Balanced AV investment ratios

[csuzor]

Although a crude way to measure the correct balance of investment for "optimal value for money", can you all post the relative investment in different components in your system?

It seems to me, that my system is balanced, and upgrading a component would create a performance gap, that would need to be counter-balanced with additional investments! Sure, upgrading anything would benefit the sound, but it would not be used to its maximum potential.

audio source = 4%
video source = 3%
display = 5% (of minor importance to me)
processor = 14%
amp = 14%
speakers (5.0) = 55%
cables = 5%

Beyond this 100% hardware total, there is software = 30%

(This list is a little simplified, because I currently have an audio-only setup and a video setup, but it's relatively correct)

Room acoustic treatment is an obvious item I have not invested in, which will be done longer term (converting the garage).

Thanks.

[Tha Freak]

But the % of money spent on a piece of equipment is not signifiquent to the % of performance it can deliver ??

retail value or paid value?

also sometimes a gear paid 1000$ gives more benefic/satisfactory results than a 3000$ gear ?

[wildfire99]

Since we derive 70% of our sensory input from our visual perception, I suggest 70% goes to the projector. I'll chuck in an old RCA home-theater-in-a-box if someone brings a 3-chip DLP projector.

I don't believe in balanced spending. You spend on what you like. I prefer the visual aspect of a presentation. For films, most of the money goes to subwoofers and the projector (visceral impact and visual impact). For music, I definately try to spend more, but since my system is 90% HT 10% music, guess which components got the checks with the most zeroes.

I did overspend on the amps by a good margin, because I will keep them through several revisions of processor and projectors. Ditto the screen, and to some degree the speakers.

[Blazar]

speakers first and projector second or vice versa...

Clearly the most AUDIBLE and VISIBLE differences occur at the output device in this day and age.

I would prefer a $12000 pair of B&W 802D which I currently have and a $1000 amp than I would a $8000 pair of speakers with a $5000 amp.

Interconnects are only something worth spending any money on if the rest of the system is already godlike and you need audio jewelery. I tried every interconnect I had from long ago as well as junk cables that come with your VCR on 802D + Rotel 1095 + D/A conversion at 114db s/n ration. There was NO audible difference at any price point with a quality system with measurable excellent stats.

[jim777]

I would prefer a $12000 pair of B&W 802D which I currently have and a $1000 amp than I would a $8000 pair of speakers with a $5000 amp.

Funny, knowing that I would upgrade the amp, I would take 8000$ B&W's and 5000$ of McIntosh... oh that would sound so sweet.

[csuzor]

Interesting guys...

Blazar, with your 802D you have a 1095, so not quite a 12:1 price ratio, but still a long way from 8:5 ratio. I currently have speaker:amp ratio at 10:3, because I included all 5 speakers. If you include all your speakers (802D+HTM1+SCMS), it becomes 18:2.5 (~7:1). That is very different to jim777's preferred ratio...

wildfire99, 70% on the projector is awesome for the projector, but realistic? You say you overspent on the amps, so what is really your projector investment ratio now?

Tha Freak, I know what you mean, and these ratios are just to enable some comparisons. The more expensive the gear, the more outrageous these ratios get.

[jim777]

That is very different to jim777's preferred ratio...

I have a RCD-1072, a MA6500 and a pair of 703's. IMO, these speakers didn't sound so good on a RC1070/RB1070 combo, and with 800 series it was worse because you are sure to hear that jitter, that IMD, and all those other bad things (didn't try the RB1080). That gives me 45% speakers, 41% integrated amp, 10% source and 4% cables. If I get a good DVD player (Rotel or Denon) and a 720p projector, I think that it will add up to 32% speakers, 28% amp, 7% CD, 7% DVD, 4% cables and 22% projector/screen. It is more than most would put on the amp, but I think that for stereo, the MA6500/703's is a great combo and is worth it.

Not my fault if the 703, with it's FST, is such a good value

[jim777]

Since we derive 70% of our sensory input from our visual perception, I suggest 70% goes to the projector.

That would be true if a projector could give you a 360-degree sphere image all around you... (side, back, up & down..). That is also like trying to compare a 3000$ projector to a 3000$ surround sound system... kind of misleading

BTW, just joking, no mean thoughts.

[RebelMan]

Okay Chris, here is how it breaks down for me... (50%A/50%V)

display ~10%
audio source ~3%
video source ~3%
processor ~10%
amplifier ~5%
speakers ~66%
cables ~3%

As you can see, I choose to allocate my funds on what I believe delivers the most satisfaction. Lucas say's, the sound track is 50% of the experience. I say, you gotta have great speakers for double duty assignments, if you know what I mean.

[Fife]

Here is my current 50/50 asset mix:

Item MSRP Price Paid
Speakers 15% 18%
Subwoofer 3% 6%
Pre-amp 11% 5%
Amplifiers 12% 11%
Sources 26% 20%
Cables 3% 4%
Stands & Access 7% 6%
Projector & Screen 24% 30%
Total 100% 100%

[wildfire99]

Okay, so here's my ratio. Keep in mind I'm rebuilding the system now to be more... shall we say "wow".

