Have I Hit The Point Of Diminishing Returns?

Joecasey, do you understand what the law of diminishing returns means? I never said that spending more money would not improve a system sonically, most times it does. However, it is not on a linear scale. A $20,000 system does not sound twice as good as a $10,000 system. It's more of a logarithmic scale, which would indicate that there is diminishing returns on money spent.

I have listened to many systems priced from $2,000 to $500,000. Yes, the $500,000 system was great, but it wasn't twice as good as the $2,000 system. It could have been....if the $2,000 system was defective, or poorly assembled. Obviously, YMMV.

Have you ever spent time with a good tube and analog system?

Jmcgrogan2, I guess I didn't clearly state my position.

I don't believe in point Of Diminishing Returns. It all depends on the individual component, system and how badly you want it. All subjective.

If I prefer the $500,000 over the $2,000 system, then it's worth it. Who knows and who cares if it's 2X, 20X, 100X ... superior. How do you measure it?

Take this advice for what it's worth-
i have a much bigger and more expensive system than you do, and it sounds
very very good. but... i still look around at new gear and would love to check it out anyway. but other than a nicer looking pair of speakers or some other aesthetically attractive component, there is no SONIC rationale for spending any more money. once you have a combination of "sweetness" and functionality, you're essentially done. OTOH, you "can" get a more "startling super-realistic" sound that sweeps you away, but it could also get tiring after awhile, or reveal
subtle flaws in source material you were better off not knowing about.
a system should help you relax and enjoy the sound. Funny, when i had a mid-fi
set-up years ago (SAE-2 electronics, a Thorens turntable, and ADS speakers, cheap wire) I was strangely happy. BTW, this was before those cursed CD's came
along and replaced vinyl in the record stores.

08-06-14: Truemaineiac
Have you ever spent time with a good tube and analog system?

I assume you are talking to me? If so, yes, my whole system is tube based, phono stage, preamp and amp, and vinyl is my primary source.

My point is simply this: I have owned $125K system previously, but due to economics, I have cut back and I am currently running about a $30K system. Was the previous $125K system better? Yes. However, if one were to try and quantify the difference, which I agree Joecasey is ludicrous and ridiculous, there is no way the $125K system was even twice as good. I would say maybe 10-20% better....for 4X the cost. That, in my humble opinion, reflects the point of diminishing returns.

I have also heard quite a few less expensive systems, and the only way something sounds twice as good, regardless of price, is if one of the systems is defective. Now I know that many folks will quantify improvements they have made in their systems over the years, this was a 5% improvement, that was a 10% improvement, heck, I even used to do that myself. However, after disassembling my $125K rig and going back downstream did I realize that those dozens and dozens of 5-20% improvements I heard over the years were mostly imaginary. Since I could scale back to less than 25% of the cost and only lose a small percentage of performance. I was quite stunned actually, to find out just how good a much less expensive system could sound.