Are you Guys Rich or What!?

Bmpnyc, and everyone else, I am sorry if I typed kinda smug. I really did not intend to dismiss what you and others have said, I was attempting to gently voice toward Axomoxa. I will stand by my statement that material wealth does not, cannot, and will not bring true happiness. "He who dies with the most toys wins" is bullshit. (I know nobody here has said that, so bear with me.) I often present ideas that I am wrestling with inside my own head, trying to live a balanced life. (Do I really need those Harbeths....Yes!) I am a strong believer that an investment in a good system, at whatever price is comfortable for the buyer, is one of the sounder investments that can be made. (The kids can sell it off after your gone.) The joy of music makes me a better person to work for and be around. How much is that worth? [:)] Hang in there. Charlie

Interesting thread folks. For my 2 cents, I am a believer in two principals...price is relative, and the law of diminishing returns. I dont think anyone should feel guilty spending whatever amount they wish on a system--it's their money, they earned it, let 'em spend it as they wish. To add perspective, how many music lovers out there would gag at the prospect of dropping even $10K (or a bit more) on a fine audio system which will last many years, but yet won't hesitate to bite at the $60,000 BMW that they'll drive for 3-4 years? $75,000 is a very substantial sum to the majority of the public, more so than 98% of those people could ever dream of spending on an entertainment system. However to Bill Gates, he makes that much money while taking his morning dump. Should he limit himself to $7500? Probably not. Even if he can't hear a difference (my second point, coming soon...) he'll be inclined to spend much more simply because he CAN, and God bless him for it. This being said, I am a firm believer in diminishing returns, and while I believe a $1000 receiver DOES represent double the value of a $500 one (just my opinion, others may differ), I do NOT believe that a $100K system represents anywhrere NEAR double the value of a $50K system. I've had the good fortune to sit in the testing room of Madrigal Labratories (makers of Mark Levinson), and listen to their "dream system" , and while I was awed, I was surprised to find that, in truth, given the means, I still wouldn't spend THAT amount of money on that system (roughly $150 - 175K at the time)...I simply didn't hear that much $$$'s worth of value. I think that the majority of responders here have the right idea...that great audio IS within the means of a great many people, especially by shopping wisely, letting others pay for depreciation, doing your homework, and being patient. Let your means decide the investment, and your ears decide the value. Best wishes to all!!!

You know rich ain't what it used to be!!When I was a kid there was a local Jewish Deli(Bay Shore) which had a sign which said,"lean is lean...extra lean is extra". $30,40,50K just don't go as far as it used to. So, if you want to be in the big time, you'se gots to pays the piper. Unfortunately, great stuff often costs a lot, even used.

Kthomas, your point well appreciated. As long as one is living in this society, he may not have moral superiority when it comes to the degree of consumption. But, that does not mean that there is no moral implications however strong or otherwise it is. As one previous poster pointed out, it also is all relative. In that sense, I am a culprit of this audiophile industry; thereby, I based my opinion not on morality but on pragmatism at individual level which I think can be more relevant to this issue though that can be as subjective as you pointed out. At the same time, the fact that I love something to death does not justify much if at all, though it may give us a clue to understand certain pattern of behaviors or consumption, when it comes to pragmatism. I love freedom to death, but I need to be responsible for my actions. One needs to think about his expenditure in that context. In other words, it would he helpful for one to think about his consumption behaviors in the light of pragmatic aspects once in a while. In this audiophile community, I think it is rather acceptable to say that I am willing to spend this much because I love them to death. Without talking about pragmatic aspects. For most of us with regular lives, it may not be O.K. Again, it is not to accuse anyone but to rephrase the followings. My morality may be no better than yours. nor may I be as pragmatic as you are. But, the issues are there for us to examine, flamed or otherwise. We all may not be that great or good morally or pragmatically; but, it would help us to think about the dimension. As I have said in the previous post, I am sure most of us are adamant in our positions. But, I am hoping that there are more people in the audiophile community who would agree with me not because that is a right thing to do but better for my own interests. Again, it is about individual pragmatism, not morality although I crudely rebutted one's claim of no moral issues involved here. If you can afford within "your" boundary of pragmatism, then what can others say in the society we are living in? I am hoping that audiophiles of middle class have a chance to examine the issues. Maybe, some people jocularly say that it is music and sound, stupid. Or, considering (therefore assuming) the pragmatic aspects. BUt.. Anyway, thank for the thoughtful comment... P.S. Would it not be better to have luxury items at cheaper price without having to take my comment as a impracticcal attempt to root such out (I did not mean it that way either)?

ok, i'll ante up to get into this game. here's my hand: i've got one of them $50-100k systems that i've built up to for the past 30+ years. and, i'm damn proud of it, moral implications and all. you want it, you'll have to shoot me and wrest it from my cold, dead hands. FWIW, i betcha' i'm as left-leaning or more as anyone else on this thread. (just to give you some flavor: i not only lived through the tumultuous late 60's, i was already by then a lawyer, defending and bailing out the anti-poverty and anti-war protesters and going up against all the draft boards in iowa arogant enough to ignore the truly moral convictions of conscientious objectors; i never lost one of these cases.) nonetheless, after reading some of the really incredible pseudo-philisophical bullshit on this thread, i suggest audiogon add yet another category to their revamped list: post-marxist audiophilia. sure, i agree you can buy into an acceptable highend system for around $7.5k. but why should that fact limit the amount that is "morally acceptable" to spend to get a better sounding, or even better looking (to you), system? should noone be permitted to buy an armani suit, lest he then lust after ever-more exspensive italian clothes? ought we limit mercedes models available for sale to those under $75,000, fearing that doing otherwise will simply enhance the market for farrari's? give me a break guys. chances are, when you are economically able to move up the audio highend ladder, you'll not only do so but become a true beleiver in the republican party simultaneously.