Law of Accelerated Returns

Everyone interested in it in any way deserves to hear what is possible. 

Absolutely. There are lots of people, even posters here, that have not heard a top end system.

You can’t hit the target until you know where it is. 

I've never heard a half million $ system.

I like that the law of accelerated returns, we hear way too much about diminishing returns and never about the former. Aspiration in audio is a good thing it’s what got most of us to where we are now.

I've made it a point to hear everything I can get to. 

Highest was the Wham/Thor/Spectral/dCS system

in a dedicated music room. I have to say it was intense.

I do not care much about the law only the sound. 

More money doesn't hurt the cause of bettering sound.

The room acoustics played a huge factor with those setup you perceived as SOTA.

You can get your setup reasonably close with room layout /speaker placement.

nice post and thread @ghdprentice :-)

Harley has been promoting this idea for quite some time. In 2014 he wrote this -

Many audiophiles think of an audio system from the perspective of The Law of Diminishing Returns. That’s the idea that each successive dollar you add to your hi-fi budget realizes progressively less sonic improvement. To use an extreme example, there’s undoubtedly a greater sonic difference between a $1000 loudspeaker and a $2000 loudspeaker than there is between a $100,000 loudspeaker and a $101,000 loudspeaker. The additional thousand dollars buy you much less at the top end of the scale.

.....

My experience with state-of-the-art audio suggests that The Law of Diminishing Returns is a fallacy. In fact, I think that an audio system follows The Law of Accelerating Returns.

Is there any means by which I can read the March 2022 version? I can't seem to find anything from March, possibly only for subscribers.

Perhaps he doesn’t contradict himself after thinking about it for a couple years short of a decade.

Expensive systems in well designed listening room do scale type things better.  They can go louder, sound bigger, thunder in the bass and shimmer the highs.  But does that really correlate with listening to music better?  Sometimes yes, sometimes no.  Harley wants you to maintain interest in increasingly expensive equipment so that you will read the magazine that employs him.  He then gets to play with the really expensive stuff while you just read about it.

Harley wants you to maintain interest in increasingly expensive equipment so that you will read the magazine that employs him. He then gets to play with the really expensive stuff while you just read about it.

I have no wish to speculate on his motives for getting something so basic so fundamentally wrong, but anyway, in my experience price often has very little to do with quality (however defined) so its not an issue..

Call it what you will it is  all about how much one values any particular improvement and how much it costs to achieve it.  

onhwy nails it.

@onhwy61 

Wow, I try to be courteous, but you are clearly clueless. I am really sorry that your cynicism will prevent you from experiencing some of the most amazing things in life. 

Guilty as charged.  Of all the possible things to experience before I die, listening to state of the art audio systems isn't at the top of the program.  Call me pedestrian, but systems in the $35 to 75k area are pretty good.

@ghdprentice , It is not so much a matter of diminishing returns as it is value.

There is equipment that is a much better value than other equipment of similar performance. Much of this "value" equipment is still plenty expensive. There is a category of "Luxury" HiFi made purely for very rich people who have to drive a Rolls or have it driven for them. Much of this equipment is needlessly complex and over built with things like 300 lb CNCed chassis. I put that stuff in the same category as a Rolex watch. An Apple watch is more accurate and you can put a Mickey Mouse dial on it. You can see Rolex watch wearers a mile away. Their left arm is two inches longer. 

Media people have to extoll the virtues of ultra expensive equipment. It is their job to do so and their revenue depends on it. 

If it costs more it sounds better because it costs more. Many media people have this programing. They did not experience the lowly Roger's LS3 5A

Lastly, we frequently view the past with rose colored glasses. I fondly remember several systems. They were excellent in their day but I shudder to think what they would sound like today.

There is a well respected school of thought, that has been around for quite some time now, that what someone pays for something is less than or equal to what they value it at.

What Mr Harley is on about is something rather different.  Although, as I said, I have only read what he wrote in 2014, not 2022.

@mapman 

You can’t hit the target until you know where it is. 

When I was a freshman at college, this clever upperclassman would try to get us new frosh to over-consume beers at parties by saying, "You can't know where the line is unless you go over it." Then, once someone was beyond holding their liquor, he'd direct them to go throw up on Ware House, the dorm for all the pre-med students in our complex. Just a fun memory, since I wasn't the one who threw up.

