It's attention, not money, we should budget


I read with some amusement a lot of posts arguing we should spend X amount of money on speakers, or preamps or amps.  I want to make a counter argument:  We should budget our time and attention, not the money.

In large part because there are always bargains to be made, and MSRP has been (IMHO) a terrible guide to what an "upgrade" is, especially when considered in the context of an existing system.

30% Room

30% Speakers

5% Cables and power

35% Remaining electronics

 

I will read your replies thoughtfully. :)

erik_squires

Showing 4 responses by waytoomuchstuff

@erik_squires

I’m agreeing with your premise. Establishing monetary metrics can get us "workable" results. Investing attention (time?) will get us better sonic results, for less money. The DYI reference was merely an example of time spent vs money spent to achieve a better outcome. Yes, there are other examples. But I’ve found, for example, a lot of music can come out of inexpensive and/or vintage drivers if you get things out of the way that make them sound worse.

@mahgister

I’m in the same camp with you on the "acoustics first" approach. Sometimes you have to work with what you have in front of you. We are involved in service and performance mods and bring up the subject of acoustics in every encounter. I think an element of the pushback is an unwillingness to change the decor in the room. Some of it is that acoustical panels are boring. They just hang on the wall and look at you. Not nearly as engaging as new gear, or "hot rodded" old gear.

I mentioned upgrading the cabling in my wife’s vehicle. I tried covering all that reflective glass with sound absorbent material. The back up camera worked well when traveling in reverse, but when moving forward the panels were a bit of an issue. So, if was on to "Plan B" -- upgrade the cabling.

@erik_squires

I get it. I made reference to DIY, but also validated the decisions made by those who take the most efficient path from A->B.

Yes, we frequently spend time (and, money) on whatever our kids have their attention on. I spent 4 hours over the weekend building custom speaker stands for my grandson. Dropping by later today to help him set up his music streamer while delivering the speaker stands. Time well spent.

It’s been said that people will spend their money on what their attention is on. This is an easy hypothesis to prove when your partner, or klds/grandkids have their attention on something. So, "attention" and "money" are intertwined.

It’s also been said; "There are no absolute truths. Only relative truths, and workable truths." The "1/3rds Rule" is a good example of a "workable truth" that has been a tool for many decades.

And, to quote another person, accountant Walter Williams, stated something to the effect of: "Prejudice is bias based on incomplete information. The problem is that the cost of obtaining the information is too high."

I’m going to attempt to throw all of this in a blender, and pour out something that can be reasonably consumed. Some people are more committed to obtaining "The Absolute Sound" than others. The information is out there. The "cost" of information is too high for many. So, they’ll check the forums and reviews, sort through a few options, "add to cart" --> checkout. Applying "workable truths" in this scenaro will provide something(s) that will make "good noises" and could represent a "one and done" solution for the owner. A little more diligence (and time) would have, most certainly, elevated the musical experience, at a lower cost. But, at what cost? Only the owner knows the answer(s) to that question.

A some suggested, absolutes cannot be applied based on the product category and price points. A 2x price upgrade in speakers should produce something significant -- and usually does. Going from a $300 pair of speakers, for example to $600 should make something magical happen. As should going from $30k to $60k. The difference is that the upgrade from $300 to $600 will, most likely, involve purely sonic improvements. However, from $30k to $60k will involve other factors: improved esthetics, over-built components/chassis, intangibles, etc. The "bang for the buck" factor may be superior in budget constrained products?

We all have our own ideas of how to set priorties. I, for one, like to take things apart, pull the guts out of them and replace inferior components with better stuff, improved connection methods, etc. I went thru a high level of anxiety watching a promo video for a new "flagship" speaker. I was wanting to grab my wire strippers and silver solder and tear into their "state of the art" design, knowing that they were exposing the sonic compromises of their new offering. You can imagine the look on my partner’s face when she saw interior pieces of her new luxury vehicle scattered all over the shop. Those crappy cables, shared harnesses, lugs, spades, etc., just had to go! (And, yes, it did sound much better). It’s who I am. We’re all different.

@mahgister 

You should be very proud of what you've produced with what you had to work with.  I can't think of a more relevant response to the OPs topic. 

(My reference to acoustical panels covering the glass in my wife's vehicle was an "attempt" at light humor.  I hope you took it that way?)