[MorbidToaster]

So I've heard of some people believing in ratios for cost of each component. Some people say your source should be the most expensive component, some say your cans should be. What do you guys think?
 
For example...My source is an SA8004 (soon to be just a transport). It comes in at a grand. My LCD 2, also a grand...but my LF was 3k.
 
Of course we all know that price =/= quality, but I feel that there are some situations where this reigns true.
----
 
I started thinking about this today when considering new TT and cart options. I was thinking about a Rega RP3 (comes in at ~$900) with a 2M Blue cart (comes in at ~$225). That would mean my cart is roughly 1/4 of my TT. Is the Blue going to cripple the RP3's potential? (Granted these aren't high ends numbers, but it's what got me thinking about it)

 

[n3rdling]

Before this thread turns into one huge bad argument you need to define what you mean by source.  People will take it to mean:
 
- CD players/DACs (digital)
- the above plus TTs and accessories (analog)
- the above plus recording quality
 
If we take it to mean only the first, IMO source makes very little difference compared to the transducer.
If we take it to mean the second, IMO source makes quite a significant difference in analog applications, in most cases more than the amp but less than the transducer.
If we take it to mean the third, IMO source can make all the difference as the recording quality has a huge impact on the sound, and can actually make a bigger difference than even the transducer in extreme cases.

 

[nikongod]

I would advocate breaking up your budget as follows:
100% source
100% amplification
100% headphones
100% "program material" I'm hesitant to say "music" knowing what some of the readers on these forums listen to....
 
If you happen to be particularly good ad finding deals you are NOT relieved of the obligation to spend that much on each part of the system. Sorry.

 

[sridhar3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
 
I believe Cardas Audio's emblem is based on a Fibonacci spiral.

 

[Chefguru]

 
Quote:

Before this thread turns into one huge bad argument you need to define what you mean by source.  People will take it to mean:
 
- CD players/DACs (digital)
- the above plus TTs and accessories (analog)
- the above plus recording quality
 
If we take it to mean only the first, IMO source makes very little difference compared to the transducer.
If we take it to mean the second, IMO source makes quite a significant difference in analog applications, in most cases more than the amp but less than the transducer.
If we take it to mean the third, IMO source can make all the difference as the recording quality has a huge impact on the sound, and can actually make a bigger difference than even the transducer in extreme cases.

 
This.
 
There is no ratio anyway, different transducers will require different levels of components to reach their true potential.  For instance a Grado hp -2($2000) might Only require a Gilmore lite ($200). But a Stax sr507 ($1000) might need a woo ges or better ($1500).

 

[nikongod]

Grado HP-2 requires a Melos. 

 

[basementdweller]

Every hobby is like this.  For those of you that enjoy firearms, there is a saying that you should spend twice as much on your glass as you do on a rifle.  I don't believe in any kind of rule regarding ratios, but I do find that if I spend a lot of money on one component I am more willing to spend like money on other components in the chain IF the other component requires it reach its' potential.

 

[antberg]

to me,folks,there are two different kind of "ratios" to be taken as account:
-you are rich so there is not really,in the practical sense,a ratio.you get the best source,dac,amp,headphone.
 
-you are not rich so you have to look,search,research,analyze all threads on the head-fi (like i did) to find your best solution to let your wallet survive.
Alain Ducasse ,one of the Chefs who`s history wont remember,sometime sad that a high recipe consist of 60% ingredient and 40% technique;
taking this as inspiration,i would say that in audio it is just a little harder,cause a good source with a good recorded music,a good amp,and obviously a good headphone are all important due to their function,anyway,to me is 40% hp-40% source-20% amp.
 
PS:looking again to the thread and the user post i am in doubt if i understood the question.

 

[vcoheda]

this thread may interest you:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/516090/how-much-have-you-spent-percentages

 

[obobskivich]

Personally I think that the most money/time/worry/what-have-you should be put into whatever is actually making the music; headphones, speakers, bone-conducting transducers - whatever. If you're talking about speakers, the location they're going to be set-up gets to be part of that equation (in other words, the room/field/barn/alternate-universe that you have, needs to be treated/addressed because it is unlikely to be perfect). 
 
