@stuartk , Sorry for the delayed response. I wish everyone could afford
an ultimate system. On the other hand one need not spend totally ridiculous money either. Accurate reproduction is not a problem of visual aesthetics. It is not an issue of personal taste. It is a science problem dealing with the accurate reproduction of sound. It is about physics and engineering, nothing else. Save the emotion for the music. There is equipment out there that is of extraordinary value and there is equipment that is pretty bad and sometimes it is not cheap either. It is up to the consumer to choose wisely. Most consumers are out to sea without a compass. They are subject to marketing which as we all know is the fine art of lying. Listening to what people think they hear is a seriously bad mistake unless you know that person and their experience well. What any system sounds like is a relative issue. It depends on what the person has been listening too. As an example, if the person has been listening to a system that is too bright, a system that is accurate will sound dull. If you really want to know what you are doing you have to calibrate your brain by measuring your system. In order to know what you are hearing you have to know what you are listening to. If you do not than your opinion is worthless. I think I just insulted at least 3/4 of the people on this site. It is easy to measure your system and all of you already have the most expensive part of a measurement system, your computer.
Anyone (with a lot of money) can spend a lot of money on a system and come up with a pretty bad system. The trick (and fun) is to come up with a great system for reasonable money. I think you can create an "absolute sound system, including turntable for about $100,000. In another few months it might be up to $120,000 if the powers that be continue to destroy the economy. It might be less. I should also note that the single most expensive (and important) component is usually the room.
an ultimate system. On the other hand one need not spend totally ridiculous money either. Accurate reproduction is not a problem of visual aesthetics. It is not an issue of personal taste. It is a science problem dealing with the accurate reproduction of sound. It is about physics and engineering, nothing else. Save the emotion for the music. There is equipment out there that is of extraordinary value and there is equipment that is pretty bad and sometimes it is not cheap either. It is up to the consumer to choose wisely. Most consumers are out to sea without a compass. They are subject to marketing which as we all know is the fine art of lying. Listening to what people think they hear is a seriously bad mistake unless you know that person and their experience well. What any system sounds like is a relative issue. It depends on what the person has been listening too. As an example, if the person has been listening to a system that is too bright, a system that is accurate will sound dull. If you really want to know what you are doing you have to calibrate your brain by measuring your system. In order to know what you are hearing you have to know what you are listening to. If you do not than your opinion is worthless. I think I just insulted at least 3/4 of the people on this site. It is easy to measure your system and all of you already have the most expensive part of a measurement system, your computer.
Anyone (with a lot of money) can spend a lot of money on a system and come up with a pretty bad system. The trick (and fun) is to come up with a great system for reasonable money. I think you can create an "absolute sound system, including turntable for about $100,000. In another few months it might be up to $120,000 if the powers that be continue to destroy the economy. It might be less. I should also note that the single most expensive (and important) component is usually the room.