Perhaps the reality is just this.... there is essentially NO correlation between cost of a stereo system and the performance of the system... at least after a certain level.
I have heard (at shows) $100-200,000 systems (dozens of them)that, on average, do not sound any better than did the average of the 25K systems (again dozens of them). And some 10-15K systems equaled or bested some 200K systems. There are limits to this... but generally, after a 20K system or so... there is no correlation between cost and sound. Cost is, at that point, not correlated any longer to performance... or at best a 2-3% (subjective) improvement doubles the cost. A typical 25K system is 97% of the way of a 50K system and 94% of the way to a 100K system... something like that. And that is on the average... so much variation occurs that again... no correlation.
I have heard (at shows) $100-200,000 systems (dozens of them)that, on average, do not sound any better than did the average of the 25K systems (again dozens of them). And some 10-15K systems equaled or bested some 200K systems. There are limits to this... but generally, after a 20K system or so... there is no correlation between cost and sound. Cost is, at that point, not correlated any longer to performance... or at best a 2-3% (subjective) improvement doubles the cost. A typical 25K system is 97% of the way of a 50K system and 94% of the way to a 100K system... something like that. And that is on the average... so much variation occurs that again... no correlation.