Law of Accelerated Returns

Just curious, but when people say they have a $25,000.00 system or a $50,000.00 system is that a total of MSRP of equipment they own or is it what they paid for their equipment? I bought much of my system used at around 1/2 MSRP.

I used to worry about this on "price point roll calls", but over time I find I’ve passed most lines any way you slice it, and the next line up is impossible for me to attain :)

The reality is it doesn’t matter that much. Measure the cost anyway you like, within reason. Some things are more "solid" values than others. Amps like McIntosh hold value well against MSRP over time - and their vintage tube amps have actually appreciated greatly in value. On the other hand you have greatly "fluffed" MSRP listings from the likes of some small cable makers (I remember "Black Mountain Cable" did that here, years ago) and some other direct sales internet companies - nobody is gonna be impressed by a $50K system comprised of that crap.

Anyways, onto another topic - I do take issue with the growing continent of folks who treat the room like it’s some magic box that is simultaneously capable of:

• Making expensive gear sound like crap if you don’t meticulously treat the room with lots of treatments. A lot of this seems to be aimed at pushing acoustic panel sales...
• Making cheap gear sound like true high end if you DO meticulously treat the room (I really don’t agree with this point).

I don’t fall in the "room is a magic box" camp. I think of the room like another major component of a system, but not as an all-powerful arbiter to the resultant sound quality. Look, if you throw $500K of high-end gear in a spare bedroom, it’s gonna sound bad. We all get that. It’s not an interesting use case to keep hashing out. And I’m not disagreeing that some investment into room treatment is a great value. But at this level of gear and discussion, the assumption should be that someone spending big $ is going to put it into a room of adequate dimensions to let it breathe, and spend time positioning things optimally. One you have that, the actual gear composition of a system will typically shine right through - whether good or bad!

I have a local friend with a room that’s currently untreated (but he’s planning to change that soon). We’ve swapped amps, preamps, cartridges back & forth over the past year. EVERY component has shown its own consistent sonic signature between these 2 very different rooms, CLEAR AS DAY. And both rooms are capable of sounding superb. But when you put disagreeable components together - bad sound is the result. The room is absolutely a factor, but it’s not magical.

Look, if you throw $500K of high-end gear in a spare bedroom, it’s gonna sound bad

I don't agree with that at all.  For $500K you could make a tent sound good.  Now would it sound much better than a $250K system?  I couldn't tell you that it would sound $250K better but it should sound better.  Would it sound better than a $5K system?  Darn tooting it would.  Money spent well does relate sound quality as it does with everything else.  

I'm not saying it's practical, something I would do or really couldn't imagine how you would actually spend that kinda money on bedroom but saying it would sound bad is total BS

I don’t agree with that at all. For $500K you could make a tent sound good. Now would it sound much better than a $250K system? I couldn’t tell you that it would sound $250K better but it should sound better. Would it sound better than a $5K system? Darn tooting it would. Money spent well does relate sound quality as it does with everything else.

I’m not saying it’s practical, something I would do or really couldn’t imagine how you would actually spend that kinda money on bedroom but saying it would sound bad is total BS

@danager  That’s definitely not the point I was trying to make or argue.

Me: I’m tired of us continually re-hashing this silly hypothetical scenario
You: I disagree with your hypothetical scenario’s conclusion, let’s hash it out more

😅

@mulveling 

Sorry I missed it what were you trying say?

I was just quoting your words from your post that I disagree with and  I didn't realize that it was hypothetical.  I suspect somewhere somebody has $500K worth of gear in their bedroom and it sounds fabulous. 

Really the point is no matter how much money you spend playback  can't sound better than the original source but it can be indistinguishable. 

To me sound is binary it's better or it isn't price and how much better is irrelevant. The graph of sound quality vs dollars doesn't level out it just doesn't rise at the same rate and it doesn't dip at top end.

Now in the real world,  your / my system price is relevant but my point remains the same.   Money well spent will improve the sound until that final result is  indistinguishable from the original but like infinity indistinguishable can never be obtained. Part of it is we don't have access to the masters and part of it is that reproduction adds artifacts that we can hear with enough training.  

If I'm wrong please point out the flaws in my logic as my bank account would thank you.

It's not about how much you spend but about how much you know. I've heard cheap DIY systems built by knowledgable hobbyists rival the most costly setups.