It's attention, not money, we should budget

Over the long haul (and it has been), the old 3-thirds (speakers, amplification (pre & power or integrated), sources) has more or less held true in my experience of 55ish years....

This is taking into account new, used, diy with very little 'room', since there's been a lot of them that I/we haven't owned.  And most were 'problematic' ( i.e., "One copes as best as....")... ;)

The later ones' (early 80's and beyond) have responded decently to analog eq and later digital correction.

Best 'splaination:

I am not afraid.

*L*

Allocating per-device price percentages is not really different than allocating per-device costs.

The tendency of folks on this site to discuss revolving through the kit in their chains suggests that the common fixation on hardware won’t always bend well to predictable slices on a pie chart, eh? 😉

Bring me any good DAC (or turntable - neither need be expensive), any decent amp of ~200 wpc (4 ohms), wire of your choice minimum 18ga, and I assume my speakers and my music files (or lp’s) will do the rest just fine. There’s no physical room treatment other than typical furniture. However, if I moved the system from a specious, solid concrete (including ceiling) dwelling to drywall etc., I’ve no clue how “transferable” my results would be. Obviously YMMV depending on such environmental factors and on individual psychological sensitivities.

When I started, it did not seem intuitive that my expenses graph would become an upside-down bell curve (= sharp valley between the actual music and the transducers). Price and percentage rules may not to work well (sometimes) for this very reason - they can set you up for highly skewed expectations when you try stuff out. Just my anecdotal opinion.

Wise thread!

+1 OP

Perfectly rational point made by the OP.

But in reality, we cannot rationalize with a rule something that pertain to gear design, our own ears/brain measures and habits , the room acoustics, the mechanical control of vibration and resonance , the electrical noise floor controls of the gear-room-house , all these factors vary too much with our own various needs between one another to be ruled by a rule for all so to speak...

My only rule is we must go for the ratio S.Q.high % versus the lowest possible  price % ... But many people here can indulge themselves without these limits...Someone able to buy many spots cars and take holidays in Paris will se mee as a poor looser here ...

Then which rule ?

The only rule is illustrated by someone owning one of the world system able to compete at the highest level : mike lavigne...

If i understood him correctly , his dedicated room cost him more than his gear system....

The only rule is then what i spoke about after my acoustics experiments ( at no cost for me for one year full time ) Acoustics sciencve rule the gear not the reverse... Psycho-acoustics rules with material physical acoustics everything in audio , even gear design ultimately depends on it as illustrated by the last revolution in acoustic on par with the transition from mono to stereo : the BACCH filtrers of Dr. Choueiri...

It’s been said that people will spend their money on what their attention is on. This is an easy hypothesis to prove when your partner, or klds/grandkids have their attention on something. So, "attention" and "money" are intertwined.

It’s also been said; "There are no absolute truths. Only relative truths, and workable truths." The "1/3rds Rule" is a good example of a "workable truth" that has been a tool for many decades.

And, to quote another person, accountant Walter Williams, stated something to the effect of: "Prejudice is bias based on incomplete information. The problem is that the cost of obtaining the information is too high."

I’m going to attempt to throw all of this in a blender, and pour out something that can be reasonably consumed. Some people are more committed to obtaining "The Absolute Sound" than others. The information is out there. The "cost" of information is too high for many. So, they’ll check the forums and reviews, sort through a few options, "add to cart" --> checkout. Applying "workable truths" in this scenaro will provide something(s) that will make "good noises" and could represent a "one and done" solution for the owner. A little more diligence (and time) would have, most certainly, elevated the musical experience, at a lower cost. But, at what cost? Only the owner knows the answer(s) to that question.

A some suggested, absolutes cannot be applied based on the product category and price points. A 2x price upgrade in speakers should produce something significant -- and usually does. Going from a $300 pair of speakers, for example to $600 should make something magical happen. As should going from $30k to $60k. The difference is that the upgrade from $300 to $600 will, most likely, involve purely sonic improvements. However, from $30k to $60k will involve other factors: improved esthetics, over-built components/chassis, intangibles, etc. The "bang for the buck" factor may be superior in budget constrained products?

We all have our own ideas of how to set priorties. I, for one, like to take things apart, pull the guts out of them and replace inferior components with better stuff, improved connection methods, etc. I went thru a high level of anxiety watching a promo video for a new "flagship" speaker. I was wanting to grab my wire strippers and silver solder and tear into their "state of the art" design, knowing that they were exposing the sonic compromises of their new offering. You can imagine the look on my partner’s face when she saw interior pieces of her new luxury vehicle scattered all over the shop. Those crappy cables, shared harnesses, lugs, spades, etc., just had to go! (And, yes, it did sound much better). It’s who I am. We’re all different.

@waytoomuchstuff 

Kind of.  The thing is though, if we open ourselves to DIY then that calculation does change a little.  I don't mean just speaker building, but say, DIY your room and acoustics, or cables, etc. 

We may spend more money on our children, but we may also make them toys and spend time with them in homework and after school activities, so I do think we can separate attention and money somewhat.