Has the General Rule of Audio changed?

[Steven Holt]

When I was coming up in this hobby, we were taught a General Rule : Decide a budget, and then put fifty percent of that budget toward your speakers (the Back End) and put the other half toward your receiver and turntable (the Front End). This was a good, safe rule and served us well for many years.

Needless to say, the world has changed since then. Nowadays, due to the great advances in electronics, and to the great reductions in cost, I'm starting to wonder if the General Rule holds anymore. Thanks to the digital revolution and large cost reductions -- especially in front end gear -- it is possible to have an excellent system for less than 1000US. But how should that money be allocated? Is it still 50/50? 60/40? 75/25? I have always valued, and learned, from the opinion of our membership, and I'm asking for it now. So, given the state of audio in 2025, how would you allocate your money if you were buying a new system this year? Thank you very much for your input.

 

[Power Pop 23]

Today I can see going for 75/25 - with the 25 percent going towards an amplifier with streaming capability.

 

[IngMishael]

How that money is allotted depends on each person.

Speakers are still the important thing for me but I couple that with the room and if one is serious, the sound front system of (room and speaker) should always be the premier priority and especially so if you have a dedicated space.

Getting the speaker/room marriage right makes the rest of the componentry less prone to trial and error (aesthetic elements still count for sure as humans our auditory satisfaction is also visual based unfortunately. Thanks, brain )

TLDR, there isn't a fixed percentage but speaker still is the largest cut of the proverbial pie

 

[DVDdoug]

I won't guess at a percentage but I'd put more into speakers. I have a basic AVR that cost about $300 USD and I'd have no issue using speakers that cost thousands. (My actual main speakers and sub are DIY.) My Blu-Ray player (which also plays CDs & DVDs) was less than $100.

I haven't played records in decades and the only reason that I still have a turntable is to occasionally digitize a record that's not available digitally. If I were buying one I'd be in the $300-$500 range. I wouldn't go too cheap but IMO it's silly to spend lots of money on something that can never sound as good as digital.

Digital audio and electronics are generally better than human hearing. The main thing is speakers and enough power to drive them. (And then you can get an AVR with room correction and optional surround sound, etc.)

 

[Waxx]

You should not use that rule anymore as there is enough devices that are measured (here and elsewhere) to cover all circumstances for reasonable prices. You should match your amp and frontend to the speaker on specs (power/ohm/dsp/channels) and make it work as a system.

Good speakers come in all price and size classes, active and passive, so start with the speakers you want that fit your room and see what they need from amp, and find a good measuring cheap one. The only exception on this rule is when you want to deviate from clean neutral, good coloured amps can cost a bit (not a fortune) more, especially when it's a tube amp.

But price alone tells nothing about quality of device these days, see the test lists on this site to find examples.

 

[staticV3]

it is possible to have an excellent system for less than 1000US. But how should that money be allocated? Is it still 50/50? 60/40? 75/25? I have always valued, and learned, from the opinion of our membership, and I'm asking for it now. So, given the state of audio in 2025, how would you allocate your money if you were buying a new system this year? Thank you very much for your input

10% on a measurement microphone
20% on a steamer/DAC
70% on active speakers


Then trade some speaker budget for room treatment if required.

 

[respice finem]

In my case (my "serious" listening room) 50% (active) speakers, 25% electronics (including the source PC), 25% room treatment (including the UMIK-1 mic).

 

[Oddball]

It is for sure not possible to have "excellent" system for less than $1K, unfortunately.

Also not really feasible to do allocation of budget as it is different for various budgets and options. Active, passive?

Defining "excellent" would be a good place to start.

 

[terryforsythe]

Today I can see going for 75/25 - with the 25 percent going towards an amplifier with streaming capability.

Generally speaking, that sounds like a good rule of thumb. But, every system is different, so I would not take sticking to a fixed ratio too seriously.

For example, I would use my Hypex Nilia amplifier ($1400 as a simple to assemble kit) with $2k speakers or with $10k speakers. If the speakers were inefficient or to be used for high volume in a large room, I probably would go with two Hypex Nilia monoblocks ($1k each for the kits).

