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.
bonhamcopeland

Showing 1 response by jmcgrogan2

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.....