Where is your point of diminishing returns?

Archguy

Official Roiurama Factory Rep
Where is your 'Point of Diminishing Returns' ?? The point at which an additional dollar spent no longer returns an additional dollar's worth of improvement?

For loudspeakers, for me anyway, astonishingly low. For me, about the price of a good set of bookshelf speakers, maybe 249 or 299. Obviously more if you need ground-shaking bass (I don't) and full disclosure requires me to admit that I now have five pairs of floor-standers all of which cost more than that--some much more.

Amplification--again, I'm a hypocrite. I have a couple of stupid expensive amps and several cheap ones. They all sound different! But no way are the expensive ones worth 20x what the cheap ones cost. Good God, I just did the math and in my house the actual multiple is over 125x. (Simply buying an even cheaper Chinese amp can readily double it to 250x!) Sorry, I say to myself, but there's something ridiculous about that. The sound out of the most expensive one isn't even twice as good as the cheapest. Sigh. Of course 1) sound is hard to quantify and 2) there are other virtues aside from sound quality--capability of driving big speakers, ruggedness, visual appeal, snob factor ;)

CD Players? No idea, but I can say that my Yamaha CD-S700 is no way and no how twice or three times the device a $149 player is. Fortunately I bought it used.

Where do you draw the line, anyway?
 
I'm open for anything.
My diminishing return start at the point where it either sounds "the same" or "different" - but not better.

I could be happy with some active bookshelf / monitors and a sub. Maybe not even a sub, depending on the room speakers. No pre, no amp, no nothin. Computer -> active monitors -> done

Since audio reproduction is always a suspension of disbelief, I don't feel the need to bring in the last 1, 5, 10% of "sound quality". I will just believe a bit harder and save 30K.
 
I have mid fi tastes, limited means, and a family, plus I rarely listen critically, so while I do enjoy a great system, a good one suits me fine. That being said, I'm having a hard time finding a set of speakers to replace my scavenged Altec A7s, as they really have something special about them. And while they were auction scores, their value isn't stratospheric.
 
Last edited:
Diminishing Returns? Sometimes I think the term is code-speak for "let's give the guy I think spent too much a razz." Not that you mean it that way - your post seems forthright.

When I figure out how to quantify a dollar's worth of improvement - I'd prefer enjoyment as the term here - then maybe I can calculate my point of diminishing returns.
 
I'm an advocate of being aware of the point of diminishing returns ( Not meaning it to be harmful in any way. ), but like has been said that point in entirely subjective. @musichal, @Andyman, @Archguy or myself, we are all going to have a different point of diminishing returns.

I think that the focus should be on getting the most enjoyment we can with whatever improvements we are comfortable with.

Mark Gosdin
 
speakers: For me, the point of diminishing returns had long been a two-way, acoustic suspension design sporting an eight inch woofer, such as the EPI 100 (which I owned back in the 1970's). There used to be a lot of people making something like that, but today, the only one I know of is the Human Speakers Model 81, which currently sells for $510/pair. Up til a few years ago, Cambridge Soundworks had their Model Six which sold for $250 a pair, though was often on sale for less. I've also owned and enjoyed the Bose 301 series V, still available and selling for $328.95 a pair (stands are $89.98). I have a feeling that if both the Bose and the Human Speakers 81 were in my house at the same time, I'd prefer the latter's acoustic suspension design over Bose's ported offering. If I'm in the market at some point, both companies' in-home trial period would make this sort of comparison fairly easy to do.

amplification: I've enjoyed music played by low-cost integrated amps such as from Marantz's PM5005 ($500) and PM6006 ($700). Spending more can get a person somewhat more involving sound (I'm thinking entry-level integrateds from Rega and Naim, as well as separates from Audio by Van Alstine), but often at the cost of features that, at present, I don't want to live without (balance control, tone controls, loudness circuit for low volume level listening), which can make the lower-priced Marantz gear actually more satisfying to listen to. The phono stage in the Marantz I owned a few years ago, the PM5003, was not as gripping as the one in my Audio by Van Alstine preamp (which has everything I want except a loudness button), so I would likely opt to augment it with AVA's stand alone phono stage ($500).

turntable: My point of diminishing returns was found a few years ago in the form of the Rega RP3. Were I buying today, it's quite likely the newer Planar 3 would get my money. I've owned Linn LP12's and a Well Tempered Record Player, and enjoyed them immensely, but the humble Rega gives me just as much listening satisfaction, compelling me to play record after record, something I couldn't say for the earlier Rega P3-24. Cartridge of choice right now is the Shure M97xE, and the afore-mentioned phono stage in my Audio by Van Alstine preamp is another important piece in the performance of this front end.
 
for me part of the hobby is finding things at a deep discount, whether online auction, estate sale, garage sale, etc.

i'm pretty happy with what i have, so really there's no need to improve, unless i can get something at a really sharp price.

