• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Spending ratios on a hifi system

dejv

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
16
Likes
20
And when adding more subwoofers, remember that the maximum output level increases. That basically means that you can choose a smaller model, as long as you get the low end extension you need. A pair of, or even 4, sealed subwoofers with active compensation to lift the low end can be really compact. As long you doesn't run out of excursion, that's a really good solution with minimal group delay compared to ported ones.
 

Martin

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2018
Messages
1,895
Likes
5,536
Location
Cape Coral, FL
I agree with several other responses. Speakers are the first priority. They are really the only component in the chain that produces sound and so are the most subjective choice and, IMMHO, the most important. I recommend 50% on speakers. If you only use digital sources then a 30% amplification/20% DAC/source split works. If you want vinyl playback capabilities flip it to 20% amplification/30% DAC/sources. Cables cost a few dollars and room treatment only if needed (there a lot of DIY options).

Also, I prefer full range speakers to sub/satellite setups. Just my preference.

Martin
 

Theriverlethe

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2019
Messages
493
Likes
344
I'm thinking about dollar ratios. I have an untreated room in a new (to us) home that I intend to make a nest of musical joy. I can get into more specifics on the room but because I'm in the learning and planning phase, I find myself wanting to splurge on certain things to a degree that might not make sense relative to the dollars I spend on other areas. In my case I am looking at spending in the following areas:

1. Room treatments
2. Speakers
3. Amplifier
4. DAC
5. Source components (if not integrated with 4).
6. Cabling

Thinking out loud, I'll probably spend $3,000 to $5,000 and I should probably give myself a budget to spread out on the 6 items above. In the absence of a budget, I suspect that the first thing I buy will be disproportionately expense and that the last thing I buy to complete the set of 6 might get squeezed on dollars because the budget is gone.

Case in point as I began to read about DACs I thought that $500 was more than I'd ever spend but now I find myself tempted by the MiniDSP SHD (though that device does more than DAC'ing). But is $1200 on source/dac/preamp/etc a silly amount to spend if I go with Statement II speakers in the $1500 range? Would I be better off with $500 on DACs and sources, and $2000 on speakers? I'm asking this in a over-simplified way and clearly the answer will vary based on differing needs but I think it's generally an interesting question.

My situation might be a little unique because I am open to putting a lot of time into DIY efforts on (1), (2), and (3).

Ignoring for a moment whether this fits into the $5k I'm tempted to allocate dollars about as follows:

1. Room treatments - $1000
2. Speakers - $1500
3. Amplifier - $1500
4 and 5 combined. - $1200
6. Cabling - $50 to $250

This creates roughly a 1:1:1:1 ratio on 1-5 (again with 4 and 5 combined). Is such a ratio silly? Am I going too far on 3 or 4/5 relative to what I spend on (2)?

I'm sure many would say that dollars don't mean performance and perhaps by extension, my core question might be flawed. Do you apply such ratios when you consider a build? If so, what are your ratios and would you change them if you had a chance to do a new build from scratch?

Personally, I’ve gone about 50% room treatment and 50% speakers, subwoofers, and associated electronics. I’m single with no children, and realize that isn’t an option for most people. Total cost was around $6,000 - $8,000.
 

Theriverlethe

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2019
Messages
493
Likes
344
This is debatable at best, and possibly harmful at worst.

Our ears (or more specifically, our brains) already do a great deal of "room correction."

Reflections are a part of hearing sounds in the natural world. That is one reason why loudspeakers can be more emotionally involving than headphones: they trick us into feeling the sounds are happening around us rather than inside our heads.

Treat a room too much, and you essentially wind up with a sterile headphone experience. Nothing wrong with that (I don't hate headphones or anything) but at that point, why not simply go with headphones?

A "normally" furnished room is fine for enjoyable listening. Some soft chairs, soft couch, a rug, bookshelves full of books, normal shelving filled with knick-knacks, etc.

I'd highly suggest tackling room treatment last, if at all. Set everything else up first. Make a room that's comfortable for you, the human, who's spending all this money. Experiment with speaker placement a bit. Are you hearing any problems? If so, take measurements and then think about some specific treatment measures that might help.

You may well find room treatment totally skippable.

Rest of what you proposed looks roughly correct. Like others have said, perhaps start with speakers and work backward. Probably at least half your total budget ought to go to the speakers.

Also accept the painful fact that there are no perfect all-around speakers. Most audiophiles wind up experimenting with multiple speakers. You might want to make this part of your process. Make use of companies that offer liberal in-home audition periods. There's really no substitute for experimenting with multiple speakers in your listening room.



I think there's fairly broad agreement here when it comes to sub-bass especially involving a single subwoofer. Opinions definitely diverge as we move up the frequency range. I have one room where I use room correction and in my other setups I don't find it too necessary. My opinions even diverge... with my own opinions!

This is probably more practical advice for most people, but I’d never advise someone who can get away with it to avoid room treatment. You would have to cover every surface to create the “sterile” experience you describe. Gik Acoustics and others make mathematically-derived diffusion products that will break up early reflections while maintaining a “live” ambience.
 

