If your whole system costs $40,000....

I am unable to let you confusing fellows here anymore, yes, I suggest you to shut up and quit this post,

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. You ask a question on an internet forum and you are not always going to get the answer you hope for.

As far as confusing people, a number of people agree with me in my opinion that you are going about it the wrong way. Sorry if that bothers you.

,

On my $8K system, the CDP is 25% of the system cost (list price). Lower costs players are just not good enough.

On my $40K system (list price), the CDP is about 5% of the cost, and the analog rig is almost 20% of the cost. If you concentrate on CDs, then the CDP becomes a more important part and could easily go to 10% to 15% of the cost.

In a lot of ways, this is another way to get at the source first versus speaker first discussion. For me, I find I need a good source, but get more payback in sound quality from the speakers and the electronics. My digital upgrades are going to PC audio, rather into a new CD player.

My CDP tends to run about 15% - 20% of total component cost (not including cables, stands etc.).

Foster9: "To most we are looked at as crazy for what we invest in this gear". Yes, It is us against the world!! :)

respectfully, since price is an imperfect indicator of quality, i agree it's kinda silly to choose a component on the basis of a formula, as opposed to what sounds/looks/feels best to you. there are credible people who maintain that a <$1k rotel or oppo sounds just as good as a megabuck cdp and other credible people who really can hear the improvement inherent in a $5k player. personally, i concur with rdavwhittaker above--i've heard enough great $2k players that i wouldn't be inclined to spend more. which isn't to say, of course, that there's no difference between a great $2k player and a great $5k player--it's an issue of whether the degree of improvement is cost-justified to you.