2. misc-audio
  3. 967138722

Price/performance curve

Hey you guys who've heard 'em all, could you help me understand the price/performance curve of audio equipment? I keep seeing people write about truly high-end gear and I'm wondering what the price points look like in terms of sonic improvement. So let's say that our scale is 0 to 100. 0 is basically white noise, 100 is you are sitting in the ideal spot at your favorite symphonic hall/jazz club/blues or rock forum and nobody in the audience is even breathing too loudly within audible range. For the sake of some reference point, let's say a decent boombox is about a 15, a decent set of components (say Sony/Pioneer/JVC electronics, Boston Acoustic speakers) chosen from your local mainstream audio outlet is a 30 and a decent set of entry-level components made by more musically inclined manufacturers (NAD, Paradigm, etc.) in the $1,500-2,000 range is a 50. What do the price points look like as you go to 60, 70, 80. 90 and 95+? I ask because I see people spending vastly different levels of money on this stuff and, while I don't expect to ever spend in the high five figures that some of us have doled out, I'd like to see where this road leads.Suggest alternatives on the scale if you like. I'll bet you all have some very interesting answers.
nichael7dd8
treyhoss
287 posts
 
BTW: If we couldn't assemble systems that didn't sound good for under $10K, this hobby would only consist of wealthy people. I have had the opportunity to recently listen to a $100K sound system, in a great room. While I enjoy my system, which retails for around $10K, it sounds like great "reproduced" music. The great high $$$ systems sound "live" - kind of like the difference between a great TV and an HDTV. The realism of the playback is such that if you close your eyes you are "there", listening to the performance wherever it was recorded. You don't have to be wealthy to get a great sounding system but you do have to be patient - unless you win the lottery. That's what I mean about the "journey" - and since I've got two small children - it may take a while! I just hope I get there before I get old and deaf!
onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
5,137 posts
 
Tubegroover, my room is 33 feet long by 14 feet wide with mostly 8 foot ceilings (a third of the room is 8.5 feet). The main speakers are placed about 15 feet down the length of the room and the subs are located behind the listening position in corners. The listening chair is 6 feet from the wall and 9 feet from the plane of the speakers. With this setup the speakers are 18 feet from the wall behind them. If I didn't use subwoofers, the free space placement of the speakers would start to roll off bass at around 60Hz. The system would sound clean, but light weight. The subwoofers eliminate this problem. The overall bass response extends relatively smoothly down to 20Hz (there are small measured humps at 31.5 and 63 Hz, plus a deeper narrow band dip at 50Hz).
sedond
1,387 posts
 
i find it interesting that the *room* has come up in this thread so much, & i think that's a good thing, cuz, imho, the room is the single-most-important component of an excellent system. my listening room is ~25'x38', w/8.5' ceiling, & it is by *far* the main reason i get good sounds from reproduced music. it allows *real* bass from a good subwoofer set-up, among other things. and, ironically enough, i find this more important on simply-miked acoustical music than, say, reggae, for instance. also, a lot easier to get a good soundstage in a large room - less speaker interaction w/walls/furniture, etc. re: how much $$$ will get you how close to "100" an a scale of 0-100, i can't really say, but, for example, if $10k will get you to 80, then i think it would take $20k to get to 85. that being said, i would rather listen to a $10k system in a room my size, then a $20k system in a room, say, 12'x18'... so, improvement of sound vs dollars spent is largely room-dependant. doug
michaelb
39 posts
 
Here's what I've learned so far 1) performance is as much room-dependent as it is system-dependent, once you reach a certain part of the performance curve 2) the "percentage improvement" scale is valid only up to a certain level, which may be somewhere between $5K and $10K 3) the scale itself does not reflect the qualitative differences between a very good system and an outstanding system, which shifts the overall effect into a whole different realm of experience. So adding it all up, I'm concluding my question probably is applicable only in systems below a price point of some debatable level. Is that a fair summary?
tubegroover
2,320 posts
 
Overall I think you sumed it up well from my perspective but would add the fact that a good room is the wild card in the equation. It can transform a very good system into an outstanding one. Outstanding components and a mediocre room will not equate to an outstanding system.
More to discover