't. There is no way I would spend $50k on a pair of speakers, and its not because I can't afford it and its not because I couldn't hear the difference between his appogees and my paradigms. But it is because I have more "valuable" things to spend $50k on (to use RGA's word). Accordingly, because two people have different financial perspectives, they will give two different answers regarding diminishing returns. Not because one has better hearing, or because one is more discerning, or because one has a bigger bank account, but because one puts more or less market value on the reproduction of hi-fi sound. Example: I just bought a sofa for $3000. I'm sure there are lots of people that think that is frivolous amount of money for a couch and wouldn't spend more than $300, I know because some of them are in my extended family. But then there are plenty of other people that think a good sofa doesn't come less than $10k. Where do diminishing returns begin for sofas? See, that's what I mean about applying the concept of demishing returns being applied to a consumer good. We will all argue around the table when we apply it to audio, but apply it to sofas and you can see how silly it is.

    Also, a person's definition of what would be dimishing returns changes over time. i.e. to answer the question directly, I think $5k is that starting point of deminishing returns on speakers. But I probably would have said a $1000 ten years ago and will probably say $10k ten years from now. That is not a reflection of the deminishing return changing or my tin ear turning to gold, but is more accurately a reflection of "How much would Slump spend on a pair of speakers he liked?" Rather than "Does Slump think any more cash would just be a waste?"
    ______________________
    Joyce Summers: "You've got really great albums!"
    Rupert "Ripper" Giles: "Yeah... they're okay..."


    "Tha H-Dog listens easy, always has, always will." - Herbert Kornfeld (R.I.P.)

    "I lick the mothra moniters because they pump up the base!!" - Dusty Beiber

  20. #20
    Demoted to Low-Fi Carl Reid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    One would bloody well hope that the $3500 Krell would sound better than, say, my
    $250 Sony. The point is that I am essentially content with the sound of the Sony, in fact with an excellant recording, it sounds as good as I need to.

    That is to say that while the Krell might sound better (even to me) than the Sony, it really doesn't sound all that much better -- and I'd be a jackass to spend the difference on the Krell. Of course, if one has a great deal of money, (or at least more money than brains), then any improvement (really or imagined) might be worth it.
    LOL.... I think you get what i'm saying about diminishing returns, though I wouldn't quite say that someone is stupid for spending the additional money....

    I might be totally impractical for most people, but for the truly affluent with more money than they know what to do with.... it might make just as much sense to drop $200K on a 2channel setup as to just leave it in some miscellaneous bank account in Grand Cayman...

  21. #21
    Demoted to Low-Fi Carl Reid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    A few problems with the basic assumptions of diminishing returns:

    1) an assumption that spending more will get you better -- while it is certainly true it is also certainly not true that this happens all of the time or even most of the time. You can certainly find a $600.00 componant that will perform far better than almost everyone elses $2000.00 unit -- but this too is subjective based on experience and preferences. What is it that you value in the system and what is practial for your living space -- if your room is 20 by 15 then you are far better off with a system designed for that space than spending $200k on a speaker designed for a 50X75 space -- no matter how good the speaker is it will royally suck in the small room it was not designed for.

    Componants are far more system dependant -- saying that X amplifier at $3000.00 is better than Y amplifier at $1500.00 might be true in one system and completely untrue or opposite in another.

    Diminishing returns you have to define in qualitative versus quantative terms in my view. You can spend little money and get a system to cover the human hearing frequency spectrum and get relatively flat response. So in terms of bass output, treble output and midrange output and other technically satisfying terms like imaging sounstage and other sonic feats then yes spending 10k on that subwoofer to go from 20hz to 10hz looks great on paper but not really a big improvement on what you can actually hear or relavent to the vast majority of recordings.

    Sound quality improvements though are more subjective usually smaller in total difference and more subtle. The question though can;t be reduced to some number -- it is subtle and subjective and so if someone wishes to pay triple for something that offers - to the buyer - a subtle but important improvement that makes him able to listen longer with less fatigue then it is a critically important upgrade whether it is noticeable in 30 seconds of a track though may not occur.

    The trick is to not be swayed by anything but your own compass. Reviews, neighboritus (keeping up with the Joneses or other forumers spending), technobabble etc will only serve to make this more about a hobby than actually providing you with a good sounding system.

    I have heard some breathtakingly expensive systems that do not live up to the hype and some that do but don;t mistake the toy factor in audio -- A honda Civic is practically a much better reliable form of transporrtation than a Ferrari which will need continuous service to keep running. I could make many cases as to why the Civic is a MUCH MUCH better car than a Ferrari -- but the Ferrari is a vastly superior car for the intended purpose behnd the Ferrari -- it'll go damn fast and handle. Too often though people look at the price and forget about the intent.

    In other words many people know the price of everything but the value of nothing.
    I agree with this post, those are some of best points I've heard re: diminishing returns...

    I did try to simplifiy things substantially in my initial post.... but it is challenging to have this discussion without complicating matters...

    As for the Civic versus Ferrari.... 100% true... Two interesting examples I've found in the audio world are 1) B&W speakers... I really love the sound of the 800 series but I find the sound very fatiguing.... so if I was to upgrade to 800s, I would have to cut my listening sessions short 2) Flo's Apogees.... being sold because they require a powerplant to run them.... So they may be audio nirvana when he plays them... but are not practical for everyday listening...

