2. speakers
  3. 175053-9627

Law of Accelerated Returns

I think back over the many decades of pursuing high end audio and I realize some of the most inspirational were listening to state of the art systems. Systems I could never dream of affording. I occasionally would get up early and drive the two hours to Phoenix in hopes of finding no one listening to the state of the art system in “the big room” at one of the four or five high end audio stores there in the early ‘90’s.

One such time I was able to spend over an hour with the most amazing system I have ever heard: Wilson WAAM BAMM (or something like that… all Rowland electronics, Transparent interconnects). The system cost about over $.5 million… now, over a million… although I am sure it is even better (I can’t imagine how)..

 

But listening to that system was so mind blowing… so much better than anything I could conceive of, it just completely changed my expectation of what a system could be. It was orders of magnitude better than anything I had heard.

 

Interestingly, as impressed as I was… I did not want “that” sound, as much as I appreciated it. It still expanded my horizon as to what is possible. That is really important, as it is really easy to make judgments on what you have heard and not realize the possibilities… like never having left the small town in Kansas (no offense).

I keep reading these posts about diminishing returns. That isn’t the way it works. I recently read an article by Robert Harley in The Absolute Sound called the Law of Accelerated Returns that captures the concept perfectly. March 2022 issue. The possibilities in high end audio is incredible. Everyone interested in it in any way deserves to hear what is possible. It is mind expanding. 

 

 

ghdprentice

Showing 3 responses by sokogear

sokogear
1,058 posts
 

This is the most ridiculous discussion/theory I've seen in a long time. The law of diminishing returns is a proven theory of economics time and time again. Anyone who thinks an upgrade from a $5K amp to a $10K amp improves SQ LESS than an upgrade from a $50K amp to a $55K amp is nuts. Maybe it works from a % spent upgrade standpoint, but I even would question that. And if it is breakeven, it still is not accelerating. The graph submitted above is on the money, but of course there are different inflection points.

I think it is great to experience all stereo possibilities, especially within the specially designed rooms, and if you want to spend the $$ to enjoy them, but please do not try to cost justify them as being of incremental SQ improvements. Value on the other hand, is in the eye of the consumer. If someone is willing to pay double for a very small improvement, then he/she sees the value, and more power to them. Some see the value in how it looks.

Some see it as a luxury item like a Rolex, but I would think most Rolex owners think of them as investments that go up in value whereas stereo equipment rarely does, and I would hope nobody goes into the hobby trying to make money (unless they are a dealer) when buying equipment.

sokogear
1,058 posts
 

@emailists - I never said spending double on a speaker would only lead to a small improvement in sound. I was refuting the law of accelerating returns that said you would get more improvement spending $5K more on a $50K component than on a $5K one. Each incremental dollar spent on a given component typically will get less and less improvement the more you spend, once you've passed the entry level point.

I am sure you can get tremendous improvement doubling your expenditure on speakers, and sometimes no improvement or even degradation.

sokogear
1,058 posts
 

@sns -we’re talking about individual component cost, not treatments or tweaks. That is why some of the more questionable tweaks are more popular with those with expensive systems. The incremental cost of these items are an extremely low % of their system cost and represent little risk if they add nothing  or minimal SQ improvement.

More to discover