What improvements did you hear in going from entry level to high end Audio?

I just made the jump from a typical college dorm/bachelor pad system from the 1980's to a system that probably cost around $20k 10 years ago.

Of course there is a difference and it is not subtle. At the same time I do not find it life altering and I would never consider spending $20k on an audio system.....even as I get more and more into this hobby....which, in many ways and like many hobbies can get bat crap crazy real fast.

Just look at noromance's response, which is a nice, thoughtful and honest response. However, if someone is asking what the difference is between high and low end, they are very unlikely to have any notion of what things like speakers disappearing are, or improved colors for different instruments (when we don't know what an instruments's color is to begin with), or what congestion is.

We might can form an idea of what stage depth means and what detail entails. We might wonder why we want to hear a cough in the audience.

He also mentions minute changes to system easily heard. I've struggled with this. And that fact makes me feel like I just don't get it....until I come to audiophile forums and find people insulting each other's mothers over the merits of cable burn in or expensive power cables....all of whom have $20k+ systems.

Not knocking his response. I'm sure it is spot on for audiophiles but maybe not for those planning on being audiophiles.

And there is a whole language that you have to learn in order to discuss all this too. And even among the best audiophile writers it seems like the language and terms are inadequate....not that the critic or writer isn't competent but just that words often can't describe what they're hearing. And subsequently you hear a lot of those terms over and over again to describe various components and tweaks....which makes you wonder if they're real or worth the $1000 you just spent on speaker cables (like mine).

My advice as someone jumping in: don't overthink sound quality that you are happy with. Don't become unhappy with what you have because someone else says theirs is better or even worse because someone wants you to buy what they make. Remember, the economy, and especially the audiophile economy, runs on dissatisfaction. For me, I don't want or need another hobby that keeps me in a constant state of dissatisfaction and envy especially when that dissatisfaction is based on largely subjective observations and personal preference.

Having said all that, I am happy with how my system sounds, I find it intoxicating, I enjoy listening more and find myself finding more time in order to do it. And having said that, I can still listen to my 1980 Toshiba receiver driving 1990's Bose bookshelf speakers and really, deeply enjoy good music....and to be honest....still be amazed how good they sound!

I have a hard time articulating the difference that I hear. "Richer" and "rounder" are words that seem to apply but I don't really know.

The one thing I can clearly pinpoint in the type of music I listen to most is clear differentiation between instruments on the low end. In other words, notes from the bass guitar are clear and distinct and they are also clear and distinct from the kick drum and toms even when played at the same time. Of course the recording is important here. Some recordings are muddy even if the system isn't.

Of course $20k is not essential for enjoyment. I'd say $100k minimum. I mean seriously, why would someone spend $100k or $200k on a system if it wasn't worth it?

calvinj, I think to suggest that people STFU in a forum discussing high end audio, or anything, for that matter is a little ironic. We're here to share opinions after all. I agree with you that if someone wants to spend large amounts of money for incremental differences that this their option and if it makes them happy then that is fantastic.

But we all probably have that point in which the skeptic lurking inside all of us comes out. The guy who has spent $100k on a system is going to be a tad suspicious that the guy who spent $485K on used speakers (they were listed on this site not long ago) is probably a little daft.

I also think the two ends of the spectrum are about the same: People who spend less thinking that people who spend more are doing it for reasons that don't warrant the expenditure verses people who spend more assuming that people who spend less are either settling for poor quality or just don't know the difference.

Finally, I do not believe that it is true that every additional dollar buys you a subjective or objective benefit. I think it is true up to large sums but there comes a point in most hobbies at which that extra dollar does not buy a dollars worth of benefit and in some cases will buy you less.

terry9 said:

"That's exactly what cheap electronic components are and what they sound like."

I suspect that's what the guy with the $500,000 speakers (used) says too. And unless you have $500,000 speakers he'd say your stuff was "cheap" and sounded like it. Thus the 'infinite regression' nature of such comments.