Digital only stereo related, cost question

[Peter Bomberg]

For those of you who's main system is 2 channel and digital only (streaming and local flac files)  have more than 50K of gear what % of your budget went where?

 

I am curious if your cost is 50% speakers and 40% electronics + 10% cables or ??? mine looks lobsided with 70% main speakers and subs, 20% electronics and 10% cables.

[Peter Bomberg]

@MarcelNL mostly as the ratio is very different if you are talking about a 5K or a 10K system. It has nothing to do with better or worse. But on my office setup the ratio is closer to 40-58-2%

[The Computer Audiophile]

I’ve never found such percentages helpful, but I’m willing to learn why people think they are. 

[jhwalker]

90% speakers.  9% other electronics (e.g., receiver, streamers, etc.). 1% "other" (including cables). 

 

If a cable follows standard, it will work properly.  I will pay a bit extra for what I consider "solid" construction, but not for any special features / 'tech'.

[DuckToller]

11 minutes ago, jhwalker said:

90% speakers.  9% other electronics (e.g., receiver, streamers, etc.). 1% "other" (including cables). 

 

If a cable follows standard, it will work properly.  I will pay a bit extra for what I consider "solid" construction, but not for any special features / 'tech'.

Do you use room treatment, too?

Wondering if the last 5 -10 % from the speaker invest may be better allocated to the room, just as a rule of thumbs?

[Peter Bomberg]

@DuckToller not as such, a mix of carpet and furniture but nothing defined as room treatment.  And I agree with @jhwalker in general solid construction but in general I have not been able to say the extra cost for the cable tech has translated into more enjoyment. Sure I can sometime say it sounds different but seldom can I say much more enjoyable. Now maybe I don't have the ear or the patience or the gear needed but who knows that may change with the next system.

 

[jhwalker]

1 hour ago, DuckToller said:

Do you use room treatment, too?

Wondering if the last 5 -10 % from the speaker invest may be better allocated to the room, just as a rule of thumbs?

Nah - my room is pretty decent already.  I do use Audyssey (with the extra laptop software) for multichannel and Focus Fidelity for convolution in Roon just to even it out even more, but didn't really need to do much.  

 

Oh, and I bought a Klimt-themed sound-dampening room divider to break up reflections off my brick fireplace - works a treat.

[yamamoto2002]

1 hour ago, jhwalker said:

Oh, and I bought a Klimt-themed sound-dampening room divider to break up reflections off my brick fireplace - works a treat.

 

The Klimt came to Japan in a traveling exhibition, and I had an opportunity to appreciate it, it is masterpiece👍🤝

 

 

[MarcelNL]

I fail to understand what the 50K benchmark means?

 

In my system approx 70% went into sources, 20% into speakers and 10% into cables from the point where the mains come into the house.

[botrytis]

I try to listen as objectively as I can, which as you all know, it is pert-near impossible to do.

 

Current system, over 6 years I was putting it together, I looked at sales, etc.

 

Speakers and subs - under 5K USD

Integrated amp - 3.5 K USD

DAC - 1.2K USD

Cables (balanced also) - 250.00 USD

 

I will let you do the math. 😁

 

My wife and I are happy with the way it sounds and honestly, that is all that matters, anyhow.

 

If you want and can spend the money. Go for it. I am happy with what I have.

[Newton John]

Electronics.   75%

Speakers.      23%

Cables             2%

[krass]

speakers 50%

amplification 25%

Digital (streamer, DAC) 20%

cables <5%

 

(50k+)

[firedog]

I'd put the vast majority into speakers. Get the absolute best (for your taste and your room) that you can budget. 

There is state of the art or near state of the art electronics available today for  relatively modest sums. A few thousand will do it. Certainly less than 10K possibly much less. 

The difference you will hear with better speakers will be greater than what you will hear with lesser speakers and more expensive electronics. 

 

And if the speakers you really like cost only 20k and not $40K - you can spend money on any electronics you want, even if you are just spending on better looks. 

[Newton John]

3 hours ago, firedog said:

I'd put the vast majority into speakers. Get the absolute best (for your taste and your room) that you can budget. 

There is state of the art or near state of the art electronics available today for  relatively modest sums. A few thousand will do it. Certainly less than 10K possibly much less. 

The difference you will hear with better speakers will be greater than what you will hear with lesser speakers and more expensive electronics. 

 

And if the speakers you really like cost only 20k and not $40K - you can spend money on any electronics you want, even if you are just spending on better looks. 

 

Firedog. That first paragraph in bold doesn't sit well with the last line of your signature:

"All absolute statements about audio are false"

😀

[Peter Bomberg]

@firedog you hit the nail on the head so to say.

 

I'm still evaluating but the speakers I can easily hear differences and improvements I am likely to get estelon XB Diamond or Focal Scala or B&W 802 D4. My wife is not happy with the Wilson Audio shape and not sold on the Joseph Audio Graphene.

 

I love the NAD M66 so unless I can detect issues it's the source. I'm looking at the PS Audio M1500 as tube inputs appeal to me otherwise Anthiem or M23 but that means 70-25-5 so I was wondering if I am missing something 

[Kal Rubinson]

19 hours ago, Peter Bomberg said:

I am curious if your cost is 50% speakers and 40% electronics + 10% cables or ??? mine looks lobsided with 70% main speakers and subs, 20% electronics and 10% cables.

I think your ratios are more than reasonable reasonable.

4 hours ago, firedog said:

I'd put the vast majority into speakers. Get the absolute best (for your taste and your room) that you can budget. 

There is state of the art or near state of the art electronics available today for  relatively modest sums. A few thousand will do it. Certainly less than 10K possibly much less. 

The difference you will hear with better speakers will be greater than what you will hear with lesser speakers and more expensive electronics. 

And that's why.  Despite all the noise, honest, accurate electronics are largely a solved problem (unless one wants custom flavors) while speakers and acoustics are not.  In fact, I'd suggest that all the 2-figure allocations for "cables" (a completely solved problem) be replaced by a significant allocation for acoustical design/devices.  

[PeterG]

I agree with the OP's ratios as a starting point, too often people try to economize on amps.  But two other important considerations.  First, you need to listen to the speaker/amp combinations before you buy.  Second, you might upgrade one sooner than the other, and that will throw off your ratios.  My ratios have typically been "off" in one direction or another because my last purchase has always been my highest end purchase

[Newton John]

25 minutes ago, PeterG said:

I agree with the OP's ratios as a starting point, too often people try to economize on amps.  But two other important considerations.  First, you need to listen to the speaker/amp combinations before you buy.  Second, you might upgrade one sooner than the other, and that will throw off your ratios.  My ratios have typically been "off" in one direction or another because my last purchase has always been my highest end purchase

 

Mine are off to some extent because I have twenty-year-old, long-discontinued loudspeakers, which would cost considerably more to replace now.

 

1 hour ago, Kal Rubinson said:

I think your ratios are more than reasonable reasonable.

And that's why.  Despite all the noise, honest, accurate electronics are largely a solved problem (unless one wants custom flavors) while speakers and acoustics are not.  In fact, I'd suggest that all the 2-figure allocations for "cables" (a completely solved problem) be replaced by a significant allocation for acoustical design/devices.  

 

Yes and one way to try to overcome the probems with speakers and acoustics is use a digital active crossover and extra DACs/amplifiers, which skews the cost ratio towards the electronics.

[krass]

1 hour ago, Peter Bomberg said:

@firedog you hit the nail on the head so to say.

 

I'm still evaluating but the speakers I can easily hear differences and improvements I am likely to get estelon XB Diamond or Focal Scala or B&W 802 D4. My wife is not happy with the Wilson Audio shape and not sold on the Joseph Audio Graphene.

 

I love the NAD M66 so unless I can detect issues it's the source. I'm looking at the PS Audio M1500 as tube inputs appeal to me otherwise Anthiem or M23 but that means 70-25-5 so I was wondering if I am missing something 

 

big differences between speakers even at this level…..

 

but I wouldn’t shortlist your amplification until you have speakers decided…. they really need to be “compatible”…. I had B+W 802s previously and found they really needed big amplifiers like Krell, Classé etc. They were woefully less when I tried them with mere 60/100W ‘normal’ amps… I don’t know the other equipment in your list though…

[Kal Rubinson]

3 minutes ago, Newton John said:

Yes and one way to try to overcome the probems with speakers and acoustics is use an active crossover and extra amplifiers, which skews the cost ratio towards the electronics.

I do not believe this is relevant.  Use of an active crossover and extra amplifiers has little or no impact on the acoustical interaction of loudspeakers with their environment.

[Newton John]

2 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

I do not believe this is relevant.  Use of an active crossover and extra amplifiers has little or no impact on the acoustical interaction of loudspeakers with their environment.

I'd invite you round to listen, but I presume we're on opposite sides of the Atlantic.

[Kal Rubinson]

5 minutes ago, Newton John said:

I'd invite you round to listen, but I presume we're on opposite sides of the Atlantic.

Thanks for the offer but, first, I'd neet you to describe how changing from passive to active loudspeakers can improve the spatial radiation pattern of the loudspeaker. 

[botrytis]

33 minutes ago, Newton John said:

 

Mine are off to some extent because I have twenty-year-old, long-discontinued loudspeakers, which would cost considerably more to replace now.

 

 

Yes and one way to try to overcome the probems with speakers and acoustics is use a digital active crossover and extra DACs/amplifiers, which skews the cost ratio towards the electronics.

Most of the times, it causes more problems not less as there is more to go wrong. Even DSP is not a universal panacea.

 

All audio systems are a compromise, period.

 

It still will not change the environment the audio is in as Kal has stated.

[cjf]

Speakers = 45%
Amps = 20%
Everything Else = 35% (There is a lot of stuff tucked under this one)

[bobfa]

Buy speakers that have the electronics in them and skip the rest of the math!  You cannot match things as well as the factory can!  

 

UNLESS the hobby is changing the parts around all the time.

 

 

[botrytis]

Can't go wrong either way.