Have I Hit The Point Of Diminishing Returns?


System ... Musical Fidelity Nu Vista CD, Bat VK-3i Preamp, Musical Fidelity A300cr power amp, Magnum Dynalab MD-102 Tuner, B&W N804 speakers, Cardas Golden Reference speaker (bi-wire) and ICs. I realize my rig is a bit dated, but it sounds great. If I were to upgrade, how much better could it get? Have I hit the point of diminishing returns where a lot more $$ gets only a small % increase in sound quality? If not, what component would you suggest upgrading and why? Thanks to all.
rlb61
@Douglas_schroeder, I was reffering to dozens and dozens of "upgrades", maybe even a hundred, over a period of 15 years. I didn't just go from a $25K rig to a $125K in two weeks and proclaim a 5% or 10% upgrade. I'm talking upgrading fuses, yes a 4% improvement, upgraded power conditioner, 5% improvement, upgrade power cord, 5% improvement, upgrade phono stage, 10% improvement, upgrade cartridge, 10% improvement....etc., etc., etc....

So if all of those perceived improvements were actually real, or calculated correctly, then how come undoing it all only set me back to 90%? I am not saying that the incremental gains did not exist, only that they were probably not nearly as big as I thought they were at the time. Perhaps what I was thinking was a 5% improvement, was in actuality only a 0.25% improvement.

Yes, this is all said in hindsight. Obviously, if I had known that quadrupling the outlay would only increase performance by 10%, perhaps I would not have travelled that road. I may have just spent that money on some more exotic vacations. ;^)
this is one of those essentially unsolvable metaphysical queries with no right or wrong answers. i sort of agree with knghifi--where and whether one has hit the point of diminishing returns is ultimately up to the person writing the check. the way i look at it, while you certainly can objectively measure aspects of audio performance (e.g. signal-to-noise ratios, distortion levels, etc.), it doesn't necessarily follow that you can measure "improvement" on such basis, since so much of audio appreciation is inherently subjective--i.e. a component with "better" measured performance may not necessarily sound better to you for a whole host of reasons.
i'd also submit that people tend to fix their point of diminishing returns on the bases of their budgets. for example, i maintained for a long time that while the sonic differences between, say a $300 cdp and a $2000 cdp were very significant, the difference between that $2000 cdp and a $5000 cdp were only incremental (and, in my opinion, perhaps not cost justified). undoubtedly, if i had had more disposable cash, i would feel otherwise, and would set the point higher.
back to the mill.....
I suspect you maybe meant to say "philosophical question" not "metaphysical question." Metaphysics is an interesting subject all of its own.

Metaphysics is interesting but doesn't pay the bills. - A. Einstein
Philosophical, or possibly a rhetorical question.....definitely a question with no absolute answer.
I didn't just go from a $25K rig to a $125K in two weeks and proclaim a 5% or 10% upgrade. I'm talking upgrading fuses, yes a 4% improvement, upgraded power conditioner, 5% improvement, upgrade power cord, 5% improvement, upgrade phono stage, 10% improvement, upgrade cartridge, 10% improvement....etc., etc., etc....
Unless your methodology is throwing darts at recommended list with your eyes closed, no way a $25K is 90% to a $125K rig IMO.

Just curious, can you list the major components of your $25K and $125K rigs? I have an open mind ... maybe I can replace my $100K+ with a $25K rig and get 85%?