Curious .. What is the compared price of your tt vs spkrs

oleschool, thanks for the comment. I am not sure what I could replace them with that would not overwhelm my 11 X 17 room, but that is a topic for a different thread.

My analogue front end is more than three times more expensive than speakers, cables not included. Next upgrade would be the amp. There is still some room for improving the speakers' performance. People often upgrade speakers too quickly.

Is there an implied suggestion that price automatically denotes sound quality? The fact that a person's record player and his speakers cost the same means what? It could be nothing more than happenstance. Not trying to be argumentative!

So for what its worth my speakers and LP system including all accessories in both cases cost about the same, but both together are only 30% of the total cost of my system -- CD Player is another 25% (it takes a lot of money to make CDs sound half decent), amps 25% and other accessories (stands, acoustics, power conditioning) the rest. 

In my experience while I tend more towards the GIGO/Linn philosophy I'm probably even more a believer is to find a set of components that work well together and then to spend whatever is needed to optimize the hell out of them -- room, power, cables etc

Is there an implied suggestion that price automatically denotes sound quality?

Bdp24, no, certainly not on my part. And I should probably not have included the words "and therefore expensive" in the excerpt of the statement that I quoted from the earlier poster.

Obviously many people can and do achieve excellent results by spending more on their analog front ends than on their speakers. And vice versa. There are of course many paths to both success and failure. My point, though, is simply that the "Linn philosophy," as originally promulgated during the 1970s by Ivor Tiefenbrun of Linn, is logically and technically flawed, and is therefore of no use as a guide to assembling a system.

Best regards,
-- Al