Did a satisfaction threshold exist under 1000 bucks ?

@mahgister

Anybody can buy the best amplifier of the world...

I understand what you’re saying but at the same time, while any rich person can buy a pair of Magicos or Wilsons, not every person who has that kind of money can take the next steps -- choosing a source, amplification, cables that add up to something sublime! ;o)

@jasonbourne52

Too many members here have lost touch with Reality by pursuing ever more costly components. Enjoyment of music is a subjective experience that eludes comparison based upon cost of gear.

I’m all for maintaining focus on the music but not everyone here is necessarily after the same thing. Those who pursue ever more costly components may simply enjoy that pursuit, so who’s to say they’ve lost touch?

Personally, I don’t relate to such a quest -- I can enjoy music just as much listening to the radio in my Subaru as I can listening at home on my modest-but-satisfying-to-my-ears system and I wouldn’t have it any other way but there is a spectrum and everyone is not located at the same point. 

I went to Outward Bound and after having no food or water for three days, being rained on for a day, snowed on for a day, freezing my butt off, with no tent or sleeping bag and having a trail biscuit and hot tea was one of the best meals I ever had.

Great story.

The lesson I take from ghdprentice's story is that there are some choice points about audio, here:

If one wants better sound but cannot afford it they should deprive themselves, periodically, to appreciate how good their current system is.

Or, one should give up the idea of better sound and just focus on music only, not sound. (That's hard.)

Or, one should figure out what else is worth giving up to afford sound after spending various increments more.

Or, one can try to convince oneself that everyone else who can spends more is deluded. (That's hard, too. Better equipment -- room and gear -- does yield better sound.)

Sub-$1,000 quality systems disappeared during the 1970s.

Perhaps it is true...

Without the 35 years old Sansui alpha nor unique 45 years old hybrid AKG K340 i will be far from where i am now...Especially without this headphone i think... Or i would had pay way more...

Then my question did not have the same meaning ...It takes very refin3ed past products to reach some minimal acoustic satisfaction level...

Sub-$1,000 quality systems disappeared during the 1970s.

I dont think for sure that someone who spend 100,000 dollars is deluded at all....

There is priorities to see BEFORE upgrading for sure : acoustics and ele4ctrical and mechanical embeddings controls but upgrading is ALWAYS possible...

My question was and is about a defined minimal satisfaction threshold defined objectively by some acoustic characteristics and for sure very important subjective factors which are linked to our sound and personal music history ....

No one is the same....Our needs too constraint our choices; i am alone and dont need a room for the family and friends for the enjoyment of music... Costs and gear are then different...

Or, one can try to convince oneself that everyone else who can spends more is deluded. (That’s hard, too. Better equipment -- room and gear -- does yield better sound.)

Happily i never give up about the idea of good sound nor about the way to reach some satisfying level...It takes me time and trials and experiments but i am more than happy now...

I can forget sound easily and focus on music because my basic acoustic needs are satisfied:  Imaging , soundstaging, holography,  timbre, etc upgrading is possible but a real upgrading  but will be very , very costly...It will cost at least ten times the cost of my system...My last upgrade was a disastrous and cost me two times almost the cost of my actual system...

Or, one should give up the idea of better sound and just focus on music only, not sound. (That's hard.)