Point of diminishing returns

Macrojack,

Most of the responses seem to have addressed the theory of diminishing returns, but you asked about point of diminishing returns. Imagine a plot of goodness as a function of cost. Assuming you have a metric for goodness -- the great devil for audiophilia, at some point the resulting curve will reach asymptot, goodness will cease to rise in direct proportion, or even substantially, with cost. That's the point of diminishing returns. For some audiophiles, cost and the concommitant bragging rights are intertwined, so their sense of goodness rises in lock step with cost. For them, a point of diminishing returns will not exist. Same is true with collecting, where the metric is rarity and rarity usually corresponds to cost.

db

Most of the threads here are a prime example of this theory at work, in that the effort spent to read post #70 will require the same energy that it took to get 90% of the answer in post #4. And yet, post #70 may provide you with only 2% of additional information. But when it finally clicks, it all gels like magic, right?

That's why that 2% is priceless, IMO.

Hi All,

The "point of diminishing returns" typically describes the amount of performance that is achieved at a particular price point (from a specific product or from a group of products) and how much more money it will take to achieve a significant improvement in performance. If the original price point is sufficient and the product is of good quality it will usually take quite a bit more money to buy a product with significantly higher performance. Of course, when we are discussing audio components it is very subjective but that is the general principle.

For example: a $500.00 high quality pair of loudspeakers has a particular level of performance (usually pretty good in a number of areas). To buy a different speaker that is 50% better in those areas (and possibly better in a few other areas as well) may require spending 100% more money ($1000). The amount of improvement (50%) is not equal to the amount of extra money spent (twice as much). To achieve an even higher improvement (75%) compared to the original speakers may require spending four times the amount of money (400% or $2000). As you can see, as higher and higher levels of performance are desired it requires a progressively disproportional amount of money to be spent. These percentages and amounts are only used here for illustration and may not necessarily coincide with your experience or perception.

Best,

Barry

we are all forgetting an important consideration, namely priority or valence.

what is the value placed upon listening to music, i.e., how important is it to really enjoy the music in comparison to other activities in life ?

if audio/music is very important improvements in sound will be more highly valued, than, as an example, an improvement in the experience of watching a dvd.

ultimately the point of diminishing returns depends upon the relative importance of an activity and the value placed upon the quality and quantity of an improvement.

Yea Barry. That is the most easy to understand explanation. I knew there was a simpler answer to a complex question. Just as the others, it's not definitive, but a great illustration just the same.