I'd budget a bit more than the price of a private inlay each on a player and amp, the price of a couple of inlays on speakers, and the price of a white filling or two on cables.
Want a TV too? You're into a crown or two, there...
Having just recovered from going to the dentist last week, I'd say the cost of one hour with the hygienist should more than cover the cost of your next telly. And it'll be a helluva lot less painful...
Gentlemen, please, I'm sensing more than a little sarcasm here!
Andrew, you've got your sums wrong: surely the more inlays are required on the source and amp than the speakers. Incidentally, would you delve around in someone's mouth for less than a pair of Wilson Benesch?
In a stereo system yes I'd agree on the source first, amp second, speakers third, but in an AV system where you have to buy five (or seven) and a subwoofer, I'd suggest the speakers should cost rather more than the amp.
And the value now available on DVD/Blu-ray Disc players suggests you can spend less on these than you do on the amp, without having a detrimental effect on quality.
As I'm currently suffering from an acute case up upgraditis, does it make more sense to splash out on speakers which are way better than my budget amp or vice versa, quality amp into budget speakers? I don't want to compromise by splitting the cost between the two components as I'll be back on this forum in a few months (having placed a few more inlays) looking for advice on what to upgrade again.