Ceburaska

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 30, 2018
Messages
250
Likes
301
Location
Gloucestershire, England
If I were starting anew, and avoided vinyl, then I’d go for
1. Roon $500
2. Speakers $1500
3. Amplifier $1000
4. DAC $200
5. Roon core/player $2000
I’m assuming Roon DSP can obviate the need for room treatment.
Amp and speakers are secondhand.
 

Midwest Blade

Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2019
Messages
401
Likes
535
I am in the camp for at least 50% of your budget towards speakers and the balance towards your amp/dac/source. A good set of speaker cables from either Blue Jeans or make your own from cable sourced from Belden, Mogami, Canare, DO NOT BUY ANY FANCY CABLES THAT PROMISE TO IMPROVE YOUR SYSTEM. Skip any room treatments until you get set up and listen to your system, after that, if you suspect a problem, do not buy any room treatments until you measure how your room is working. Experts usually warn that unless you know by measurement what you are trying to accomplish you are spending money on an unknown.
 

MRC01

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
3,424
Likes
4,030
Location
Pacific Northwest
... Skip any room treatments until you get set up and listen to your system, after that, if you suspect a problem, do not buy any room treatments until you measure how your room is working. Experts usually warn that unless you know by measurement what you are trying to accomplish you are spending money on an unknown.
This makes sense. But if one does this, remember to hold back something like 25% of the budget for room treatment. Rooms typically have frequency response variations of 12 dB or more which also affect spectral decay and distortion. Addressing this with room treatment makes a huge improvement in sound that cannot be achieved with EQ.

You can save some $ on room treatment if you DIY. But even then it's still not cheap because most room treatments must necessarily be sized in proportion to the wavelength of sound they affect, and bass frequencies have long wavelengths. It cost me a few hundred bucks to build my own tube traps (7' tall, 2' diameter), but they would have cost thousands if I bought equivalent ones. I decided not to build the tuned bass membranes myself because I wanted to avoid the hassles of learning how to set mass, tension, damping, depth, etc. to tune the frequencies right, and the Scopus T-70s didn't cost much more than it would have cost me in materials to build them.
 
Last edited:

Theriverlethe

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2019
Messages
493
Likes
344
If I were starting anew, and avoided vinyl, then I’d go for
1. Roon $500
2. Speakers $1500
3. Amplifier $1000
4. DAC $200
5. Roon core/player $2000
I’m assuming Roon DSP can obviate the need for room treatment.
Amp and speakers are secondhand.

Why so much money on Roon? Something like this would accomplish most of what you’re after:

https://www.minidsp.com/products/streaming-hd-series/shd-studio

You can use any old hardware for the music server.
 
Last edited:

Ceburaska

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 30, 2018
Messages
250
Likes
301
Location
Gloucestershire, England
Why so much money on Roon? Something like this would accomplish most of what you’re after:

https://www.minidsp.com/products/streaming-hd-series/shd-studio

You can use any old hardware for the music server.
I’m currently enamoured of Roon, using an Innuos which cost $500, but I’ve budgeted for a Nucleus to do all the DSP properly.
I’m sure there are cheaper ways of running Roon, but I’m a lazy technophobe who doesn’t want to (can’t) do anything involving hardware/building yourself/etc.
 

Daverz

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 17, 2019
Messages
1,294
Likes
1,451
The problem with subwoofers is that you really need at least two.

With a single subwoofer, the "subwoofer crawl" method is nearly always going to reveal an ideal placement that is extremely inconvenient.

A pair of decent subwoofers is not cheap.

Why? Why do I need to spend a lot on a subwoofer?
 

Willem

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
3,654
Likes
5,276
Subwoofers are a good way to have deep bass. Two small ones will not cost more than $1000 for two. Personally I would at this budget level probably not spend more on electronics than the cost of a Yamaha AS 701 and if using subwoofers an Antimode 8033. The rest on speakers like Harbeths (but that is just my taste). Without subs I would go for the Harbeth Compact 7.
 
Last edited:

dkinric

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
666
Likes
1,446
Location
Virginia, USA
Why? Why do I need to spend a lot on a subwoofer?
I used to think I didn't need a sub. Then I got one. Now I have two.

I don't think you need to spend "a lot" on a sub, but probably at least $500/per range for something good.

Why a sub? For many genres, there is a lot of energy in the lower bass that you usually don't hear. Most speakers, even towers, cannot reproduce that range adequately. Those that can cost big bucks and require big power. A much more economical route is to put money into smaller but excellent bookshelf size speakers that excell above, say 80hz without drop off, and let the sub do the heavy lifting below that range, as it's designed to do.
Also, as mentioned earlier, the best placement for imaging is not usually the best placement for subs.
Also, if you can find a good out of the way spot for the subs, the WAF (or should we now say SOAF?) is usually much higher for smaller speakers. It's an excellent solution. Most people don't even realize what they are missing.
 

