Correlation: Money and Good Sound


Why do many equate throwing money around with the assumption that it will result in vastly improved sound? I realize this is relative...for example...many who have not heard the GMA Europas will not even consider them because of their affordability(under 1k)...this is just one example...are there any others where a reasonably priced product(1k or under) competes or surpasses those 2 to 3 times the price? I am sure there are numerous cables...but cables are vastly overpriced already...also...the next speakers up in the GMA line are roughly 5k and 7k respectively...just something to think about....it seems there are many who judge a product on its worth vs. actual performance...also...I will probably get flamed for this...but I do feel NAD intergrated amps compete very favorably with others at 3 three times the price...
128x128phasecorrect

Showing 1 response by stehno

I would agree with you. At least to a good degree.

Money does not guarantee superior sonic performance. But one can usually expect the more expensive products to at least have a potentially much higher build quality, visual appeal, customer service, and better warranty.

It's not so uncommon for a lesser valued system to do much more than just hold it's own against the very 'high-end' systems.

But to do so requires a great deal of homework, very thorough component mixing and matching, experimentation, and tweaks. And this can take years to accomplish.

Which reminds me of the addage, "The best thing that one can spend on their system is time."

Then there's always the addage, "One must spend a lot of money on this hobby to realize one need not spend a lot of money."

Which leads to the addage, "If you look upon bacon and eggs with lust, you've already committed breakfast in your heart."

-IMO