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


The answer is no, but it's real close.

I was reading a recent TAS issue where different writers were putting together entire systems. J. Valin comes up with a $75,000 setup centered around Peiga speakers, Krell electronics and Purist Audio/Nordost cables. While I've not heard the Krells or the Purist components, I have heard a demo of the Peiga. They were very impressive. For the sake of argument, let's rate JV's recommended system as outstanding sounding. Ten pages later, a different writer recommends a $15,000 system centered around the new, big Quads, Innersound power amp, Meridian CD, Placette preamp and Kimber cables. From my experiences with the Quads, Innersound and Meridian, I believe this system is also capable of outstanding music reproduction. I'm not saying that the systems will sound the same, nor am I denying that skilled listners will not have a strong preference for one system over the other. The key point of my observation is that for one fifth the cost, comparable sound quality is attainable. This is a very dramatic example of the role of diminishing returns.

MY QUESTION IS, for those who have invested large dollars in your systems, using perfect hindsight, would you truly have had to settle for lesser sound if you had spent substantially less?

BTW, at a personal level, I have roughly $40k in my main system. I don't imagine it sounds much better, if at all, than the $15k recommended system. I strongly prefer my system (deeper bass, higher volume capabilities), but it is a sobering comparison.
128x128onhwy61
I agree with Pls1, the recording media is frequently the weakest point in the music reproduction chain. However, in a recent post in another thread you gave a comparison of dCS vs. MSB Platinum converters. You said the dCS was the better unit. The point of my post is for you to consider what would happen if you scaled back from the dCS to the MSB, your Sigtech to a TACT, the Dunlavy Vs to IVs, etc. Would your system really sound that different? Of course it would, but how much different?

I'd like to clarify, while I recognize that the effect of dimishing returns is very real, I don't see it as a barrier to further system upgrades. Not just making it good, but making something perfect seems to be an innate human characteristic.
Plsl hit an important point with the room treatment comment. The best sound i've heard was from a $20k-$25k dunlavy, wadia, ARC system in a well treated showroom at Audio Vidio Logic. Back to the question at hand. A local retailer had a Mark Levinson system (33 monoblocks, 39 cdp and a reference pre-amp)with all Transparent xl cables to show off Revel Salons. The list price was said to be about $90k. There is no way i would trade my Dunlavy, VTL, ARC, system ($25k retail and about $15K purchase) for that system. The ML system may have had a bit more detail but it lost out in the musicality and involvement catagories. I can't knock really that system it just didn't have the sound i like and it wasn't worth another $65k (plus tax). With the exception of upgrading my phono section and tuner from something so lowly i won't mention I'm done upgrading for a long time and my focus will be on my room to get the most out of the gear i've got.
I mean this response in good will and I'm ging to limit my comments to classical because it is the easiest example. I have a basic problem with the concept of perfection, or absolute sound. I just don't think it exists in anything let alone the recording and reproduction of classical music. There are physically intractable problems in trying to reproduce the Mahler 8th in your living room. We have chosen our system for the most realistic reproduction of late romantic music and it does an excellent job given the recordings we have as a source. It does have moderate minuses on the reproduction of superbly recorded string quartets for which we would go back to Quad electrostats. Moving back to a Tact from a Sigtech would be a very big step for our taste in music because of the differences in implementation of correction curves. This is based on direct experience. The MSB to dCS is less of a gap because what very few shortcomings the MSB has tend to be euphonic on many classical CD's but certainly not all. I guess my major point is this: the gap between 15K and 75K for the best Mahler or Bruckner recordings is very significant compared to a live performance. If you listen to chamber music the cost of a system would be a lot lower. Over 75K I believe you are into trade-offs and preferences given the current quality of the source material.
Pls1, I hope my earlier comments came across as intended. No negativity was meant. I truly am interested in what people (particularly at the moment, you) see as the sonic differences between various high quality components. Your response was most informative. Good luck much pleasure on your journey.
For most people, a well setup $15K system will sound great and you still have $60K in the bank. Based on my many years of audio upgrades, etc., it is my opinion that one does not need to spend $75K for an excellent sounding system. A $15K System with high quality components that work well together should be okay. enjoy.............