On the other hand, with efficient speakers or for moderate listening levels, I like the Topping LA90 Discrete ($800).

 

[terryforsythe]

10% on a measurement microphone
20% on a steamer/DAC
70% on active speakers


Then trade some speaker budget for room treatment if required.

The KEF LS60 Wireless speakers are a great value for small rooms and/or moderate listening levels in a large room. With them you don't even need a streamer, it is built in. But, I do use an external streamer and a Raspberry Pi running CamillaDSP with my LS60s for the purpose of room correction.

 

[AaronJ]

Personally I'm at about 40% speakers, 30% phono playback (turntable, cartridge, SUT), 20% electronics/cabling, 10% room treatment (DSP). As far as I'm concerned I have just about everything other than speakers completely sorted and that will be the next big upgrade which will change the equation.

I think it's worth spending a little extra $ on the components you physically interact with. A beautifully built turntable is an absolute pleasure to operate. Obviously there is a physical interaction with the speakers and the room, but I place a little higher emphasis on source components than most do. The rest of the electronics are more utilitarian with a strong emphasis on looks.

 

[PristineSound]

I still say 50% for speakers. Everything else will still add up.

Let's this example:
Ascend Sierra LX Speakers $1600
Buckeye Amp $725
Topping E70 $350 (on sale)
Topping P90 Preamp (optional) $600
Source/streamer $0 (assuming you are using your existing computer)
Cables/Msic $50

Not accounting room treatment.

Speaker is around 60% here based on this example without a preamp and room treatment.

 

[Oddball]

As noted before "excellent" needs a definition. I think this is mostly for the benefit of the OP. "Excellence" is a very tall task and beyond what some good speaker suggested above could provide.

 

[kyuu]

I don't see the point of allocating percentages. The rule for electronics should be to get whatever meets your requirements in terms of functionality, power, and whatever other metrics are important to you (perceived reliability, aesthetics) and spend no more than necessary to meet those requirements. Then allocate the rest of your budget to speakers and room correction.

 

[Mike123]

Speakers 63%. But, in principle, the rule works quite well in the form: 50% and more.

 

[respice finem]

I don't see the point of allocating percentages. The rule for electronics should be to get whatever meets your requirements in terms of functionality, power, and whatever other metrics are important to you (perceived reliability, aesthetics) and spend no more than necessary to meet those requirements. Then allocate the rest of your budget to speakers and room correction.

Indeed. It's sometimes not even exactly possible - as with active speakers, how much is the speaker and how much the amps in it?

 

[GXAlan]

No science to my data, but I would recommend

WiiM Amp Pro + JBL L52
Bluesound Node Icon + JBL 708P
Trinnov Nova + Meyer Sound Amie

$380+1000 (2.6x)
$1200+$4000 (3.3x)
$3500+$9740 (2.7x)

So, at least in this theoretical “what would I recommend to people” based upon MSRP, I am about 3:1 speakers to electronics, but that is with active speakers once you have the budget to get into active speakers.

The depreciation on the JBL 708P is much greater than the depreciation on the Bluesound Node Icon.

For all of those three systems, it’s not as if a turntable needs to be equal in price. You buy the turntable that looks cool to you…

I would then add a nice subwoofer like a PSA S1813m ($1550) or S1512m ($1200).

So it really does show the amount I would put in my speakers.

 

[tengiz]

To date, I spent:

~50% on speakers, including the subs
~40% on room treatment
~10% on electronics

 

[Berwhale]

My setup is classed as 'PC peripherals' and doesn't come under the audio budget

£530 for iLoud MTMs, £262 Sennheiser HD 660 S, £198 for Topping DX5 II, £94 for UMIK-1 measurement mic, PC to run it and do other stuff ~£2,000

Although looking at the audio bits, it's pretty close to 75% for the transducers and 25% for the other stuff

 

[Bruce Morgen]

Throw powered/active monitors in lieu of traditional passive speakers into the sub-$1k/system options list and the formula gets a good deal more complex.