[Jim R]

Speaker info (they were just a few inexpensive but high quality options off the top of my head)

http://www.gr-research.com (under DIY section)

http://www.magnepan.com (look up MMG's)

http://www.bottlehead.com/et/et.html (go down to Straight 8 info)

There is tons of info on these speakers over at www.audioasylum.com

 

[kelly]

What you want, ideally, is for each component to follow the line on the spending graph across until you see a sharp spike in order to get the next quality increase and stop before it.

The problems here are:
that chart is a moving target (technology changes, the market evolves)
the question of where those points are is a matter of subjective opinion
the chart varies when DIY or modded components are used
the chart gets confused by direct sales and lower distributer/retailer margins

So even if you knew the budget of your system and we could all agree (ha!) on where those points of diminishing returns are, the points would change quite a bit as technology moved, as more direct sales companies opened, as your resources increased (via HeadFi, other internet resources) and as you learned to do some things yourself. So... frankly, a book published 12 years ago isn't very relevant today.

And these formulars are naive and stuipid. So tell your dad he's stupid. And that if he keeps doing stupid things that you're going to grow up to be stupid too. Then make a sad face because you don't want to grow up to be stupid.

 

[andrzejpw]

Quote:

And that if he keeps doing stupid things that you're going to grow up to be stupid too.

My dad is not stupid by any means. He's one of the brightest people I know. He takes any problem, and solves it. It's just that he's NOT an audiophile, he's an engineer. He took 5 years of a sort of electrical engineering in his Polish high school(he went to a technical school before going to college). That's why he doesn't believe in this stuff. Heck, I'm slowly convincing him.

One other thing: why would I copy his mistakes?

 

[dvr]

It looks like we caught Kelly in a bad mood...

First he exaggerates our comments, then he put those comments in our mouths, then scolds us for having them.

I think these percentages are useful if you take them as a starting point. For example, if you wanted to make a Bloody Mary and someone offered to give you the ratios of Vodka, Tomato Juice, and Worcestershire in the best Bloody Mary they ever had, wouldn't that be useful?

 

[markjia]

Don't take kelly's comments so literally...he's just making a point (though perhaps not the best choice of words)...

As most of the others here, it is also my opinion that no formula can determine how much to spend on each component. As CRESCENDOPOWER put it earlier in this thread, "balance, and synergy are much more important than percentages". Speakers need to be paired well with an amp to give optimal results. This pairing is unique to all components and cannot be determined by any ratios. Not only that, but you also need to consider other factors, such as the acoustics of the room (a factor ofter ignored). I find that rooms with poor acoustic design are more demanding on the speakers rather than the amp (not to say that the amp is not important).

The bottom line is that you need to audition the system first before making any judgement. Percentages may be a good starting point, but cannot be used to ultimately determine the needs of your particular system.

 

[DarkAngel]

The 80% speakers, 20% rest of system is way off base if you are looking for truely great sound. (referring to regular 2 speaker stereo)

Until you get some real "class A" amp/preamp/source/cables I would spend 30% max of total budget for speakers. Once the rest of your system has truely high end gear (which will cost 8-10K+) then you can spend more for speakers. If you have a 20K+ total system cost you may have 50% tied up in speakers, but they can be properly utilized now because the rest of your system is reference grade, and a high quality sound is being feed
to these expensive speakers.

BTW my 10K Musical Fidelity system has 25% of total cost invested in speakers currently.

 

[aos]

I don't know about 30% max on speakers, I believe that the end of the chain (speaker/headphones) are THE most important parameter, and by far. 80% is too much though, but 50-60% is not unreasonable by any means. 30% would be way too low in my experience. But those percentages can vary a lot depending on particular model you buy and discount you wrangle out of salesperson, so it's tought to say what should they apply to - list price or actual price. I got my speakers for $1700 CDN, and I believe they list for $2500 US, that's a huge difference that'd screw up any percentage. And I'm using $700 CDN receiver to (under)power them, yet the fact is I'm running it for a year now and am still utterly amazed with the sound. I fiddle with the source (i.e. DAC) on literally daily basis, and I have tried 2 different cables that cost $100-200 but that's about it. I do want to get a proper amplifier but the money is an issue. I plan to spend about $1500 CDN on it which would make it close to 50% for speakers.

 

[JohnActon]

First off, I'm pretty sure that Kelly was joking; sounded pretty tongue-in-cheek to me. At least, that's how I took it.

