Did your system getting better the more money you spent or more experience you gained?

The ultimate goal coincide then with the ultimate pleasure in audio : learning acoustic and listening music...

Not buying, even if buying a new piece of gear is fun when it is necessary....😁

I’ve been at this hobby for 55 years. I built my first amp, a Dyna 70, when I was 14. 
 

I was born on the wrong side of the tracks. So I’m a cheap rat bastard.
 

I believe the system I have built up over the years stands up to 98% of the stuff out there. 
 

see

@asctim wrote:

Experience saves me money. Ultimately I can get better sound if I spend more but I have found there’s an upper limit to my ability to enjoy. Once the sound quality reaches a certain threshold I’m basically there, so no reason to push it further. Mostly what drives me to try new things now is just curiosity. What will it sound like if I do something novel? Even if I limit myself to moderately priced components, experimenting can get expensive quickly. And that’s where experience comes in again. I’ve learned to think more and build less. Think about every reason why I shouldn’t try something, and be as sure as possible there’s not a better way to do it before I actually start ordering stuff and cutting wood. Thinking about assembling a new system can be as much fun as actually doing it! Meanwhile I'm blissfully enjoying my current system, occasionally trying a minor tweak that doesn't require me to buy anything. 

Well put. I very much share your sentiments and approach here. 

I actually shaved off substantial cost buying my current main speakers a few years ago, while at the same time converting from passive to active configuration over the mains (the subs were already actively configured) and later replacing my 3 different brand power amps (mix of class A and class D variants) to similar brand/series ditto (all class A/B). The Xilica DSP I had over the subs to begin with, and with enough channel outputs I just needed an extra power amp to configure to whole frequency range actively. That turned out to be a wise move, if I may be so immodest (that is: there was a clear rationale behind it, but it was an experiment as well, so the outcome was hardly given); substantially better coherency, added resolution, a more uniform sphere of sound, added physicality with a more visceral imprinting, and better height of presentation with a more realistic sound stage overall. 

The thing to learn from the above is how and where to invest your money, and not - as an outset - how much you're spending. Sometimes there's only so much that can be done within a given narrative, design approach and configuration. Implementation is still key, it always is, but at some point you start seeing limited gains with the upgrades and endless tweaking of a certain pathway, and ultimately more money isn't going to solve the main problems inherent here. For these to actually be addressed one needs to look outside an approach previously taken, and this is where new ground and experimentation comes to the fore. That's the very exciting part, and much time with research in design variations and their configuration is invested by me here. 

So, instead of pouring ever more funds into a perhaps stubbornly held approach of thinking audio, change the narrative and vantage point, and in doing so one may well end up saving loads of money while seeing significant improvements across the board. Only then do you can start refining the new approach even further, but only so much to prepare for what lurks around the next corner.. 

Knowledge has been far more important than money spent. In some ways it's an inverse relationship.

@phusis @asctim yes i am at a point to where any changes or upgrades at this point will only minimally improve my sound. I am at a great place right now. I have my system dialed in to how I like it and it aligns with my listening preferences and type of music I listen to.  I find that when you have experience and you gave the money to get what you want then that’s where that knowledge really kicks.  It becomes less improvements and more takeoff the higher you go! 

OP,

Congrats, I am in the same place. I truly loved the journey… although if I knew how much money I would have at this point in life I would know I would be spending to that level. 
 

It is very satisfying to have such a great system and time to appreciate and enjoy it.

My 2 Cents being an Audiophile for 50 years.

Definitely better with experience.

Took some time to gravitate to an all tube system.  Well worth the effort.

Took some time learn the advantage of belt driven, Oil bearing turntables.

Took time to learn that Moving Coil carts really sounded better than MM.

Took time to learn that high efficiency (>91 dB) speakers are easier to drive, but perform best in 4 Ohm mode for best sound.

Took time to understand necessary room treatments and apply them correctly.

Took time to realize you don't need to spend a fortune to get great sounding equipment!  (most recent purchase - Schitt Skoll Phono Stage at $400 sounding better than $2K C-J EF-1 Phono)

Took time to realize its best to purchase equipment used off Audio-Gon.  Let the well healed pay for the depreciation in the first few years.....

Lastly - Its always about the music!  Enjoy as often as you can!!  Life is short.

