Philosophy used in assembling your system?


When putting together your system were there any underlying desgin philosophies used? Some examples would be:

- Most expensive component you can afford in every category (Cost no object).
- Best Value in every category.
- Cost ratios between components (ex. Speakers = 40%, Cables = 15%, and source components = 45%).
- Components types, i.e. Tubes vs. Solid State, totally digital or all analog.
- Listening preferences.
- The ascetics of a particular component.
- Best deals you happen to find.
- Physical dimensions and sound characteristics of your target listening room.
- Spouse's budget
- None of the above

Any input is greatly appreciated!

Jeff
jeffhunter
Best Value overall (from my perspective, of course).

Since I use digital, I have tended to go ho-hum ordinary gear with cables and digital sources, as this has the least impact on the sound per kilo-dollar spent. Besides my goal is to listen to great music and not feed a single CD tray all evening like an assembly line worker. In a listening session, I will listen to 20 to 30 different albums and at least 3 to 4 genres...so I jump around as one track makes me hungry for another...I guess I like buffet style!!!!

Just my philosophy based on listening and the science behind digital but I know vinyl users will spend a lot on their source and in this case it certainly pays off in spades. Some will spend a lot to get the sound coloration they desire and it certainly pays off too...just not my thing...if the mastering engineer got it wrong and messed up then I don't try to fix it with sugar....just my philosophy that's all...

You will note I spent, by far, the most on speakers (including active amplification) and then the room design/treatments. I find this holds the most value in what my tin ears register.

Digital sources do sound different to me but not enough to get me excited enough to part with more money. I often found sources just sound ever so slightly different...but which is better is often too hard to say... at least to my "tin ears".
listening preference is primary.

i prefera very vintage tube sound and panel speakers.

i select the speaker and then the amp, pre, cd player and acbles to create the spectral balance i am trying to achieve.
a lot of auditioning is necessary to get where i want to go.
i am still considering cable and possibly a new speaker.

for the panel fans out there , there is an interesting speaker from england, the podium, which i am investigating.
I used the “Aball Method” above more or less. After considering the room, I chose the amp. I fell in love with the sound of single-ended triodes, so I chose an amp from a manufacturer who makes a complete line of products – Audio Note. In choosing a single maker system many of the system synergy problems has been addressed in the product design phase, and the focus can then center on the selection of the appropriate level from their product offerings within a given budget (with a clear upgrade path available).

One of the limitations of using a single manufacturer, is you limit the opportunity for great deals. But, after three decades, I’ve stopped buying and selling various components. Now, I plan for periodical upgrades and focus more on music.
As a practioner of Gautama the Buddha my philosophy is Emptiness
In stereo listening it means trying to achieve an emptiness of any imputed hums, hisses, colorations, blooms, and other alterations in the essential nature of the music
It has meant that most of my investment has gone into amplication, as anything that is missed leaves the resulting sound empty of something and it cannot be picked up further down the line.
Next has come cables, my sources are both in need of upgrade as at some point as are my speakers.
As a practioner of the middle way, it seems I start with amplification and cables and then move out toward sources and speakers with the aim of emptying the final sound of anything other than a background of pure blackness or complete emptyness.