"I'm a believer"

The problem is that this diminishing returns relative threshold exist because S.Q. is not related to price tag and better gear design in a linear way ...

Guess why ?

Because other parameters as the acoustical, the mechanical and electrical working dimensions play a great role...

Especially acoustic ...

For example a costlier speaker can sound way worse than one  less costly if the acoustic working dimension are not set right ...No speakers at any price beat their room ...

Most people who dont believe in diminishing returns are gear fetichist in a way or in another ...

my "fetish" or passion or hobby was acoustic and music  not high end gear collection...

I don’t believe in the "diminishing returns", at least not as a universal truth. When you’re in to the subjective the value of the return is up to the one who spent the money.

Don't forget that speakers are the end of the signal path and can only deliver what the amp gives it, which can only deliver what the preamp gives it, etc. 

Also a big part of the speaker cost is the material and construction cost of the cabinet, which may or may not contribute to the sound quality. But it may help you get approval from the boss, especially if the 3 feet from the wall rule encroaches on a more general purpose room/den like I have my system located.

Diminishing returns depends on how much you are willing to spend on the entire listening experience - room (see @mikelavigne's system) and then each component. Nothing exists in a vacuum. He based his entire house purchase on what he could convert into a dedicated listening room. First item - design of the room including minimizing noise from his HVAC system!

I think he is the most dedicated contributor I've heard about on the 'Gon. I don't look at any other audiophile discussion boards though - maybe there is someone else out there. Wish I was ever near Seattle so I could listen to his system, especially the reel to reel decks.

I’ve been around high end audio for a great number of years. I have had the opportunity to hear, at shows, at audiophile friends homes and at audio shops, a great number of high end speakers: old and new, from the low, to the ultra megabuck price ranges. I’ve heard very, very expensive speakers that didn’t sound so good to me, and then, I’ve heard vintage speakers or relatively affordable speakers that just knock my sock off. In all my personal experience in this great hobby of ours, IMHO, there is no other item in high end audio that fall under the "Rule of Diminishing Returns" like loudspeakers.

@kennymacc

i think how speakers go is that the more capable and expensive speakers tend to be more full range and move a lot of air. and they can be huge. sometimes the ability to spend the money is inverse to the system building and set-up effort expended. "sometimes". so we might commonly observe systems delivered by brick and mortar dealers to well off customers and viewed as plug and play. when they are far from it. and we form our opinions based on these anecdotal circumstances. or also audio show conditions; where the larger speakers are more exposed with messed up rooms or limited time for set up. even with competent exhibitors. we then point fingers at the speakers. yet in some cases those large expensive speakers are actually guilty as charged. some are actually a bit of a hot mess. the biggest issue are speakers where the coherence or level of tonal balance is lacking. then the amplification synergy is critical. and not always successful.

whereas we find that some modest sized, modest cost or vintage speakers might have sins of omission; where they tend to just by the odds not offend as much, and in balance be less in the way of the music. are they better? well, they are simpler and have less ability to offend, but also have lower ceilings. amplification choices for especially the vintage speakers tend to be more thoughtfully selected. so it’s not just a speaker thing. and the rooms are not quite as critical when the speaker is not doing as much. also; the musical choices tend to be less dramatic, asking less of the room, speaker, and amplifiers.

@sokogear

thank you for the kind words.

Diminishing returns depends on how much you are willing to spend on the entire listening experience - room (see @mikelavigne’s system) and then each component. Nothing exists in a vacuum. He based his entire house purchase on what he could convert into a dedicated listening room. First item - design of the room including minimizing noise from his HVAC system!

so buying and optimizing a large or very large speaker system is not trivial. when you are going for the ultimate everything matters. large speakers, in my case; twin 7 foot tall and 600 pounds each tower, requires a huge commitment to be musical and coherent. where they disappear and are capable of nailing any recording large or small. but when you actually pull that off, you are in a whole different experiential dimension. so the payoff is huge. my speakers do not limit me.

but if you never heard a large system do it, it would be easy to dismiss the concept as a waste. not worth it.

unfortunately; access to successful large speaker installations is rare. so we are left with the idea that there are diminishing returns. nothing could be more wrong. the right large expensive speakers are a great value in terms of ROI.

just my 2 cents. YMMV.

and anyone who wants to hear how this goes is welcome to visit and judge for yourself.

Wise post as usual from Mike Lavigne who made me think again ...

Especially this line ...

so buying and optimizing a large or very large speaker system is not trivial.

For me this means the embeddings workings controls matter as much as the speakers ...

my best to him ...

For sure if there is no ceiling limit for the sum of money invested , the diminishing return concept made no sense to begin with ...

In my use of this concept i distinguished for a relatively low money ceiling a minimal acoustical satisfaction experience and his maximal relative end point threshold defined by a notation associated for all acoustic factors implied in the perception ....And i distinguished it from the maximum acoustical satisfaction experience and his minimal starting point threshold ...

Then for sure as said Mike Lavigne :

access to successful large speaker installations is rare. so we are left with the idea that there are diminishing returns. nothing could be more wrong. the right large expensive speakers are a great value in terms of ROI.

if there is no limit of money invested these two threshold collapse for sure into a single continuous linear scale where a diminishing return cannot exist because there is always a return that can be evaluated as qualitatively justified ......

For me judging audio experience out of any limit money threshold make no sense ...

It is why in my posts i insisted on the mechanical,ele4ctrical and acoustical embeddings controls of the working dimensions of any system at any price ...

A dedicated acoustic room homemade or made by a pro with a difference in cost of 100,000 bucks ; for example mine at peanuts cost with a grid of tuned resonators homemade and the astounding Mike Lavigne acoustical room , reveal a level of excellence in each case , but these two room cannot be compared at all...

but for me many costlier device present a cese of diminishing return very evident ...

For Mike Lavigne himself if i read well his past posts many costly propositions are only diminishing returns as too much cherries on a cake well prepared already could be ...

All that to say that those who say that the diminishing return dont exist say it in the absolute case with no money ceiling limit which is true as any common place fact can be true , a triviality ...it is meaningless to repeat triviality as any improvement is worth it ... It is not true in any of the two cases, the minimal and the acoustical acoustical satisfaction thresholds ...

Diminishing return exist... For me or for Mike ; but we are not in the same category : i am passed the minimal acoustical satisfaction threshold ... He is passed over the maximum acoustical satisfaction threshold ...if we take into account a RATIO between all acoustic factors levels evaluation...

The computing of the ceiling limit is relatively easy : it is under 100,000 bucks for sure ... Take it around 25,000 bucks for the average obsessed audiophile ... My system cost is now 700 bucks with two vintage speakers and headphone ... iam satisfied and envy no one ...I am proud of my system modifications and embeddings at no cost...😊

But only an idiot will compare my system with the Mike Lavigne one ...

I’m a believer in start with speakers and move backwards when upgrading.  I currently own a pair of Joseph Audio Perspectives.  After buying the speakers I’ve been through 4 DACs, 3 Amps, 2 Pre Amps and with every upgrade I came away thing wow these speakers are great.  I’ve concluded I can’t afford the electronics to exceed the speakers.  I guess my point is if you do an electronics, cable upgrade and can’t hear a difference it is time to look at your speakers.  Just sharing my experience.  Start with good speakers and evolve from the there!!!