Many years ago it was not an option to be frugal, I had to be. Now that I dont really have to be, I find it much more fun to look for the needle in the estate sale haystack than to just walk into a store and plunk down money. I find it so interesting to go to antique stores and swap meets and thrift stores to see all of the things I had no idea existed or to actually see something I had only read about.
 
Many years ago it was not an option to be frugal, I had to be. Now that I dont really have to be, I find it much more fun to look for the needle in the estate sale haystack than to just walk into a store and plunk down money. I find it so interesting to go to antique stores and swap meets and thrift stores to see all of the things I had no idea existed or to actually see something I had only read about.
exactly my feeling - you find tons of cool crap, and also things that you just can't get anywhere else.
 
I had monster system for many years that impressed all who listened; likely more for how it looked than how it sounded (although it did sound great). Through house moves and years bit by bit it got smaller and way less visually impressive yet, I still enjoy it. My goal is to devolve to a kitchen radio and still be happy with what I hear.
 
My goal is less about a point of diminishing return, but buying audio gear that gives long term satisfaction. I would rather buy it right and keep it rather than buying a dozen of something to have variety. But being a pig of limited means, well it means I look to the pre-owned market so I can get a higher level of performance for my dollar spent. It also means that when I can afford to move up to a better piece I can sell the old one at minimal loss. And that is how I have gotten where I am, with careful purchases that have been bought and sold, with additional funds added whenever possible to get the best I can afford. What I have found is that the point of diminishing returns moves higher as the system becomes more revealing. What seemed to be a ceiling before is moved once you get foundational pieces in place that sets the bar higher.

Regards
Mister Pig
 
The law of diminishing returns sort of assumes that perfection is an asymptote which can be approached, but never achieved.

How close do I need to be to this line, to feel that any further improvement is no longer of value to me?

This is entirely income dependent... To answer the question honestly, the sky is the limit: if I had the resources of Bill Gates, I'd have my own auditorium set up for listening to records. The room being the most important component.
 
The law of diminishing returns sort of assumes that perfection is an asymptote which can be approached, but never achieved.

How close do I need to be to this line, to feel that any further improvement is no longer of value to me?

This is entirely income dependent... To answer the question honestly, the sky is the limit: if I had the resources of Bill Gates, I'd have my own auditorium set up for listening to records. The room being the most important component.


Then again, you don't really need to be Bill Gates to do that - maybe in auditorium scale, yea... But else? I'd say with 5K and a normal sized room, you can get to 95%. 10K 99%.

Just saying: Genelecs or Adams, measurement s/w, room treatment - done. I can certainly do that for under 5K. And it will sound better than many audiophile setups!
 
Could it be that the laws of diminishing returns apply more to happiness level than money spent? Is Bill Gates happier with his stereo than I am with mine?


And that. I actively choose what I have in my living rooms. I have what I have because it makes ME happy. Its a mix of SQ, good old times, my father, love for technology, being outside the mainstream (Technics ain't Marantz, now is it?) and participating in forums while listening to music.
 
For me, its budget neurosis vs. storing pallets of stuff neurosis vs. Salvation Army donations, will they get damaged, neurosis. Diminishing returns doesn't enter into it.
I just try to keep a sain balance. A few hundred on a piece, about the limit.
 
Last edited:
Tough question to answer as, for me it all depends upon what's presented to me, how bad I want it, whether I think it's good value for the money, etc. IIRC I've never spent more than $500 on a pair of speakers, $500 on a turntable, and the all time high expenditure of $1500 on a pair of nicely restored vintage tube monoblocks. Most of the time I'm spending less though....
 
Back
Top Bottom