Current System (In Progress -- totals indicate finished levels)

Amps: 15%
Processor: 9%
Speakers: 15%
Cables: 0.6%
DVD/CD Player: 2%
Scaler: 5%
Projector: 33%
Screen/Room treatments: 1.4%
Seating: 14%
Subs: 5%

Wiring is all DIY, including lamp cord. Seats are semi-permanent so they get some emphasis, the projector I expect to last 2 or more years, the speakers are DIY (probably Adire Kit 2641's). Processor will probably have to get swapped for an HD capable system within the next year, but it should have an upgrade path. Of all of this, 30% are things I do not expect to swap out/upgrade for at least 5 years, unless I simply have the obsessive need to switch, and of course 66% of it should be stable for 2 years at least.

My old system was as follows:

Amps: 2% (For the rear channels)
Receiver: 13%
Speakers: 24%
Cables: 1%
DVD/CD Player: 2%
Projector: 50%
Screen/Room Treatments: 2%
Seating: 3%
Sub: 3%

The amps, if inserted into the old system (which is what I meant by overspending... since I got them before making the bigger plans) would have been 40% of that total.

[csuzor]

Quite a range guys!
Fife stands out, with just 18% on speakers and 26% on sources... if it wasn't for the 802, I'd guess he should buy better speakers! Must be some great sources you have.
Rebelman, 5% on amp, you've been thinking about upgrading your amp for a while... your speakers are nice though, 66%!
wildfire99, with diy speakers, it really screws up this type of analysis, great value for money I'm sure.
jim777, agree with you, 703 are great value. I am sure I could more out of mine with a better amp... but better than selling out in favor of 804S?

For the moment, I am thinking of improving the family A/V system (denon + b&w), and just enjoying my personal audio system (mch rotel + b&w + sony). Even my wife, who doesn't care much for audio quality, was surprised how much better her CDs sound on my audio system. My audio system is "balanced" enough for now.

[jim777]

jim777, agree with you, 703 are great value. I am sure I could more out of mine with a better amp... but better than selling out in favor of 804S?

Don't know about your amp, but the 703 with a McIntosh MA6500 versus a Rotel RC1070/RB1070 wasn't the same speaker at all (even at low volumes). A pair of 803S instead of 703? can't know for sure, but I wouldn't upgrade any piece if it isn't a 2x upgrade in price (value), as I would never upgrade a computer if it isn't at least 2x the performance. I think that in such a case, better to keep our money for a bigger/other upgrade.

[Fife]

csuzor,
I am using Matrix 805 still.

This asset mix really is not comparative. Some of my equipment is less than a yr old while others are 5+ yrs old. Prices have dropped since then.
If I recall correctly, B&W Matrix 801 were about $5000 when they came out. The current price of N801 or 801D is :E
Thats the reason why I put in ratios for MSRP.
Maybe the best comparative ratio would be to use Prices on the used market which would be a better indicator.

If only I was able to permanently borrow the Zanden CD/DAC combo I heard last week, my MV ratio would be 99% sources and 1% everything else. :lol:

[RebelMan]

Rebelman, 5% on amp, you've been thinking about upgrading your amp for a while... your speakers are nice though, 66%!

For the moment, I am thinking of improving the family A/V system (denon + b&w), and just enjoying my personal audio system (mch rotel + b&w + sony). Even my wife, who doesn't care much for audio quality, was surprised how much better her CDs sound on my audio system. My audio system is "balanced" enough for now.

Indeed! The next step will be into Rotel's next pre/pro update of their RSP-1098 and a five channel mix of RB-1091 and RB-1092's amplifiers OR Bryston's upcoming SP 2.0 pre/pro and a possible combination of 6B-SST and 3B-SST amplifiers. Classe' is also on the short list but is not very realistic for me price wise.

There is another possiblity that I might upgrade my mains and center far sooner than originally planned. On the table are the 803D's and the 802D's with the HTM2D as the center side kick. While I am very pleased with the performance of my 803S's for movies I am far more critical about them while listening to music. I already know the 802D's sound better than the 803D's do. What I do not know is how much better.

My first encounter with the 803D's was less than satifactory. However, I believe I know what some of the culprets were. My next encounter will consist of not less than three critical sessions that will put the three speakers (803S's, 803D's and the 802D's) under VERY tough listening conditions. After all, if the 802D's end up THAT much better than the 803D's then I am going to end up making some living room compromizes. I am actually hoping the 803D's will be good enough so I won't have to make any room changes.

[aphexist]

What I paid (% of total system) for my home theater:

40% Speakers/Stands
15% Projector/Screen
15% Sources (Universal Player & TT)
10% Amp(s)
10% Processor
7% Sub
3% Cables

These percentages reflect my personal preferences fairly well. I obviously value speakers very highly. The only thing that isn't pre-owned is the projector/screen and the TT, which allowed me to buy outside my normal budget range.

After buying my first projector, I have seen how much a good display (not to mention HD) can enhance the experience, so I will be prioritizing that aspect in my future systems. As far as everything else, nothing is itching for an upgrade. I am totally satisfied and enjoy my system every day.

I can foresee setting aside some money for a HD DVD player, but I doubt I will be an early adopter.

[Duke]

Here is the break down of my set up.
Percentages for what I paid
electronics 26.22% preamp/amps
speakers 28.7%
Video/Accessories 30.26% TV/DVD player+Moster Power stuff
cables 14.9%
I am in a place where I am very satisfied with the system I have now. It has taken allot of reseach to get to where I am. It has been an education to say the least.