@ghdprentice man I’m blessed. I work for Infigo Audio now.  A brand I believe in and makes up my system.  It has allowed me to have this high level system and hours and hours of listening joy.  Doing this is fun not real work. 

I believe I was seriously restricting my opportunities to build a good sounding audio system, when I was a stut myself away in a room listener to music produced from a dedicated audio system.

As good as 20 + years ago this changed.

I chose to be much more interactive and social in audio related activities. 

It is the social activity that introduced me to mentors, fellow enthusiasts showed to me systems I was in awe of, I learnt of the dream that some very respected individuals had designs for in their own set ups. 

I am not upset with decisions made in the Company of others, they have proved to be economical and very very attractive for their meeting my needs. 

There will always be something better than you have. Once you think yo’ve got there you’ll bet bored and want more. Learn to be happy with what you have.

The fact that there is better gear than mine dont means that my optimized gear system cannot give me the minimal acoustical satisfaction threshold....

When you get this MINIMUM acoustic qualities level you forgot sound so immersive music is...

If you cannot get it with a relatively low cost system , it is either a bad synergetical choice of gear pieces or it is a lack in the mechanical,electrical and acoustical workings controls...

I dont need to learn to be happy with my low cost system BECAUSE it is well chosen well embedded system under my control, then my system makes me happy and  then it is not a stopgap i am in the obligation to live with... No frustration in me  , on the opposite , i pity many who give away more money for not really better sound... And trust me they were numerous...My system value is 1000 bucks...

Knowledge is key not price tag...

Better gear is not the key, but knowing how to use any system at any price at his optimal level is...

Acoustics dont change his principles, nor the mechanical and electrical science  because we upgrade a piece of gear...Any piece of gear must be optimized at any price... No speakers beat their room and they all suffer from resonance ... No amplifiers can replace the electrical grid of the house...No interconnect can work without picking interferences ... Etc  Then adress that BEFORE upgrading ...And call that the key....

There will always be something better than you have. Once you think yo’ve got there you’ll bet bored and want more. Learn to be happy with what you have.

@skinzy i agree with you. I’m now at that point. Can I get better maybe but at what cost.  I got synergy because of all my electronics gear and cabling are from the same company. Built on eliminating noise and providing clean musical power and music performance.  I have a great speaker that I researched extensively before I bought.  I even saw what other things the designer did before I bought them.  Gato in Denmark. I’m happy. Infigo electronics and cables. Gato Speakers. Rel subwoofers.  Happy! 

Question’s a bit of a red herring since it’s not all encompassing of what can provide satisfaction (money vs. learning) in a playback setup. Both of those factors are inextricably linked to time, so they’re also not mutually exclusive, which some other posts did mention.

A better system is a product of how satisfied you are with it. Is it too strange of me to say anyone should be able to get there without large expense OR an engineer’s / marketeer’s knowledge of audio kit?

To me, smart devices that stream into affordable IEM’s are “better” in so many ways. High-end stereo kit and the folks who’ve come and gone along with it have been fun for me, but to be honest, to me the “better” system would be one far more modest than my present setup. Dang. Stupid love of live music paving the way for over-budgeting and learning superfluous technical info… 😅

@benanders we all have different budgets, experiences and mindsets. Get to where you are happy and enjoy the music. 

Good attitude. I’m there, have been for a few years now. Just wish that, like many people in this world, it had taken far less to tick that box for me. 😉

Knowing when to quit should be a large part of being an audiophile.

@frankmc195  +1

The industry is designed to keep us always searching for more.  Then it makes it extremely difficult to get there (inefficient market with imperfect access to information). 

Synergy is a key element when putting together a system (at any price).  It's difficult for any audiophile to have heard a large enough quantity of gear to know what works with what.  This is where a good trustworthy and experienced dealer comes in.  Most successful dealers have the opportunity on a daily basis to hear and assemble many different components in the context of systems.  Befriend a dealer you can trust, and you'll be grateful you did. 

You are right completely ddgtt...

The problem is that synergy is only the starting point line ... We must learn way more to create a good system/room/ears experience ....

Synergy is a ghost and you will never know if you're there.  My first high end amp was a new Audio Research design with matching preamp.  After a couple of years I upgraded the pre to an Aesthetix Calypso.  Huge improvement in SQ.  One would have thought AR components would have the best "synergy"?  I have never seen a dealer who carries all the components I want to evaluate. Their experience is limited to the brands they carry.  They want to make a sale.