After that, the actual music (this assumes you don't just have a single album that you're married to, and that you listen to lots of things - I cannot imagine buying a headphone, speaker, whatever to listen to a single album over and over again).
 
Amplification and any sort of playback equipment should be purchased to satisfy the above; whatever you need to play the music and drive the thing making the music. It does not have to cost an absolute fortune, and in most cases should be cheaper than whatever it's "playing." Extremely expensive amplifiers, CD players, etc are not worth it imho. 
 
 

 

[mrstrangeguy]

Quote:

Personally I think that the most money/time/worry/what-have-you should be put into whatever is actually making the music; headphones, speakers, bone-conducting transducers - whatever. If you're talking about speakers, the location they're going to be set-up gets to be part of that equation (in other words, the room/field/barn/alternate-universe that you have, needs to be treated/addressed because it is unlikely to be perfect). 
 
After that, the actual music (this assumes you don't just have a single album that you're married to, and that you listen to lots of things - I cannot imagine buying a headphone, speaker, whatever to listen to a single album over and over again).
 
Amplification and any sort of playback equipment should be purchased to satisfy the above; whatever you need to play the music and drive the thing making the music. It does not have to cost an absolute fortune, and in most cases should be cheaper than whatever it's "playing." Extremely expensive amplifiers, CD players, etc are not worth it imho. 
 
 

+1, though driving high-end things properly with amplifiers wouldn't be that cheap either
 

 

[PhoebeFairchild]

By far, my source component is the most expensive purchase in my audio system. I believe in the source first philosophy first and foremost.
 
Resolution Audio Opus 21 CD Player and Power Centre: $3,500.00 USD
Resolution Audio Opus 21 Extra Sources: $1,500.00 USD
Resolution Audio Opus 21 S30 Power Amplifier: $2,500.00 USD
Ray Samuels Audio Emmeline HR-2: $875.00 USD
Balanced Power Technology BP.Jr II Ultra: $700.00 USD
Balanced Power Technology 9 gauge Litz power cord: $100.00 USD
Cardas Golden Reference Power: $534.00 USD
Cardas Golden Reference Interconnect RCA: $816.00 USD
Sennheiser HD-650: $500.00 USD
Moon Audio Blue Dragon Cable for Sennheiser HD-650: $240.00 USD
DNM Reson RCA cable: $150.00 USD
 
Grand Total: $11,415.00 USD
 
To be honest and truthful, I traded my Audio Technica ATH-W5000 "Raffinato" headphones for the Sennheiser HD-650 headphones and the Moon Audio Blue Dragon Cable so that did not cost me any money, but I did pay full MSRP for everything else and I have the receipts as proof.
 
I think that this qualifies me to play in the high end audio sub-forum from time to time.
 
I would describe everything as reference grade audiophile quality components. It took me years to build this audio system before I joined Head-Fi last month.
 
I am going to purchase the ZU Omen Bookshelf speakers and I am going to purchase Blue Jeans Cable Belden 5000 Spades to Spades 10' long speaker cables. That should cost me an additional $1,300.00 USD.
 
After that, I am done. My focus will be to buy newly released music from my favorite musicians, artists, and bands, and composers.

 

[PhoebeFairchild]

Do you think that I might benefit further by purchasing the Sennheiser HD-800 headphones with the Cardas Headphone Replacement Cable for the Sennheiser HD-800 headphones instead of the ZU Omen Bookshelf speakers and the Blue Jeans Cable Belden 5000 10' long Spades to Spades Speaker cables?
 
I know that I love the Sennheiser sound as I used to own the discontinued Sennheiser HD-600 headphones with the Cardas Headphone Replacement cable years ago.
 
What do you think? My birthday is coming up next month.

 

[jcx]

"Audiophile" cables in general, headphone aftermarket replacement cables has to be the least "bang for buck" component category by any objective measure
 
its all "look and feel", expectation effect - you can't find  psychoacoustically valid tests showing audible differences, much less "ranking"
 
and actual "feel" - stiffness, microphonics is worse with most headphone recable products

 

[obobskivich]

Eh, depends on what you're driving. Doesn't have to be expensive; price doesn't dictate anything but price.
Quote:

+1, though driving high-end things properly with amplifiers wouldn't be that cheap either