Absolute best of the best sound system.

You can't really specify a "best." Everyone has different tastes and as can be readily seen here, no one agrees with each other.

That said, you really don't have to spend a million for great sound. I'm happy enough with an old pair of Quad ESL-63s. I'm building something more expensive (Linkwitz Orions), and am not 100% sure I'll love them, but I know the Quads will always make me happy. Those and about $3,000 of associated equipment (including DIY parts) would be enough to keep me happy for the next 30 years.

There are more important things to spend money on. Heck, I'd rather spend $5,000 and let the other $995,000 earn interest in a savings account.

You can't really specify a "best." Everyone has different tastes and as can be readily seen here, no one agrees with each other.

 

See, thats the big fun of audiophilia. It's never "the best" of "finished". It all depends on taste. It is all about the music and the emotion this brings, so more expensive is not automaticly better. It's all about what makes your ears tic.
 

With my father's B&W 800 Diamond and 2x Bryston 7B SST setup, I can point out no flaws. It's honestly perfect to me. I don't think I would get anything else.

 

I really do think it's a matter of personal preference. In the case of the system above...the sound just suits my tastes.

 

Using a low priced headphone analogy...I have a pair of Koss KSC-75 and had some B&W P5, and I far preferred the KSC-75. The KSC-75 cost $12, the B&W P5 cost $300. Cost doesn't tell everything.

Stop saying "personal preference" for gods sake, take a stand. Its so annoying when people wont say anything helpful except "personal preference". I'm sure there is a best of the best, but i don't know much about speakers.

you could reproduce respected mixing/mastering engineer's studio's - still won't sound exacltly like they mixed it unless you also include the mixing desk/console - kind of awkward/uncomfortable for lounging around

 

I've been to Bob Ludwig's Gateway studio, some members have Smyth SVS Realizer personalizations done at AIX

There was a really huge horn system that was built but I can't find the pics.  

Maybe the question should be changed to ask what setup each person responding would get if they had a billion dollars to spend on audio, so people stop talking about how subjective the word "perfect" can mean in audio.

my best answer . . .

 

Ha! It's true no setup can sound better than the real deal!

Now, that's waaaaaayyyy wrong,

 

• live performers can make mistakes
• Some music cannot be performed live
• you could have bad acoustic due to the geometry of the place
• you could have noisy neighbors...

 

A lot of times, you won't get the best sound with a live performance, but you compensate by having visual (and other sensory perceptions), thus making the experience better than what you get in you couch with your hi-Fi system. Best experience? probably. Best sound? sometimes.

 

For an unlimited budget Hi-Fi system, I'd split it between going to concerts regularly and have both architects and an acousticians design a room for the hi-fi system, and re-correct the room after the speakers have been installed.

 

Well, that can be true, but for one, if an orchestra is worth getting paid a million dollars(or however much would be equivalent of the perfect system) to play, they'd most likely(they better be) be able to make music without making mistakes. And if you had another million to throw away, you can get the best seat. And plus I'm pretty sure the acoustics for these music halls aren't half bad since they probably cost multimillion dollars to build them in the first place. But if you're still not satisfied, you can throw in some million dollars to improve the acoustics. Also, I don't think the music halls of such size as one shown in the picture would be just built on random place without consideration of location. e.g loud neighbors. And when you talk about noisy neighbors, keep in mind that perfect speaker/room setup is not exempt from the possibility of having loud neighbors either.

 

But yes, it's true some music can't be played live.

The point of diminishing returns is in the thousands, not billions.

I could spend more, but I won't. If I had billions about, I'd find a more efficient way of spending them. The high-end equipment would just transfer money to the manufacturer.

I would find a use with more social utility. Would it be better to spend a few million on speakers, or would it be better to endow some chairs at a university I attended and give out dozens of scholarships? Since the expensive speakers wouldn't sound any better than the ones that cost a few thousand, I argue that the social use for education would have the greater benefit.

What about developing several thousand units of low-income housing? How about starting a company that provided a lot of jobs? Or maybe providing free vaccinations for an entire small country? I'd have social utility while still enjoying good sound.

Which is what I do, but not on quite as grand of a scale. I could spend a lot more, but just don't see the point. Same reason I don't spend a lot on a car or other things where the law of diminishing returns kicks in hard.