Are more expensive speakers better?

To achieve greater quality in ANYTHING typically requires more money and research. Whether or not the money and research are used wisely or in the most worthwhile or productive manner is another story. As you know, some things in high end are STRICTLY cosmetic based, which can add DRASTICALLY to the cost without doing anything for performance.

Bottom line: More expensive speakers ( or components for that matter ) SHOULD sound and measure better, but that is not necessarily the case. Every design involves trade-offs. Which trade-offs you can live with or can't live with is a personal thing. That is why audio is so "subjective". What you hear and like may be different than what i hear and like. Regardless of price. Sean
>

I walked away with a slighlty different take on what Pbb said. I "think" he meant that, due to their pricing, that the Vandy 5's, Maggie 3.6's, etc... were "mid-fi" in the eye of some "hi-enders". This pertains back to his comments that it takes $50K, $75K or $100K to achieve "state of the art" performance. If you don't spend this much on speakers, those people would in turn tell you that it was simply "mid-fi" because it was not on the "hi-end" of the price spectrum. To further bring the point home, Pbb also stated doubling or tripling your investment may not get you much in return, i.e. that the Vandy's may be able to hang with others in the $20K to $30+K range.

Maybe i mistook what he was saying, but i don't think that he meant to insult anyone or any specific models of products. He simply said to buy the best that you could afford. Sean
>

Natalie, i'd rather be smart AND rich. Unfortunately, i am neither. : ( As such, you guys are stuck with me until i can find some way to achieve both.. : ) Sean
>