Sweetspot price-performance in HiFi?

TB303

New member
May 26, 2008
16
0
0
Visit site
Hello People,

I'm working on my first 'proper' hifi set up and find it hard to decide how much to spend.

Speifically I understand taht the higher up you go in terms of gear cost the more diminishing returns you'll see.

Case in point a streamer,

I've been looking at a dedicated streamer and considered teh CA Stream Magic 6 (£650) - theres a new version coming later this year - it's very good but then I heard the Linn Majik DS (£1400 ex-dem) and it sounds fantastic, especially as I managed to hear it together with the rest of my future system (Classe CAP2100 and B&W CM10's). BUt then there's teh Linn Akurate DS (£3150 ex-dem) which is even better... Obvoiusly I don't have unlimited fund and the CFO is watching like a Hawk.

My question is about teh relationship betwen prioce and perfoirmance.

Let's say the CA Stream Magic 6 is good and the Linn majik DS is twice the cost, does it sound twice as good?

And wil the Akurate DS sound twice as good again?

Please do share your thoughts,

Thanks.
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
13
0
Visit site
I have found that (all things being equal), you need to double the cost to get a "worthwhile" improvement....but this seldom gives an improvement which is twice as good.

In the case of the Linn DS for example, I would rather get an MDS than an ADS, if it meant making too big a compromise on the amp....as someone said on here today, it's a jigsaw puzzle, which if put together wisely, will bring great reward.
 
D

Deleted member 108165

Guest
I can only comment on my purchases over the last two years; all Marantz. Went from PM/CD6004 + MA BX2 & 5 to PMKI/SAKI Pearl Lites + MA RX2. Most definitely not twice the improvement; the biggest noticeable improvement came with changing the speakers from RX2 to PMC DB1.
 

Esra

Well-known member
Feb 20, 2011
59
19
18,545
Visit site
Personally I didn´t realized much differences in Streamers if you already have a Dac you like.Most important for me was usability with big screen and stable software.I found this in Logitech SB Touch which is sadly discontinued.

If I had to buy new I would probably go with Pioneer N-50 or Simple Audio Roomplayer 2 if there is not a seperate Dac or Sonos if you have Dac.
 
I think the sweet spot is an individual thing. Same with, say, cars, or houses, you get the best you can afford (or at least I do!). Maybe not literally, but the best balance for you between cost and what you perceive as the merits.

In audio there is surely no particular level. In the last few weeks I've read threads here from people spending under a hundred quid for an 'all in one', and others spending much more on cables.

I disagree about spending most on speakers. They certainly make the most obvious difference, transducers always do, but the are not necessarily the things to spend most on. The wider you open the window the more muck flies in, was once an apt explanation for that! Balance is what matters. And streamers can outperform their price points, speaking also as a Squeezebox user.
 
D

Deleted member 108165

Guest
Matthew, thank you, sir.

As for comparing, that's a good call, I could do this as I still have the PM/CD6004 boxed-up waiting for my sister to finish decorating before she takes these off my hands.

As for my current system, my music collection is around 50% 70's-90's pop music so I think this is about as far as I dare go up the hi-fi ladder as I find the Pearl Lite + PMC can be a little too revealing at times, (detrimentally). However, it has also had me in tears on certain tracks as it sounds so beautiful, (this, alas, does not happen that often as the sweet-spot appears to be about 75dB peak and I value my neighbours friendship).

Doug
 

RobinKidderminster

New member
May 27, 2009
582
0
0
Visit site
To muddy the waters but agreeing with previous, IMO the room size, acoustics & layout is always a limiting factor to any system. I think I would gain little if doubling my expenditure since room effects limit the overall system sound. The better the room the greater gains in spending more money. Balance & appropriate system matching is more important than expenditure.
 

Andrew17321

Well-known member
Nov 12, 2008
24
2
18,525
Visit site
RobinKidderminster said:
To muddy the waters but agreeing with previous, IMO the room size, acoustics & layout is always a limiting factor to any system. I think I would gain little if doubling my expenditure since room effects limit the overall system sound. The better the room the greater gains in spending more money. Balance & appropriate system matching is more important than expenditure.

Having retired to a house with smaller rooms and using the same music system, I can agree that this is true. I suspect a cheaper system would sound as good in my current house (maybe better?)

Andrew
 

Teo

Well-known member
Nov 13, 2013
95
8
18,545
Visit site
Many interesting and right points here , if not taken as final decision they don't exclude reciprocally ...wich makes judging things more ...interesting :)

I have a limited personal experience ,but I can say try to buy best gear you can find at discounted prices ( ex demo , preowned , ex display ,stock clearance ) if possible keeping some warranty ,of course . you'll be able to access gear you can't afford otherwise at a pocket friendly price . Double satisfaction. Of course , all the things as system matching ,etc , are not excluded . I am happy now with my recent speakers upgrade , it revealed that the front and midddle of the chain had more reserve of performance than I thought. Revealed also the weakness of my Phonostage wich has to retreat someday soon.

