What Do You Get When You Spend Megabucks?

Thanks to all those who responded. I started with the premises that it takes a certain amount of money to attain high quality music reproduction and I make an assumption that it's at least possible by spending even more money that performance can be further improved. I also assume that people spending megabucks know what they are doing as far as system matching goes and will address room acoustics, electric power, vibration isolation, etc. issues.

I have a lot of respect for those people who are willing to go all out. In a manner of speaking it takes a certain amount of courage (and money) to put together a state of the art system. There's a huge risk of failure, or at least not attaining performance in-line with the financial commitment, but I imagine that success would be very gratifying.

Fcrowder, great system. Have you set up the Finite Elemente? I'd love to hear your impressions.

If you concede better bass extension to another system, then how can it truly be SOTA? My concept of SOTA is that it cannot be outperformed in any given performance area. Equalled, yes, but not outperformed. I'm purely speculating about the quality of the two systems. I'm only familiar with the Meyer HD1 and I've not heard any of the most recent Von Scheiwkerts. Your last question is basically my original question, but with a different assumption about the answer.

Cinematic Systems, it is you who are 100% wrong. The systems you offer as proof against spending megabucks are in no way state of art systems. Excellent systems, yes. Pushing the envelop of sound reproduction, no.

Actually I don't have any definitive answers. My position on this subject is best contained in my earlier post of 3/15. As far as specific systems go, take a look at the Virtual System section titled "All Out Assault". Your Meyer X10/EMM/etc. sysstem is certainly competitive with most of the systems listed, but are you really going to argue that it's better than say Lakefrontroad's getup? One thing that is obvious as the dollar spiral exponentially, setup is the key and you better devote serious money toward room design.

Part of the reason why I put forth Lakefrontroad's system is that it has been carefully assembled by a knowledgeable audiophile with a written record of the process, it's not clear that the system(s) you extoll have the same pedigree.

I'm actually quite familiar with ATC speakers and I consider them excellent products. A few years ago Mix did a comparison of the ATC 200 vs. Dunlavy VI. A group of audio professionals ended up not having a clear preference. Some definitely preferred the ATC as a professional tool while others preferred the Dunlavy. Some thought the Dunlavy would be better suited for mastering applications. Although no longer in production, the Dunlavys still enjoy a very solid audiophile reputation, but are generally not considered SOTA products by today's standards. My own experiences with ATC monitors (50 and 100s) is that the treble is not as good as a good ribbon design (say, Magnepan) and their amplifiers are no better, or worst, than any number of high power solid state designs, say Bryston as an example. Very good to great, but not excellent let alone SOTA.

BTW, I fully agree with your earlier statement that within their limits the Quad electrostatics are competitive with virtually anything at any price.

Lakefrontroad, thanks for the insights into your system. I presume you're talking about your main system, although the smaller system also looks like it's capable of attaining your sonic goals. It's frustrating that the recordings are most often the limiting factor in the realism your setup can achieve.

Nrchy, while Cinematic Systems can be criticized for not always admitting that he's a dealer, his posts do show a good deal of knowledge about audio reproduction. That doesn't mean you have to agree with him, but you dismiss him at your own risk.