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?
stfoth
Hi Stfoth,

My perception is that for a given overall level of sound quality, the factors that particularly drive the cost of a speaker in most cases are the maximum volume level that can be cleanly reproduced, the deep bass extension the speaker provides, and the quality and size of the cabinetry. There are always exceptions, of course, and judging by the experiences that have been posted here the Tekton DI apparently is a notable one in three of those four respects.

I listen mainly to classical music, including a lot of well engineered symphonic music that has been subjected to minimal or no dynamic compression, and I like to listen at a reasonable approximation of what I hear at live classical concerts.  Including those that are held in relatively small venues, where even chamber music can reach volume levels that are high enough to surprise a lot of people. And I prefer to not use a separate subwoofer. So for me a speaker must be able to cleanly reproduce peaks of 105 db+ at my 12 foot listening distance, and must provide bass extension to below 30 Hz. Also, since my living room is my listening room the cabinetry must be some approximation of furniture grade.

All of those things add up to the speaker representing a substantial fraction of total system cost. For others who don't have similar requirements, though, I would expect a much lower fraction of total system cost to be fine. So as usual in audio, it all depends.

Best regards,
-- Al
 
I'm using vintage speakers that cost me $264 used. My integrated amp and CD player/DAC cost 13X (used) the price of my speakers. I also just bought another pair of semi-vintage speakers for $150. They need a little work, and will probably end up costing me $500 when I'm done with them. However, the modern version of that speaker retails for $4975. Is the new version better? Almost certainly. Is it $4500 better? Not to me.....


Comparing MSRP on all of my gear, my speakers weigh in at 37% of the total system cost.  They are the single most expensive item though, by a large margin.  In my system, I have 11 significant components, counting all interconnects as one component, and all power cables as a component, and the speaker cables as a component.

Component List

Linestage
Power Amp
Phono Preamp
Turntable + Arm
Cartridge
DAC
Power Conditioner
Power Cables
Interconnect Cables
Speaker Cables
Speakers

In my system, I think I have struck a good balance.  In fact, I think my speakers would be happy to live with some upgraded electronics, which would effectively make them take up even less of the overall cost.  I believe my tone arm, line stage, and power amp will all see an upgrade in the coming years before the speakers.
My front speakers represent the most $$$ spent on a single component in my system. However, their price only represent 18% of the total system cost (including tweaks). 

personally I never held with the 30%+ of your system in speakers and use speakers that are <<10% of my system cost. Matching the speakers to the room and the system to the speakers will likely pay back much more assuming you have a decent set of speakers to begin with. My bias is always to spend more on sources being of the garbage in garbage out school