    And yep reviews can be total nonsense.... I've heard so many products that reviewers raved about and I honestly thought 'what's the big deal?'....

  22. #22
    test the blind blindly emorphien's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    919
    It sure isn't worth getting this upset over. It's interesting to hear what everyone has to say based on their experience with various equipment. You guys are getting a little serious about a fun discussion.

  23. #23
    Forum Regular Florian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,959
    Well it was only meant as a joke, as mentioned above.

    I was going to write a more detailed report but what the hell. I heard a Genesis 201 yesterday and a large Odeon horn. Both over 85 thousand. The only speaker that was better in one area was the Genesis with its bass towers. I guess it could do more "physical" damage but to call my Grand sub bass system slouchy would be crazy as they are essentily two Krell Master Reference Subwoofers.

    Will i sell my system, most likely not as i have yet to hear something that is in an acceptable distance to it. So far, no luck. And finding one again is impossible with only 20 pairs in existance.

    So i guess i need to work for the powerbill and enjoy these heating monsters.

    We would have to take retail price. It was 85K in 93 and sold for over 230K in Germany. Is it 230 times better then a 1K speaker? Nope! Is it 10 times better then a 2.3K speaker? I would actually say yes to that, even tough logic permits it.

    This hobby is crazy and obviously diminishing returns are there, but if you want to take it to the extreme, hell then why not? Is the system 10 times better then some Nautilus? Oh yes-... it will play with much more resolution, much more power, slam, dynamics etc... but is it easier? Heck No! You need a huge room, TONS of money for power amps (not some cheesy Krells like i use) ....is it all over my head? Yep.....but man so is a Ferrari, Lambo, a huge house and all those nice other things. Doesnt mean they cant be enjoyed :-)

    And lets not forget the bragging rights on some cheesy internet forums..... ***disclaimer: Mr.Flo does not support the said statment eventough he things this forum is not one at all *** kiddin....
    Lots of music but not enough time for it all

  24. #24
    Demoted to Low-Fi Carl Reid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by SlumpBuster
    Here's my honest input. Diminishing returns is a phrase taken from the financial investment world and applied, in this context, to consumer products that are subject to artificial markup, price controls, and instant depreciation once it leaves the shop door. Yes, I know what Carl is referring to, and I'm not trying to be a smart ass. But it is an inapplicable concept.

    The real question is not "When do components start to sound the same, or at least not be worth the difference?" That is not the question because any answer I give would be inherently colored by my financial position, ethics, priorities, past, present and future. The answer will invariably be "This is how much I would spend on X." The real question is "What dollar value do I put on hi-fi reproduction of music." I don't think the question of a $5k speaker being only half as good as a $10k speaker cannot be separated from a persons overall financial bent.

    I know Flo was half taking the piss, but he also half wasn't. There is no way I would spend $50k on a pair of speakers, and its not because I can't afford it and its not because I couldn't hear the difference between his appogees and my paradigms. But it is because I have more "valuable" things to spend $50k on (to use RGA's word). Accordingly, because two people have different financial perspectives, they will give two different answers regarding diminishing returns. Not because one has better hearing, or because one is more discerning, or because one has a bigger bank account, but because one puts more or less market value on the reproduction of hi-fi sound. Example: I just bought a sofa for $3000. I'm sure there are lots of people that think that is frivolous amount of money for a couch and wouldn't spend more than $300, I know because some of them are in my extended family. But then there are plenty of other people that think a good sofa doesn't come less than $10k. Where do diminishing returns begin for sofas? See, that's what I mean about applying the concept of demishing returns being applied to a consumer good. We will all argue around the table when we apply it to audio, but apply it to sofas and you can see how silly it is.

    Also, a person's definition of what would be dimishing returns changes over time. i.e. to answer the question directly, I think $5k is that starting point of deminishing returns on speakers. But I probably would have said a $1000 ten years ago and will probably say $10k ten years from now. That is not a reflection of the deminishing return changing or my tin ear turning to gold, but is more accurately a reflection of "How much would Slump spend on a pair of speakers he liked?" Rather than "Does Slump think any more cash would just be a waste?"
    Though I understand your points.... one thing I will say... is that I don't intend diminishing returns to be just a question of how much are you willing to spend on a setup.... since that changes with your income and priorities...

    For me, I believe diminishing returns kicked in at probably around a quarter of what I spent on my current setup (and I haven't even upgraded my speakers yet)....

    I know that I've simplified and bastardized the concept of diminshing returns from the pure economic sense substantially.... but I still need to try and differentiate between the an optimum price point i.e. what you are willing to spend on a setup and the point at which you stop getting as much value for your money as you initially received...

    So put it this way... at $1000 you might find that a CD player is subjectively worth twice the value of a good $500 player... but you may only find a $2000 player to provide a 25% improvement over the $1000 one.... but since you can easily afford the $2k player, you still choose to buy it.... So $1k is where diminishing returns sets in, but $2k is your optimum price point.... (yeah I know there are whole lot of assumptions and subjective valuations there but it's probably the best way I can describe the concept)...

  25. #25
    Forum Regular Florian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,959
    There is a bit of a concept problem here. Ya cant judge a 7K CDP and a 1K CDP BOTH on lets say a Apogee C-Minor (smallest hybrid) cause its not good enough to show up the performance of the 7K player.

    One player that is at least 7 times better then a 1K player (the ones i know) is a Goldmund CD36
    Lots of music but not enough time for it all

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •