Digital only stereo related, cost question

[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.  

[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.

[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. 

[Kal Rubinson]

1 hour ago, PeterG said:

I did not realize you could spend $40K on active speakers.  The most expensive I've seen are the B&Ws for about $5K.  Maybe B&O for $10-20K?  But with B&O you are paying a hefty premium for design, so I would not call those audiophile.  Please advise

I would not call these $90K B&Os "audiophile" either.  They do not succumb to audiophile foibles but are based on solid engineering and acoustical science.  https://www.stereophile.com/content/bang-olufsen-beolab-90-loudspeaker

 

[Kal Rubinson]

6 minutes ago, PeterG said:

On the B&O's--if you're telling me that they perform at about the same level as Wilsons or Magicos that I might drop $80-100K on, then I stand corrected, and acknowledge them as audiophile. 

I cannot argue directly with that point because I have heard the Wilsons and Magicos only at dealers and shows and I have heard the B&Os only at B&O and in my own home.  That said, I definitely preferred the B&Os and, if I were considering a purchase at that level, I would certainly gravitate towards them.