As for audio, I have recently heard some very good systems, but not in the stratospheric range. A couple of them had custom builds happening, so it's hard to know what they cost. What was true, though, was the the owners had really worked for years on them, and what I was listening to -- whatever the sticker price of the gear was -- was the result of a lot of sweat equity, true audiophiles who listened, tweaked, changed gear, listened more, worked on room acoustics, etc. 

To me, the question becomes akin to the difference between the experience in a cozy, comfortable, home which has been domesticated with love over many years vs. a new, expensive, super modern house. One of them is very expensive, and some great features; the other is humble but crafted into the site of aesthetic experience. I cannot see how price plays a role in that kind of comparison.

It’s true the most important ingredient is caring, not money.

I know my hifi sounds good and the way I want it to sound to me. Lots of time and sweat and a few $$$s spent over the years to get it that way. Also listening to everything and anything and paying attention over many years, both hifi systems and live.

Not interested the slightest in having a competition. No Hifi Olympics for me. Mission accomplished!

I agree the possibilities in high end audio is incredible, the possibilities in high fidelity audio is also incredible though the two aren't always synonymous. I've heard extremely high fidelity equipment that put high end equipment to shame at a fraction of the cost so I don't know if it would be considered high end. But that's my personal experience and  2 cent opinion.

I’ve heard extremely high fidelity equipment that put high end equipment to shame at a fraction of the cost

Yes indeed. Robert Harley’s many edition book is called "A Complete Guide to High-End Audio".

He promotes such things as MQA technology.  I digress - my pet peeve.

hilde45

Our dealers will not allow you to listen to such a system unless you have the money to buy it.

I talked to a dealer today who would not allow comparison audition of 2 components. He just said take your most educated guess and buy one.

In the time I spend here ( benefiting from people’s experiences), or obsessing reading mag’s and websites I could more productively spend that same amount of time just listening to it in my room. But that is impossible. It is sad. Hi-end needs to do better than this.

Cdc, what country are you in? 

If anyone bothers to read my posts I have been rallying against the concept of diminishing returns.

Just today I posted about a $95 ethernet cable purchase (2 cables) hoping it makes a nice upgrade.

If the cables (when they arrive) make just a 1 percent improvement, in my system, that would be around a $1000 benefit. Other upgrades are free, like a cleaning tube sockets, or low cost tweaks like a new AC power outlet.

In a lesser system these upgrades might not be audible, but in a high end system the entire experience can be bettered by some inexpensive or modest upgrade.

While my thesis might be flawed in some ways, my point it that the benefits stack up and pays dividends.

@mofojo

I am in USA

@onhwy61

Expensive systems in well designed listening room do scale type things better. They can go louder, sound bigger, thunder in the bass and shimmer the highs. But does that really correlate with listening to music better? Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

From the extreme high end systems I have heard, they do a lot more things better than the things you mention.

The most recent I heard was a pair of Estalon Forsa, driven by Pass labs, and besides the things you mentioned, there is an overall effortlessness that most speakers at this price and quality range exhibit, that goes beyond any specific one attribute.

Yes, they produced a realistic scale soundstage of an orchestra as if I was sitting 10 rows back, but they also were able to produce an intimate singer/guitarist performance as if I was I was sitting in the original room with the performer. I could even tell they when they were standing, or sitting on a stool.

This is just the tip of the iceberg.

And of course it is "Sometimes yes, sometimes no". Not every high priced speaker is equal, not every high end speaker works well in a particular room, or with all equipment.

@mapman …

”It’s true the most important ingredient is caring, not money.”

To a point, but caring and money trump either individually. Let me care and choose and implement state of the art equipment and that trumps just one or the other.

The "law of diminishing returns" is overplayed to death, usually promoted by guys who:

• have upgraded poorly
• have a significant system imbalance or underlying issue which precludes high performance
• put a system together by reviews and "deals" instead of by ears
• have a vendetta against expensive gear and people who pursue it
• have never experienced a what a truly amazing state-of-the-art system can do

I like "the law of accelerated returns"! It can certainly happen when some new component, approach, or an identified weak link helps you bust out of a performance plateau.

