Rock? money down the drain?


I have seen posts where people describe their systems and ask for upgrade advise and their systems cost $5000 and up and their primary music is rock. here is a question for everyone. is it worth spending $10,000 on a rock system or do think there is a cut off point where all rock systems sound the same?
mboldda1269a
Jazz and Rock simply do not lift me to the extent that classical music does. There's more of the edge of centuries in classical music. There's more blood, more style. It's just up and out and gone. Jazz just jerks around. Rock music is more sound and pretense than an actual and venturesome entrance into the grand gamble.
The whole game is to reproduce whatever you listen to in a satisfying manner. Of course it's OK to spend X amount of dollars on any system, with any souce material. What if your hobby was recording live song birds, insects or waterfalls? Think about it:-)
Anyone catch the article on classical music in the latest Listener? Eldragon - Have you heard Keith Jarret's solo work?
Both - I think you reach the "knee in the curve" of price vs. performance earlier with rock music than other genres, but that knee is still past $10K (retail) for a single source two-channel system that is used primarily for rock. Two excellent points earlier though - first is that rock is a broad categorization, so the answer might be at least subtlely different if you've got a strict definition. Second, rock has a lot of low end which is essential to it's fullest reproduction and is costly to facilitate.