As for the price/performance sweet spot , probably it is very pocket dependent , and subjective ... also , I don't know if this is the same for speakers , amps and sources ? Probably keeping a balance in the amp power and speakers dimensions relative to the room size can bring your price lower

One question from pure curiosity , never listened one : why streamer and not other solution ( CDP ,TT )?

Cheers,
 

matthewpiano

Well-known member
RobinKidderminster said:
To muddy the waters but agreeing with previous, IMO the room size, acoustics & layout is always a limiting factor to any system. I think I would gain little if doubling my expenditure since room effects limit the overall system sound. The better the room the greater gains in spending more money. Balance & appropriate system matching is more important than expenditure.

Nail, head, hit.
 

matt49

Well-known member
Apr 7, 2013
51
1
18,540
Visit site
A couple of generalizations.

I find the idea of a price sweet spot most useful when looking at a particular manufacturer's range. Some manufacturers provide their best value with their entry-level kit, some with their mid-range stuff, and others with their top end.

A qualification: in most ranges, the item at the very top of the range is relatively poor value. Often it's designed for consumers who have to have "the best" just because it's there, but in fact "the best" isn't much (if at all) better than the items just below it.

Another qualification: fixed costs can make entry-level items relatively poor value. It's a bit like wine: that bottle costing £3.99 has a whole load of fixed costs (the glass bottle, label and closure, transportation, warehousing, duty) which are exactly the same as for a bottle costing £9.99. In other words, the fixed costs make up a much higher proportion of the £3.99 bottle than of the £9.99 bottle.

Matt
 

Covenanter

Well-known member
Jul 20, 2012
85
29
18,570
Visit site
matt49 said:
A couple of generalizations.

I find the idea of a price sweet spot most useful when looking at a particular manufacturer's range. Some manufacturers provide their best value with their entry-level kit, some with their mid-range stuff, and others with their top end.

A qualification: in most ranges, the item at the very top of the range is relatively poor value. Often it's designed for consumers who have to have "the best" just because it's there, but in fact "the best" isn't much (if at all) better than the items just below it.

Another qualification: fixed costs can make entry-level items relatively poor value. It's a bit like wine: that bottle costing £3.99 has a whole load of fixed costs (the glass bottle, label and closure, transportation, warehousing, duty) which are exactly the same as for a bottle costing £9.99. In other words, the fixed costs make up a much higher proportion of the £3.99 bottle than of the £9.99 bottle.

Matt

When I was working in the West End many years ago I had a secretary who had been admiring a dress in the window of a Bond Street shop. It was several hundred pounds and she was always talking about how much she wanted it. Then one day she came in and said that the shop had a sale and that the dress was now priced below £100. I aksed her when she was going to get it and she said she wasn't because "... it doesn't seem so attractive anymore".

Just a story ...

Chris
 

matt49

Well-known member
Apr 7, 2013
51
1
18,540
Visit site
Covenanter said:
When I was working in the West End many years ago I had a secretary who had been admiring a dress in the window of a Bond Street shop. It was several hundred pounds and she was always talking about how much she wanted it. Then one day she came in and said that the shop had a sale and that the dress was now priced below £100. I aksed her when she was going to get it and she said she wasn't because "... it doesn't seem so attractive anymore".

Just a story ...

Chris

A good story, and not just a story: it's an example of a Veblen good. Reduce the price of an item, and people's preference for the item reduces too.

Matt
 

jjbomber

Well-known member
TB303 said:
but then I heard the Linn Majik DS (£1400 ex-dem) and it sounds fantastic, especially as I managed to hear it together with the rest of my future system (Classe CAP2100 and B&W CM10's).

Go for that. Anything less and you will be disappointed and end up having to upgrade later. That means that you will pay twice to get what you know is right in the first place.
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
13
0
Visit site
jjbomber said:
TB303 said:
but then I heard the Linn Majik DS (£1400 ex-dem) and it sounds fantastic, especially as I managed to hear it together with the rest of my future system (Classe CAP2100 and B&W CM10's).

Go for that. Anything less and you will be disappointed and end up having to upgrade later. That means that you will pay twice to get what you know is right in the first place.

It's good logic; so good in fact, that I have often used it to convince myself into spending more That, and "you only live once".

Mais je ne regrette rien!
evil.png
 

TB303

New member
May 26, 2008
16
0
0
Visit site
Hello,

I had a chance to compare the Majik and Akurate DS with my future system (Classe CAP2100, B&W CM10), I spent almost 2 hours going back and forth with various music I know well and I have to say there was very little difference sound-wise...

Maybe slightly better detail and soudstage but it was really hard to notice teh diferenca nd frankly I doubt I'd ave noticed taht in a proper double blind test.

So for me the ADS isn't worth the extra £1,700 over the Majik (both ex dem), but I'm almost disapointed I didn't really hear any noticable difference, I hope my hearing is fine... ;-)

One I get the system working the room sorted maybe I'll get an DAS for a home demo, but for the moment not much difference, to my ears.

Thanks,
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts