OP>
… literally everything down to the last cable has been tuned to work in synergy with these speakers. Had I upgraded my speakers mid way through, I would have undone a lot of the work that went into the system in terms of synergy.
blindjim>
not necessarily. I think this is sheer conjecture. every rig is ever evolving. changing horses in mid stream may have come out similarly with what ever other alterations were made with the orig units.
for EX. what if one stays in house with speakers but steps up a few levels? normal expectation would be more bandwidth and bottom end response or articulation, given bass reproduction and its overall improvements escalate usually as speaker costs rise.
however the ‘house’ sound should remain in force to some degree.
OP>
Does anyone have any extreme percentages in terms of speaker cost to system cost like 5% or 95% and what has been your experience?
blinjim>
I’ve been a staunch supporter of ‘the ‘get what you can when you can’, system building ethos for decades.
percentages be damned. those figures for pieces within a stereo or HT outfit are aimed at marketing and bare little witness to what can be done if those numbers are NOT in play.
say the ratio for wires is already maxed out in each link , then what? Be happy? regardless the current results?
one other very large Elephant in this room no one has acknowledged thus far is the underlying caveat this hobby rests upon…
THE THRESHOLD OF DIMINISHING RETURNS
component performance does not equate precisely to cost in every instance.
has any of the number crunchers around here ever posted a speaker thread which aims itself at finding a consensus as to the percentage of improvement vs. cost as one moves up the speaker ladder?
IOW…. is a $35K pr of squeakers actually twice as improved vs. a $18K pair? or a $40K pr twice as good as a $20K set?
doubtful.
once that bag of worms is opened and than slapped shut, , then another bit of concious consideration looms large… ‘justification’.
one then must be able to justify spending twice as much as perhaps their present squeallers cost for what? 10%, 15%, or 25% of improvement?
hearing a tad more, or maybe even something not heard before is not enough IMO to reconcile doubling my transducer indulgences. there would have to be more in the equation for me to pull that trigger.
i’ve heard plenty of speakers under the $50K range whose abilities are profound. well under. in fact under $35 in nearly every case, and many far below the 30s MSRP, of course.
Just because someone, anyone, comes up with some likely unsubstantiated and probably unsupportable pie chart on how to split up the audio outfit’s funding in terms of flat percentages… like at a dealer’s shop… look closely at the systems they have setup in house and do a bit of quick math and see if the dealer is keeping to the same ratios they would have you maintain.
past times, hobbies, and or devotions engage more than simple numbers. enthusiastic folks can and will overstrech means, some more prudent people will use good sense and restrain their financial involvement. but as long as the variable is generated by the human and his or her prevailing condition making the call, its truly an anything goes prospect at all times.
Botom line
, when all accusations of a thing are partially or wholely subjective, there can be no absolutes.
@gofastr
byee!