Can $15,000 Sound As Good As $75,000?

Great Question and what I suspect that to justify spending 75K on a system which would also have exceptional bass that couldn't be had in the 15K system, a large room is required. That to me is the justification in spending more as Reprince notes, he likes Organ music and the like and to approach real life dynamics, especially in the nether region, more must be spent.

From a musical involvement point of view, I doubt that one needs to spend the big money unless they are looking for the above, big sound in a big room in an attempt to replicate live music dynamics. A daunting challenge to get right.

Although I personally haven't nor ever would spent that amount, (current system about 27K retail) I have heard enough large megabuck systems over the years to feel qualified to offer my opinion. The best of them was an audiophile acquaintence who had multiple mono amps driving a large Infinity Beta System in a HUGE room with a 25' ceiling. Total value including analog and digital exceeded well over 100K retail. He passed away in 1994.

So far as music reproduction it was excellent but bigger than it needed to be for musical enjoyment IMHO. What it did do is impress, especially on HT where to this day remains the most awesome HT set-up I ever heard, it could almost shake you out of you shoes.

Very interesting post. I agree that cost is not the absolute factor in determining how good a system is. It would be easy to pick high priced components that lack synergy and get your audio doors blown off by a less costly system. However, all things being equal in terms of knowledge and synergy, I have found a correlation between cost and the capabilities of my system. I believe that at some point, there are diminishing returns, but returns nonetheless. Sometimes these improvements have made an immediate but no so lasting impression -- meaning the "golly gee", "oh wow", "hot damn" effect doesn't jump out at me down the road in the same way it did on day one.

I have not come close to that point of diminishing returns yet (less than $30,000 new street cost in my system -- most bought used). Like Kelly, I don't envision myself moving down the ladder in terms of cost. However, I think at some point I might be inclined to *simplify*. My system takes up quite a bit of space, has lots of IC's and PC's and more glowing tubes and leds than I'd care to count. Maybe it's a product of age (mine not the system's -- it seems to be aging more gracefully than I am), but those garden hose cables and large speakers have a little less visual appeal to me on some days than they did in years past. This disappears as soon as I fire things up, though.

This is somewhat off-topic, but I often wonder what sound I could achieve if I down-scaled a little -- not in terms of cost, but in size and number of components. Food for thought.

Again, a thought provoking post Onhwy61. Like I'm not already thinking about this hobby too much as it is.

Sorry for the redundancy in the first 2 para. of the post. Did I mention real dynamics, more money and justification enough to get across the point do you think?

What a dilemma...are we to be submerged into a soundtrack or music? Or are we to mearly watch and listen? And, It's the journey my friends, not the destination (at least for me). I have found that pursuing complete audio video nirvana seems to always come down to a price point and yes, diminishing returns on the investment. But each of us have (I believe) a different level or threshold where the line is drawn on price for performance. Spending $25K on a stereo system for a 1975 Ford pinto sounds ridiculous to me but so does spending $75K on a system going into a living room or family room!

When one is going for the "Nth degree" the difference between a $15K set up and a $75K set up can be significant but if the room acoustics are not optimal, then there is probably not as much difference. If one only watches DVD movies then save the money. If one enjoys being totaly caught up into some great recorded music, then I strongly believe you have to throw a little more money into the pot. Which brings me to AUDIOGON...I was able to purchase a complete Meridian Digital theater system with 7 X DSP 5,000's and 2 x M2500 subs running through a 561 processor and a new Sony 9000ES DVD / SACD player for under $20K. This gear is set up in an acousticly optimum room 16 x 20. I will now argue that I would not be able to achieve any better sound with out spending ALOT more money (over $75K) Thus, for me, this is the line.

However! A little experiment is pending...I am getting ready to install new carpet, thus the gear will be removed...but befor the new carpet goes in, I am going to hook up a new Denon 3801 and a 5 pairs of B&W CDM NT's and really see how much difference there is...hell, I may even hook up 5 B&W inwalls I have sitting in boxes which is going to really push the bottom line! I'll look forward to reporting back on my findings...

My hunch though will be 1.) because of the rooms good acoustics...all three systems will sound good to most everyone. 2.) I believe that the B&W CDM NT's along with the Denon receiver will be more than adequate for alomst all but a few with respect to movie playback. 3.) I have a complete love affair with my Meridian gear and will surely be suffering from such withdrawl symptoms that any review from me would be obviously biased.

-Kmeriedeth

Hi Hwy61; I've wondered the same thing myself, and have come to the conclusion that I could be very happy with a system in the $15K range. Like you, I have about $40K in my main system. And as I look back on the decisions I've made, I feel quite sure I could put together a similar sounding system using less expensive products from the same manufactures.

For example rather than choosing the ML 37 and 360S digital front end ($11K MSRP), I could have gone with the ML 39 CD player for about half that cost-- and (I think) have very close to the same music quality I've got. Another area I could cut cost is amplification. I just had two McCormack DNA-2DXs upraded to Rev. A by SMc, and MSRP of these two amps is $15K. Well in retrospect, one DNA-2DX Rev. A is enough, as I have a hard time telling the difference between one amp and two. However, the Rev. A upgrade was definitely worth it.

In fact, I could even go to a single DNA.5 Rev. Gold for about $3500. and still have comparable sound quality-- I believe (my Vand. 3A sigs are not hard to drive). And yes, the SMc Rev. A is that good IMO. BTW, these amps were factory matched.

Just examples above, but that's not the whole story with high end audio IMO, and I don't think cost is often even the main consideration when you get into the exotic high cost stuff. I have one of only 4-5 pairs of McCormack DNA-2 Rev. A in the entire world, and that's unique. I love these amps, and consider the experience of owning them worth a lot-- one of the highlights of my audio craziness. Had I not done this, I would never have known what these sounded like. It was a dream that became a quest that I fulfilled-- that's worth a lot to me. At my age (58), how many more chances am I going to have to "go for the gold"?

It may be that Lev335 considers Levinson the best in high end audio, and owning that amp gives him a great deal of satisfaction. Although your thread asks specifically about music quality versus cost, I think there is much more to it than that with many of us when it comes to selecting audio components, eg I'd rather have an ML front end than a Mercedes sitting in the driveway. Pride of ownership is worth a lot to many-- me included.

Also a factor, "wringing" the last few percent improvement in music quality is what much of high end audio is all about, and to do that is expensive, eg getting excellent deep bass is notoriously expensive.

Then there is the "used" factor. While my front end retails for $11K new, I paid about $6K used. For me, i-net buying and selling has put an entirely different light on the cost of high end audio. Cheers. Craig