Has anyone made the jump to $uper High end and were disappointed?

No regrets. 90% of my expense is the speakers. I agree that even entry level electronics is quite good. My setup sounds great with a mere iPhone plugged in.

As far as speakers, mine are most alike to Quad but with rock and roll dynamics. Designed with the Quad in mind or as a reference.

Harbeth are really nice in the mids too (one of my favourite mid ranges) but they don't quite hang together at high levels and the thin walled cabinets tend to have some resonances in the lower frequencies.

The crux of the matter will be if they are willing to submit their casual observations to the rigours of scientific methodology. I do not doubt that they genuinely believe that they hear the differences that they hear. The question is whether they can make this stick under controlled conditions. I once did submit myself to such a test, believing I would be able to distinguish between some quality but not exotic amplifiers. Just like everybody else, I could not. There have been many such tests, and they all produced the same result. It is a sobering thought, but also a cheerful one: good quality audio is affordable for many. Socially and culturally we can only rejoice in that.
The only expensive component is the speakers, and the reason is not hard to fathom: they operate on the interface between the electrical and the mechanical, and that is far more complex than designing a straight wire with gain. Just look at the measurements for distortion and frequency response and compare those with the same measurements for electronics.
Moreover, even good speakers have to play in imperfect rooms. So compare their response in an anechoic chamber or the open air, with their in room response, and you can see that you have your job cut out.

Art Dudley discusses this same subject in his "Listening" article in the latest STEREOPHILE issue I received yesterday. Check it out.

I just read a post on another forum, "Jeff's Getting a New Stereo". The Jeff is Jeffrey Fritz Editor-in-Chief of SoundStage. After several years he's looking to downgrade from a seriously expensive system. Don't get me wrong, by any standards he's still considering expensive components. The fact that he's concluded that the ultra expensive system isn't worth it, sure makes me think!

@Aberyclark > curious if someone made the leap and deep down realize the "expected" sound quality jump was not as much as the price jump.
> buyers remorse.
> It's not easy to just "flip" a super high priced component.

Blindjim > nice thread. Hope it gets tons of feedback. I’m wondering how many ultra high end flippers will chime in to begin with?

Yep. At those costs, flipping the stuff is a whole other bag of worms I’m sure. I’d need a big bottle of Tums.

I think an easier observation of ultra gear sticking around or leaving quickly are inside reviewers comments. Perennially I see reviewers say, “this ain’t leaving here!!” a few months later or later that same year, that piece is no longer listed as side bar gear and quite often no explanation of why it disappeared is written..

Superb! Gotta have it! Got it! Gone!

I resisted saying ‘wait! What? Purely for prejudicial reasons.

Its all exceptionally fascinating. Why folks migrate about on mega buck levels with audio equipment. I’d vote it is from boredom or ego. Mostly. Then for excellence, albeit pursuing excellence gets tabbed as the why of it when openly confronted.

It also sounds better than, ‘Because I could”.

Even that ‘threshold of or for diminishing returns’ is a subjectively floating point of entry. Or exodus.

@Willemj > The only component that really makes a big impact on the sound and is also expensive is the speakers
> Contrary to what many here believe there is no evidence that ultra expensive electronics have anything to add (let alone cables
> if you do not want to believe measurements, there is also the listening test

Blindjim > speakers are the ticket! Nope. Just part of it.

I’ll take your second inference to mean moving from one $50K amp to another similarly or higher priced amp sheds no greater light into the performance. Experience. Or listening event and as you said, many mass produced low or mid fi amps possess numbers and measure as well or better than the occasional first two years of college education or cabin near a lake costing, amps, sources, etc.

It begs the question then why then are so many systems with decent or incredible speakers not using entry level amps?

‘there is ‘also’ the listening test.

I apologize, but please, tell me exactly who is buying this or that regardless of price using something other than their ears as the final arbiter? Well, maybe their spouse’ opinion too.

I’ve been to my share of retail audio houses and not yet have I seen anyone dragging in an oscilloscope, meters, microphones and measuring tapes. Not one time.

“Also”? sorry. Try ONLY.

15 years ago I read here everything matters. I heard too, if you can hear a difference and are willing to pay for that difference, then you should.

Those statements are the best fundamental rules for achieving system synergy I’ve yet found. I would add as you said the synergy between speaker and room is of high priority, physically and acoustically, BUT it is not all of it. I just could not forgoe that bit on measuring being more important than listening, or associated gear not being AS instrumental to the end result, or we’d all be using X boxes and such to drive speakers.

Albeit I’m most curious as to those who the OP begs input from to add in their perspectives on where diminishing returns are in the uber high ranges of audio and just how much more was obtained or lost in this or that migration of gear?