Synergy is defined as compatibility ...

It cannot be defined as the "best" possible component in relation to another component...

You need acoustic room condition optimal anyway to judge a system synergy ...

For many synergy is an end of the journey because they focus on the gear,not surprizing if they realize synergy defined as the optimum it is a gost ...But the gear synergy is only a starting minimum , a starting point  for the journey ...We learn how to embed a system and it takes time only after having a minimal synergy between parts...

When we say that 2 components are synergetical we means that they do not present evident incompatibility ...

Audio is not only merely about the gear but about acoustics and about electrical and mechanical embeddings controls of these synergetical components to begins with  ....

@frankmc195 we don’t know when to quit. I think I’m at a point where I’m good. Changing one thing can screw up my entire chain and sound now!

@ddgtt +1 that saved me years and thousands. 

Kinda both, but there is no doubt that experience guided my investments and the info shared in forums like this has saved me thousands. Shouting out also To Paul at PS Audio for consistently answering a wide range of good questions.

I decided to build a couple systems about five years ago and my main rig has consistently improved since then based on good info gained over time. Building around the same Class A/B/A+B pro audio amp I upgraded main speakers, added a sub, did a complete cable swap, cleaned up the input with a WiFi streamer and adjusted input gain to the point where $5k hard cost sounds like $50k to me LOL

@calvinj

I think I’m at a point where I’m good. Changing one thing can screw up my entire chain and sound now!

That’s a very good sign. I got there at my previous residence, at least in terms of setting up the equipment I tried. I’ll never know if other components I didn’t try might have done something even better but I was having a great time with what I had. The thing was, there was a LOT of digital settings involved and I was worried about accidentally messing it up, which happened sometimes, causing me to carefully and nervously go over everything to figure out what happened. That’s the good thing about using components that just sound the way you want without any special settings required.

My setup at my new house is quite a bit different, but still has a LOT of settings I have to make sure stay put. Fortunately there is no longer a front control panel that I or a toddler nephew can mess with and inadvertently screw things up.

@mahgister

I’m with you on the crosstalk reduction. I haven’t heard BACCH, but I’ve set up the physical crosstalk barriers and had my mind blown, and now I’m using my own 3 speaker array method to deal with comb filtering caused by interaural crosstalk. This is my main area of audiophile interest now. Interaural crosstalk is the 600lb gorilla in the room to my ears. 2 speakers playing across your head without some kind of electronic or physical hardware to reduce crosstalk is a seriously compromised setup for anything other than sounds panned hard left to one speaker or the other, and I don’t think there’s any way to correct it with recording methods or mixing/mastering - unless some kind of crosstalk reduction is mixed into the recording - which means it’ll only work in very specific listening configurations. Multi-channel recordings with 5.1 or 7.1 setups bring their own headaches, although I think those could be solved with a specially designed room, but only if the people who mix the recordings properly take advantage of what’s there. I know that many feel it’s a non-issue. Hence, Sonus Faber just put out a 2 channel speaker system for $750,000. You wouldn’t put that much into a system if you thought it was inherently flawed, I wouldn’t think.

Thanks for your confirmative experience about crosstalk universal obstructive effect...

Most people have no idea how and why all stereo systems are flawed...

And Speakers sellers wont say it guess why ?

😊

Add to crosstalk destructive effect , no vibrations/resonance controls, no electrical grid noise floor control and no dedicated acoustic room...

Buying costly dac or a costlier turntable will not solve all these problems repeating the false mantra that the source is everything.

What is the source ? Not the dac nor the turntable but the specific recording trade-off choices process we must translate with our speakers/room/ears...

What make this acoustic translation from the recording SOURCE process difficult ?

Crosstalk in any stereo system and lack of electrical,mechanical and acoustical controls.. ( i called them embeddings controls because i used many homemade devices embedded in these working mechanical,electrical and acoustical working dimensions)

Many people dont even know what is the source of information they think it is their dac... 😁

The primary source are the choices of the recording engineer in each albums different form, which must be acoustically translated and delivered by your speakers/room/ears... Your system convey this acoustic information and impede or/and help it in many ways thats all ...

The source is the acoustic information chosen and related to the recording process and this is this SOURCE which we are pleased to listen to and experience with our system/room/ears ...The dac is like a cable or an amplifier a way to convey, more or less well , this acoustic chosen set of trade off choices by the recording engineer which are this specific album source ...