Okay, all your theoretical percentages are crap; here's the "real" percentages: speakers - 100%, amp(s) - 120%, source - 100%.

Before you cry foul, listen to my reasoning. Let's say you have a respectable $1000 to spend towards putting together a nice system (integrated amp, CD player, speakers). You bring your CDs to some stereo stores and listen to stuff within your budget (~ $400 for speakers, $300 for amp, $300 for CD player - note that these percentages can be adjusted; as you'll see, it just doesn't matter). Inevitably, the sneaky sneaky dealer guy makes you listen to, in addition to the speakers within your budget, the $700 speakers. They kill the ones you were looking at. Likewise, he "suggests" you try the next amp up 'just to see what a little more juice'll do'. Of course, it's more effortless, transparent, etc. You are then forced to listen to a new, just released CD player that does HDCD, upsamples, blah, blah, etc, etc. IT'S better. So, you end up spending much more than you ever wanted to, and end up going into debt for six months. This is not really that dissimilar to all of us coming to head-fi for advice regarding the Grado SR-60 vs. SR-80 and four months later winding up with HD 600s, RS-1s, Headroom AND MG-Head amps.

Alright, seriously - I lean towards the "speakers are the most critical component" side of the fence (within reason). I recently helped my brother pick out a new integrated amp. We chose the Rotel RA-02 at $500 and 40 WPC. The dealer actually had the cajones to hook it (and the companion $500 CD player) up to Wilson Audio Sophias, via MIT Oracle cabling (total price ~ $20,000). It sounded AMAZING, and totally kicked the crap out of my system, despite the fact that my electronics are markedly better than the Rotel stuff. I actually cried a little on the way home. I'd say spend more on the speakers and save on the amp and CD player (caveat - make sure the room will support the speakers and make sure the amp will drive them). Then you can upgrade the electronics later, and remain confident that you won't have outgrown the speakers. Just my 2 cents, of course.

Disclaimer - keep in mind that this is more important at the lower end price-wise than at the upper end. A $200 difference when you're comparing $500 speakers or an amp makes a huge difference. When you get into $2-3000, it doesn't make nearly as much difference (diminishing returns). I bet that DA's PSB speakers sing driven by his Musical Fidelity/Bel Canto rig.

 

[Hirsch]

Quote:

Originally posted by JohnActon Okay, all your theoretical percentages are crap; here's the "real" percentages: speakers - 100%, amp(s) - 120%, source - 100%.

Hmm...my percentages only added to 200%, but you'd likely wind up with a better system this way

The real debate is not what percentage of resources to spend on each component, but rather how much over your initial estimate you'll wind up going to get the system you decide you really want.

 

[andrzejpw]

lol, Head-fi's new math!

 

[ashish]

Based on the above topic I had a question regarding some specific amp+speaker combinations.I wanted a opinion as to what will be a better sounding combination :

1) NAD C300 + B&W 602 s3 ( cheaper amp + costlier speakers )

or

2) NAD C350 + B&W DM303 ( costlier amp + cheaper speakers )

 

[taoster]

Quote:

Originally posted by ashish Based on the above topic I had a question regarding some specific amp+speaker combinations.I wanted a opinion as to what will be a better sounding combination : 1) NAD C300 + B&W 602 s3 ( cheaper amp + costlier speakers ) or 2) NAD C350 + B&W DM303 ( costlier amp + cheaper speakers )

can we take guesses or must we know what we are talking about.. assuming the first, my guess is no. 1!

 

[grinch]

Quote:

Originally posted by dvr For example, if you wanted to make a Bloody Mary and someone offered to give you the ratios of Vodka, Tomato Juice, and Worcestershire in the best Bloody Mary they ever had, wouldn't that be useful?

but you're wrong! skip the other **** and put the vodka in a glass with ice. now that's a drink..

 

[Hirsch]

Quote:

Originally posted by grinch but you're wrong! skip the other **** and put the vodka in a glass with ice. now that's a drink..

You'd dilute good vodka with ice?

Heathen!

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by ashish Based on the above topic I had a question regarding some specific amp+speaker combinations.I wanted a opinion as to what will be a better sounding combination : 1) NAD C300 + B&W 602 s3 ( cheaper amp + costlier speakers ) or 2) NAD C350 + B&W DM303 ( costlier amp + cheaper speakers )

The 350 has more features and more power, but overall I'd hazard that they sound fairly similar. Considering that NAD amps generally provide much more power than similarly-rated amps from other manufacturers, I'd get the C300 and better speakers.