@mulveling 

+ 1

@simonmoon, I fully agree.

I have limited experience with certain classes of components.  I've never heard a $15,000 phono cartridge, $200,000+ turntables, $150,000+ loudspeakers or for that matter really expensive cables.  The bulk of my listening to systems that are more expensive than mine are comprised of $10k to 30k components.

I am also of the opinion that most of the musical differences between systems are subtle.  The difference between a table radio and a decent $5,000 system is dramatic.  The difference between the $5,000 system and a $50,000 system is subtle.  There are clear sonic differences, but I maintain that from a musical perspective they are overwhelmingly subtle.  Maybe as audiophiles we obsess over these small differences?  There's a whole school of thought about the narcissism or tyranny of stressing subtle differences.  I end with the following quote:

consumer culture has been seen as predicated on the narcissism of small differences to achieve a superficial sense of one's own uniqueness, an ersatz sense of otherness which is only a mask for an underlying uniformity and sameness.

@mulveling : Spot on! Especially this:

• have never experienced a what a truly amazing state-of-the-art system can do

Unfortunately I have experienced such system several times. And while I will never be able to afford such system, nobody can blame me for aspiring.

As for the last poster:

The difference between the $5,000 system and a $50,000 system is subtle

That’s absolutely NOT my experience. The difference is dramatic. Yes, not as dramatic as going from a table top radio to a $5,000 system, but dramatic nonetheless. Certainly not subtle. Which systems do you base this opinion on?

@thyname

Absolutely. I have owned system in the $5K, $20K, $70K, and $150K… and the differences are not small… and actually increasing in how profound they are… of yes… accelerating returns… oh that is right, I started this discussion.

@ghdprentice : Agreed! And we all started somewhere. Even at less then that $5,000. Years ago. I can assure the poster of this comment I am not hallucinating 

Nobody is slamming anybody for enjoying a $5,000 system. But to say that a $50,000 system is only subtly better than a $5,000 system is…l don’t know.

To many subjective preferences to state anything with certainty. One persons overwhelmingly "better" could be another's subtly "better".  

Yes sure. Especially when you have never heard a $50,000 system. It’s most certainly only subtly better than a $5,000 system 😉🤭

@thyname as I usually never agree with you. We should celebrate today… it is a good day.

@ghdprentice : Agreed! And we all started somewhere. Even at less then that $5,000. Years ago. I can assure the poster of this comment I am not hallucinating 

 

Nobody is slamming anybody for enjoying a $5,000 system. But to say that a $50,000 system is only subtly better than a $5,000 system is…l don’t know.

@holmz : I am jumping out and air punching out of joy and happiness 🙄

@thyname me too sir!
(Have a great evening.)

It's all subjective. Enjoy what you have and envy is not worn well.

One mans garbage is another mans gold.

If I die tomorrow I will die a happy content man.

Remember it is about the music not the trappings, at least in my world.

You dont know what you are missing until you have heard an extraordinary system. Only at that point do you have a frame of reference. 

When the trappings are the best it becomes even more about the music. I dont understand the need of some to differentiate and then attempt to ascribe purchase motivations.

Wanting something better is not envy. Being bitter that others have better equipment is. Worse still is attempting to diminish those that spend more than you think is acceptable and attaching some sort of moral imperative to the action.

Reference my trappings cost $45k.

Once again this goes over ones head and between their knees.

Thinking OCD Mikey is right....

It's all subjective. Enjoy what you have and envy is not worn well.

One mans garbage is another mans gold.

If I die tomorrow I will die a happy content man.

Remember it is about the music not the trappings, at least in my world.

You are right on jerryg123! 

What an insane idea, applying "the law of accelerated returns" to the reproduction of music in the home.  Without context.  I have heard many, many systems over the past 40 years (more but I'm embarrassed to admit it :-)) and each one sounded great in it's own way.  They were/are great because the owner cared deeply about music.  Some were super expensive and some were modest.  

I hope newbies to this hobby understand that you simply don't have to spend a fortune to achieve fantastic sound.  It's still all about the music.  Who cares about the last 1%.  

Thank you @steveashe this thread reminds me of the posers at the racetrack with their new Ducati’s and zero skills at dragging a knee and I stuff them on a 20 year old VFR400 or Hawk GT.