The source of my life is not ONLY my actual body but FIRST my parents bodies encounter and genetic trade-off so to speak...

In audio people dont think this way about the source because their focus is on the gear possible next upgrade not on acoustics nor about embeddings controls to recreate the acoustic source : the acoustic specific atmosphere of each album...

They think that a piece of gear create the sound... 😁😊

A piece of gear contribute thats all... The sound acoustic information exist already in each album then how can my speakers/room/ears can translate it in the best way ? A change of cable or dac will help or not but could hardly be the solution about an acoustic problem ...

I like your three speakers idea and creativity... Congratulations...

@mahgister

I’m with you on the crosstalk reduction. I haven’t heard BACCH, but I’ve set up the physical crosstalk barriers and had my mind blown, and now I’m using my own 3 speaker array method to deal with comb filtering caused by interaural crosstalk. This is my main area of audiophile interest now. Interaural crosstalk is the 600lb gorilla in the room to my ears. 2 speakers playing across your head is a seriously compromised setup for anything other than sounds panned hard left to one speaker or the other, and I don’t think there’s any way to correct it with recording methods or mixing/mastering - unless some kind of crosstalk reduction is mixed into the recording - which means it’ll only work in very specific listening configurations. Multi-channel recordings with 5.1 or 7.1 setups bring their own headaches, although I think those could be solved with a specially designed room, but only if the people who mix the recordings properly take advantage of what’s there. I know that many feel it’s a non-issue. Hence, Sonus Faber just put out a 2 channel speaker system for $750,000. You wouldn’t put that much into a system if you thought it was inherently flawed, I wouldn’t think

Definitely more experience. The more experience I gained, the better able I was to sift through the hype and get to real quality. When I started out 50+ years ago, I made some really stupid errors. I can't say that now, my moves are perfect, but I haven't bought any really lousy gear in a long, long time.

Definitely became better as I spent more dough, but the vast majority was spent on speakers, big ones. And the difference is not apparent in 90% of the music we play.  Experience taught me that it’s not terribly difficult to get great sound with a fairly modest budget if you listen carefully to your ears, not to the advice of reviewers and marketers. I’ve spent waaay into the six figures range, but get enormous amounts of pleasure from my bedroom system that could be replaced for $5K. When I got really honest with myself, I had to admit that I had gotten way too wrapped up with exotica and bragging rights. Sure, there are some selections that one of my big systems will handle better, but for the vast majority, the bedroom system is just as good.

I think some think there is one good sound when there are actual many types of goood sounds that different systems can bring you. 

A combination of the two!!! Actually, system building is a combination of: Your budget, exposure and experience/knowledge. You can’t spend money you don't have, so you have to be very thrifty by maximizing what purchasing power you do have, in order to get the most for your money. For example, about 15 years ago, I spent above my budget for speaker cables.  The speaker cables performance  have withstood the test of time.  I have no plans on replacing my 15 year old speaker cables (money well spent).  My speakers have been around for over 15 years as well, and I have no plans of replacing them either, as they are my end- game speakers (money well spent). I just replaced all the other cables in my system, except for my ethernet cables, only because, for what I paid for them, I felt that there was room for improvement and, I was right. This time, I was able to spend enough to purchase cables that I feel are at that level of diminishing returns. I knew going in what cables I wanted, I searched for them online, pre-owned, which allowed me to purchase cables at a significant discount, that I would have never been able to afford new, at retail prices. The cables that I’ve just purchased perform at such a high level of proficiency that they will be in my system for years and years to come. All my purchases over the past 20 years or so were based on: budget, exposure and experience. Happy listening!!!

More money was the answer.  I knew what I wanted sonically and tried to do it on a lesser budget and it was fine but didn't have that certain something I was looking for.  Now it sings and waxes poetic to me and I am happy with it.

@vitussl101 the truth is you really got to spend a little to get up to the exceptional gear.  With proper matching it sounds great. 

I started down this path when I built a Dyna Stereo 70 at the age of 14.

I am 69 now. I’ll be writing about the journey for this group sometime soon but not today.

My system design can be found at the bottom of the page link below.

The law of diminishing returns applies. I spent more than most, and nowhere near as much as some. I think that it compares well to systems costing up to 10 times as much.

Component matching and room treatment are critical.

Sounds "better" but does not mean I enjoy it more. "Better' is a tricky word.