These ratios are at best guidelines and will vary depending upon overall budget as well. Ratios at $20-50k are generally going to be more speaker leaning in terms of total percentage than a $200k system. There's also a general (incorrect) belief that good speakers can somehow fix shortcomings in front end and amp, which is in my experience far from the case. Ultimately, unless the system builder is relatively new (and needs a helpful guide as a baseline) cost allocation is not a consideration that will be relevant; rather, it should be building the best system possible, and that is almost always a system where the relative performance of all components is similar since one cannot "fix" shortcomings in a poorer (relatively speaking) component and such component will then hamstring and limit the ultimate potential of the system.
cost of speakers in relation to the rest of the system
I don't intend this to be a "How much should I spend for speakers" question. Seems a number of folks generally recommend a third to two-thirds. My question is, generally for discussion, whether folks found happiness and "success" in spending significantly less than that. Or--by price, are you happy with speakers that might be considered by some folks outclassed by your other equipment and don't think the speakers are the "weak link?"
As a "favorite" professor might have said too often, "Discuss."
I would think there would be a number of Maggie MMG/1.7 folks, Tekton DI folks, probably some Omega folks, some vintage speaker folks.... others?
As a "favorite" professor might have said too often, "Discuss."
I would think there would be a number of Maggie MMG/1.7 folks, Tekton DI folks, probably some Omega folks, some vintage speaker folks.... others?