Gear vs. Music investment. What's your ratio?

So for whatever OCD-riffic reason, I have this rule...

As long as my total hardware investment doesn't go beyond what I've spent in music, I feel like the hardware costs can be justified. That's just me. And the great thing about this absurd self-imposed 1st world consumer rationalization is that I can conceivably keep going on forever.

Or can I?

I've got to believe that folks who are lucky enough to own six figure+ systems have far exceeded what they've spent on gear than music. And I'm not knocking that or judging anyone. Because I totally get the quality vs. quantity argument. I just feel like a great system deserves a great collection and vice versa. I have an audiophile friend who's TT rig is simply stunning. He owns less than 100 LPs. It makes me sick. But more in the way of thinking he could be getting so much more from his turntable. His total spend ratio is in the neighborhood of 85% gear, 15% music (at best).

II don't keep a spreadsheet, but if I'm being totally honest right now about total cost - I'm at my limit: 50% hardware and 50% software. That bugs me. So one of my New Years resolutions is not to buy any new gear unless I have too. (see how long that lasts, junkie).

Curious if anyone has thought about their investment this way and what your ratio is.
Post removed 
I've never really done a price breakdown of my software side, so I don't think I could put a price tag on it. I am limited by space, so I have only about 600 LP's and 400 CD's. I tend to keep it at about that level even while buying more. That means that when I buy more software, some older stuff has to go to make room.
The same reason I've never owne planar or electrostatic speakers, floor space is at a premium. Now, if my family were to move out.....
It's near 1:10 especially if call PC HDD music and not equipment + add near 3000 of mint vinyls where vast majority are rare and hard to find makes my equipment investment look tiny.
it is hard to answer such a question. i would have to count my lps and cds, and attach an average price to each.

i think equipment and music purchases are independent of each other. thus the ratio is irrelevant.
I would guess around 1:12. I don't count LPs / turntables, since I no longer play them.
the more i think about it, Mrtennis is right.

even though i may have spent any ratio of software vs. hardware, it doesn't matter. i have way more personal investment into the music in terms of time, appreciation, and memory. and i'm less attached to the gear in these ways, so the overall value can't be truly compared. and like Marakanetz, i have quite a few vinyl gems that you can't buy online anywhere for any price. so i'm not sure a monetary scale is relevant.

maybe a better question would have to ask if anyone has ever felt like their collection wasn't worthy of their hifi and vice versa. i know i have felt both ways at times.
Why buy any music? I don't anymore.
My wife and I spend 10 bucks a month and have access to about 3 million albums on Spotify.(cd quality)

Spotify is not CD quality. 320 Kbps at the most if you have a Premium subscription at set it to 320 in the settings menu.

That said, it does offer an amazing amount of music at your fingertips. I use it to explore music and help me decide what I might want to get on vinyl. No longer do I need to cross my fingers when I buy an LP (well there are still pressing issues, surface noise etc...)
I prefer MOG. The sound quality is better IMHO. Also 320, but without having to buy their primo subscription. They likely don't have the same breadth as Spotify and they've been bought out by Beats Audio. So who knows what'll happen to them. I use it exactly like Roscoeiii does. It's been great for exploring and shortlisting vinyl purchases.

I agree that CDs and lossy downloads as they stand today will die out for general consumers because of 'the cloud' and other streaming services. There'll be entities like HDTracks and Pono for people who want high rez files without a physical medium. And vinyl is not going away for a long time.

But I will never switch to a 100% subscription based model. It's not even a feeling of ownership as much as it's: no connection = no music. server down = no music. annoyed hacker = no music. Maybe I'm paranoid, but clouds, subscriptions, etc., bug me because ultimately somebody else can flip the switch at anytime for any reason and your sans sonics. I've switched over to Apple TV/Netflix/Hulu and cancelled cable, but that's because I don't care about it as much. It's been 75% reliable.
I don't think it matters either, except in the case of people who have ultra expensive kit and a few test LPs/CDs. Then again, it's their money and none of my business how they spend it. I have about 2000 LPs and 1500 CDs and was clearly well out of space, with She who must be obeyed vetoing any more shelves. I have put my CDs on a NAS and can start buying a few more. With so many already, I only buy a limited number of CDs.

I remember on HiFi+, the editor some years ago saying, he only uses reviewers who spend at least as much on music as kit.
I recently purchased the Decca and Mercury Living Presence boxed sets, 50 cd's each set. The total price was around 240.00 for both. There is no gear that would come close to matching the value of that music investment!

Overall, I've spent more on gear. An expense ratio of one to the other never entered into the process of a purchase.