My posts have been pertinent, because many audiophiles believe that by chasing vintage gear ( again, not speaking directly to parkergetdean’s philosophy of system building, as I do not know it) and spending far less, they can achieve sound quality on par with systems costing many multiples more built with current gear.
phusius, well thought out comments which I appreciate.
To your points, I do not condemn thriftiness in general. I am saying that it often impedes advancing the system. If the highest concern is getting better sound, then thriftiness is a problem because it shrinks the pool of potential products to build a system down to inexpensive, vintage, etc.
Correct, thriftiness is not to be equated to a person with a lower budget. That is why I stated that I have nothing against budget audiophilia. However, I was a budget audiophile because I was thrifty, not because I could not afford better gear. I was not convinced that more expensive gear was that much better. I never would have spent to compare better gear in my home because I thought I was getting sound close to the expensive systems. I only learned how expansive the performance spectrum is, and how far short I was falling, by handling better gear though reviewing. The experience of handling finer gear was a direct threat to my thriftiness! To reach a different plateau on the performance (and enjoyment) spectrum, I had to spend more and let go of the notion of diminishing returns.
There are many audiophiles who have high net worth and are thrifty. I have no judgement about any of that. I have budgeted for 40 years and strongly recommend it to economy audiophiles as a means to work toward a better system and higher satisfaction as a listener. However, regardless of one’s occupation, net worth, income, etc. being thrifty, i.e., looking to how little can be spent with building an audio system does not typically lead to higher performance.
Which leads to the comment regarding shows and systems. Yes, obviously there is quite a spectrum of performance of systems at shows. True, a person’s home system may be quite a bit better than some show systems. I have several times heard audiophiles - I think, following every show I have attended, I have heard or seen audiophiles comment that their system was better than all the show systems they have heard. However, that determination cannot be made apart from direct comparison in the same room. Many audiophiles presume to judge an entire show worth of setups, much less particular products, without hearing any of them in their room. I suggest the tendency to do so is motivated by thriftiness.
Absolutely, one’s resourcefulness and openness to options and new methods can have a huge impact on system performance, and often it can save the audiophile money.
I am not saying money is the most important variable in system building. It is an important variable. There are many other variables that have less to do with money which could be said to be as important.
Summarizing: Vintage gear is seen by some as a way to beat the system, to get the best sound on the cheap. I took the opportunity to discuss low cost gear and thriftiness, as the OP was about a vintage speaker. Thirfty people cover the socioeconomic spectrum. In absolute terms, being thrifty inhibits system building. The performance spectrum is far, far wider than most thrifty audiophiles are aware.
