General Asylum

General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Absolutely!

Posted by Don T on February 18, 2006 at 07:50:59:
But IMO, beyond entry level, the cost of the components are less important than the mix of components.
Surely one can always get some improvement in some aspect of performance by spending more money - but what's important is how this improvement effects one listening experience.
It's a system thing - there's no reason one should conclude that any system that costs $20,000 is going to sound better than a $2000 system comprised of carefully chosen components. Of course IMO a $20,000 system comprised of well chosen components is going to sound much better than the great $2000 system. There's no way to know if a $20,000 system made up of a random conglomeration of components is going to sound better than a $2,000 assembled in a similar fashion. Additionally anything other than first hand experimentation and listening is most likely going to lead to random conglomerations.
Audiophiles always talk about that law of diminishing returns. I think believing that's about as bs as believing that spending more is all it takes to get better. I've heard wonderfully musically coherent systems in the ~$15K/$20K new retail price range - but I've never heard a system with this kind of price being capable of natural large scale dynamicism and extended natural sounding bass response. Would musical coherency with extended bass response and added dynamicsim be worth buying a ~$40k/$60k system to achieve? If my room could support it - heck yes and I wouldn't feel for one minute that I was getting any less for the second/third $15k than I got for the first. Maybe this law kicks in at the high price points?
But then again I don't know for sure that I can't get it all in a ~$20K/$30K system. Add to the mix that I don't even know if I can get what I want by spending more in the first place.
From experience, unless I know for sure, more than likely spending more money is more like paying for "dung" than audio nirvana. Without local dealers with wide selections of components worthy of being in $20K+ systems, the thought of spending more is mostly a fantasy that experience tells me will end in tragedy.
Sure you get what you pay for with audio - but whether you pay for great sound or audio dung is up to you. And this hobby has a plethora of excuses and justifications all ready and waiting for those of us looking for excuses to justify why our expensive supposedly great audio systems sound so bad.

Give me rhythm or give me death!