Gear vs. Music investment. What's your ratio?



So for whatever OCD-riffic reason, I have this rule...

As long as my total hardware investment doesn't go beyond what I've spent in music, I feel like the hardware costs can be justified. That's just me. And the great thing about this absurd self-imposed 1st world consumer rationalization is that I can conceivably keep going on forever.

Or can I?

I've got to believe that folks who are lucky enough to own six figure+ systems have far exceeded what they've spent on gear than music. And I'm not knocking that or judging anyone. Because I totally get the quality vs. quantity argument. I just feel like a great system deserves a great collection and vice versa. I have an audiophile friend who's TT rig is simply stunning. He owns less than 100 LPs. It makes me sick. But more in the way of thinking he could be getting so much more from his turntable. His total spend ratio is in the neighborhood of 85% gear, 15% music (at best).

II don't keep a spreadsheet, but if I'm being totally honest right now about total cost - I'm at my limit: 50% hardware and 50% software. That bugs me. So one of my New Years resolutions is not to buy any new gear unless I have too. (see how long that lasts, junkie).

Curious if anyone has thought about their investment this way and what your ratio is.
bonhamcopeland
Why buy any music? I don't anymore.
My wife and I spend 10 bucks a month and have access to about 3 million albums on Spotify.(cd quality)
Todd,

Spotify is not CD quality. 320 Kbps at the most if you have a Premium subscription at set it to 320 in the settings menu.

That said, it does offer an amazing amount of music at your fingertips. I use it to explore music and help me decide what I might want to get on vinyl. No longer do I need to cross my fingers when I buy an LP (well there are still pressing issues, surface noise etc...)
I prefer MOG. The sound quality is better IMHO. Also 320, but without having to buy their primo subscription. They likely don't have the same breadth as Spotify and they've been bought out by Beats Audio. So who knows what'll happen to them. I use it exactly like Roscoeiii does. It's been great for exploring and shortlisting vinyl purchases.

I agree that CDs and lossy downloads as they stand today will die out for general consumers because of 'the cloud' and other streaming services. There'll be entities like HDTracks and Pono for people who want high rez files without a physical medium. And vinyl is not going away for a long time.

But I will never switch to a 100% subscription based model. It's not even a feeling of ownership as much as it's: no connection = no music. server down = no music. annoyed hacker = no music. Maybe I'm paranoid, but clouds, subscriptions, etc., bug me because ultimately somebody else can flip the switch at anytime for any reason and your sans sonics. I've switched over to Apple TV/Netflix/Hulu and cancelled cable, but that's because I don't care about it as much. It's been 75% reliable.
I don't think it matters either, except in the case of people who have ultra expensive kit and a few test LPs/CDs. Then again, it's their money and none of my business how they spend it. I have about 2000 LPs and 1500 CDs and was clearly well out of space, with She who must be obeyed vetoing any more shelves. I have put my CDs on a NAS and can start buying a few more. With so many already, I only buy a limited number of CDs.

I remember on HiFi+, the editor some years ago saying, he only uses reviewers who spend at least as much on music as kit.
I recently purchased the Decca and Mercury Living Presence boxed sets, 50 cd's each set. The total price was around 240.00 for both. There is no gear that would come close to matching the value of that music investment!

Overall, I've spent more on gear. An expense ratio of one to the other never entered into the process of a purchase.