Question is do these posers know how to listen?

Music first.

As a musician I know, I know how to listen.

You can spend a $100k and if you have no listening skills then you just wizzed away $95k.

I am done here today off to Whats Best Forum.

@jerryg123 who has apparently left us brings us a good point which I'd like to elaborate upon.

There have been several times in my audio journey when I listened to a system that was beyond my ability to fully process it.  Over time and with experience, our brain fine tunes itself to discern the differences in fidelity.  

The differences I hear in my system to a non audiophile might be difficult for them to hear.  When I point things out, sometimes they can hear it, sometimes not.

So perhaps the law of diminishing returns also plays into not yet having the developed palate to hear the full differences.

I posted about this previously, but I recently evaluated high end shotgun mics for my film shoots.  

Schoeps make a full size and smaller size of the mic I just purchased.  The smaller mic has the same capsule but different electronics.  Common wisdom in the pro audio world (and manufacturer) is that they sound the same, just without the filter switches.   However,  to my ear I could easily tell the difference in the side by side comparison.  The larger electronics with higher current sounds clearly more dynamic to me.

If I didn't have the experience from listening to high end audio (and a lot of live music,) perhaps I wouldn't have been able to hear what pretty much no one else on the pro audio world

Posers? Who is to say. Of course no one is stating that you have to spend a fortune to get good sound. The point is that when you spend more money, intelligently, you will get better sound. I think that the benefits of being a learned listener is a given. 

Damned young whippersnappers on new Ducati's! In my day you earned to right to buy a nice new bike. Your statements betray the precise attitude I was referencing. 

The law of diminishing returns applies to audio gear the same as anything else. The notion of accelerated returns is just more audiophile blabbing by reviewers. If you don't think diminishing returns applies to this first world hobby then you haven't the slightest idea what diminishing returns means. 

@djones51 If you don't think diminishing returns applies to this first world hobby then you haven't the slightest idea what diminishing returns means. 

And to clarify the issue, the principle is actually called the law of diminishing *marginal* returns.   This concept is rather more nuanced than perhaps people realize.

Robert Harley came close to getting it correct in the passage I quoted from 2014.  (This despite him then rejecting it in audio with some magic logic.)

@mapman 1+++! That is essence is the problem. Very few systems including the ultra expensive ones can produce a SOTA performance. They can be VERY impressive compared to the usual and they can have very balanced tonality and excellent timbre but they do not image at the level available on many recordings.

Many think they have a great image because they hear the guitar over there and the bass in the middle and a cymbal to the left. They can even tell that the cymbal is behind the other instruments thinking they have "3D' imaging. Performing at this level is not all that difficult and can be achieved by pretty much any serious audiophile as they have heard other systems perform at this level and know what they should be looking for. Imaging the third dimension means placing an image in space that has location and depth/size. Imagine you can walk around the image of that trumpet or piano, the third dimension is not the size of the venue it is producing instruments and voices with depth. The instrument and voice have 3 dimensions. 

IMHE this is the hardest characteristic to reproduce. Energy created by the room and reflections blur out the third dimension. Channels that have different amplitude and impulse patterns also blur out the third dimension. These three problems compromise at least 90% of the systems out there. Some speaker/rooms will never be able to perform at this level. Others can but are not adjusted correctly. Only by luck can you get this out of the box and only the very misinformed are going to get there by placing little discs next the their interconnects. Do you have to spend a lot of money? Depends what you think a lot of money is. I think you can get there at a lower volume for maybe $50K. The full Monty takes at least $100K for a system with a turntable. Many are spending $250K just for speakers. The most reliable way to get there is with someone who has a lot of measurement equipment and knows what they are doing. As I have said before, it is exactly the same as video projectors. No projector will project colors correctly out of the box. It has to be calibrated and requires a lot of knowledge and expensive equipment. Some projectors, like the one I just bought, will never get it right because they can not do black. You only get shades of gray out of them. Live and learn.   

Point is you have to have the skills to appreciate the tools you are using.

Damned young whippersnappers on new Ducati's! In my day you earned to right to buy a nice new bike. Your statements betray the precise attitude I was referencing.