How do you determine how much to spend on speakers

This thread seems about dead but I will kick in my own POV.

There really is no argument that speakers make more of a difference in the sound of your system than any other component. Electrostatics, cones, horns....all produce quite different sounds.

There is also more bang for the buck in speakers up to maybe $2-3K, maybe even to $10K. That is to say, a $200 CD player doesn't sound as good as a $2000 CD player but the difference isn't nearly as great as owners of high end CD players will tell you. It just isn't; listen for yourself.

In contrast, you can buy an EXCELLENT set of speakers for $2000 whereas a $200 pair will drive you and your cats right out of the house. Again, this is simple truth that you can confirm by listening for yourself.

That's why the GIGO or "spend more on the source" argument is ultimately fallacious.

My suggestion is that you listen to various types and makes of speakers until you have a feel for the kind of speaker sound that you like. Then buy a moderately good pair of speakers of that type. Match them with sound mid-fi electronics and get busy listening. As your ears become more sophisticated, you'll probably want better electronics but if you've done your homework the speakers will keep you happy long enough to get your electronic upgrades done. THEN...if you long for better reproducers you can start questing for them.

In summary:
(1) Speakers vary more in sound than any other component...by far!
(2) Speakers differ in quality more on the basis of price than any other component...by far!
(3) Speakers are the most important key to listening satisfaction.

And the nice thing about my dogmatic assertions is that they're all so easily provable....just by listening.

Enjoy!

will

Having wandered in the dark space of Speakers first for many years, I finaly find myself firmly in source first land. It is not true that all CDPs are the same once you get above a certain threshold, neither is it true that all speakers are the same. My current ratio is about 2:1 CD to Speakers and while I was skeptical I did what Will suggested and listened. Result: resounding source first.

Interestingly, this debate has been pretty much resolved in the UK (in favor of source first) - but the debate seems alive and kicking here in the US. I wonder why?

Well, dj, that's what makes life interesting. I wonder if the difference between UK and USA has to do with the oft-cited "fact" (which isn't that at all, of course) that all UK speakers sound pretty much the same.

I do think that there are more similarities than differences in sound among UK speaker manufacturers. Gotta love that BBC sound (and I do!).

will

I'm from the UK and I think that the source first arguments (garbage in, garbage out) are nonsense ... the entire signal path is equally important. I agree with Will that cheap CD players sound remarkably good, but I've only heard a couple of expensive CD players (both Meridian) and I was glad I saved my money and bought a Marantz.

Not sure I would hold a torch up for Meridian CD players either! The problem with CD is that you do have to move up a long way to get the kind of returns you can get with Vinyl at much lower levels. I agree most CDPs are crap and time spent arguing between them is pointless...this however is a little different to the source first argument.