Daverz

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 17, 2019
Messages
1,294
Likes
1,451
I used to think I didn't need a sub. Then I got one. Now I have two.

I don't think you need to spend "a lot" on a sub, but probably at least $500/per range for something good.

Why a sub? For many genres, there is a lot of energy in the lower bass that you usually don't hear. Most speakers, even towers, cannot reproduce that range adequately. Those that can cost big bucks and require big power. A much more economical route is to put money into smaller but excellent bookshelf size speakers that excell above, say 80hz without drop off, and let the sub do the heavy lifting below that range, as it's designed to do.
Also, as mentioned earlier, the best placement for imaging is not usually the best placement for subs.
Also, if you can find a good out of the way spot for the subs, the WAF (or should we now say SOAF?) is usually much higher for smaller speakers. It's an excellent solution. Most people don't even realize what they are missing.

I wasn't questioning the usefulness of subwoofers, just the "not cheap" admonition.

I'd like to add some subwoofers to my system, but I don't really want to spend a grand on them and was considering the "cheesewoofers" recommended elsewhere on ASR.
 

JohnBooty

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
632
Likes
1,555
Location
Philadelphia area
I wasn't questioning the usefulness of subwoofers, just the "not cheap" admonition.

I'd like to add some subwoofers to my system, but I don't really want to spend a grand on them and was considering the "cheesewoofers" recommended elsewhere on ASR.

Well, you don't have to. Broadly speaking there's two ways to do it in my experience. That is of course assuming you are not buying used or building DIY kits. Both of those are 100% recommended. I'm just leaving them out of the equation because if you're going one of those routes you're probably advanced enough not to need my advice.

There's a cheap (but decent) way and a way that runs you at least a grand.

I mentioned the expensive way for OP because OP seemed to be committed to spending a grand or two on speakers and it would be sort of a hilarious mismatch to combine them with cheap subs. Though it might be fine. Who knows.

Way number one, the cheap way. Get two cheap but decent subwoofers. Good examples would be those recommended by Wirecutter, like the Dayton SUB-1200. I have personal experience using two of those in a couple of 2.2 setups and totally recommend them as long as you know that you're getting into. They are $150ea and you can usually find some coupons or free shipping deals from PartsExpress on them. I got mine for $120ea w/ free shipping about three years ago but I haven't seen them that cheap in a while.

What will this get you? These will "politely" extend your existing bookshelf speakers down to 40hz or a bit below. Frankly, it is not too difficult nor expensive to design a subwoofer that covers a single octave or so, and most reputable budget subs manage this perfectly fine. They don't deliver a ton of definition, nor "slam", but used properly they don't really do anything wrong. They just sort of make your bookshelf speakers sound like they play deeper than they do, and that's okay! That's actually a neat trick for $300 total! Bonus points if your bookshelves play deep enough to be crossed over at 60hz instead of 80hz.

People crap on these affordable subwoofers, but in my opinion that's because they crank the volume up too high attempting to get some bone rattling bass at which point they (like any overextended subwoofer) will not sound great. Used properly they extend, not offend. I really do recommend them.

Way number two, the pricy way. Get two decent subwoofers. $400-$500 seems to be the price range where subs start getting really good. Lots of power, definition, etc. These are generally internet direct retailers like Hsu, Rhythmik, SVS, etc. Now you're cooking! You'll hear those callouses on the performers' fingers during those super-funky slap bass solos.

I lied, there are actually a billion ways. There are many ways to skin this cat. You can find a zillion internet testimonials from folks who are happy with carefully tweaked and positioned single-sub setups. That's just a bit harder and less convenient. If you're building a home theater system, a single monster sub might even be preferable to two modest subs. For music I'd always rather have the duallies though.

Opinions vary widely here! Ask ten audio nerds and you'll probably get ten answers!
 

Juhazi

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 15, 2018
Messages
1,717
Likes
2,897
Location
Finland
I couldn't find a perfect place for this link, but here we go (in German)
Umfrg_Ergbn_Zubeho__r_Weiss_Web_zahlen.jpg


https://www.stereo.de/artikel/wie-w...er-kabel-spikes-absorber-stecker-etc-fuer-sie
Hier haben wir die Ergebnisse unserer letzten Newsletter Umfrage zu diesem Thema gesammelt
(Query to readers of Stereo.de newsletter)
 
Last edited:

Willem

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
3,654
Likes
5,276
Pretty depressing ignorance, particularly from a country that is so high on engineering.
 

dejv

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
16
Likes
20
I would also like to raise an important point on this subject:
Regarding high end audio equipment, the relationship between price and performance are something that you really should question. At least if you are searching for true, objective performance. A $1000 pair of speakers can perform a lot better than a $3000 pair, so this is totally dependant on what products you choose.

If I were about to upgrade my power amplifier, and found a better one for say twice the price, I wouldn't even think of changing out my other equipment to keep my spending ratio on the rest of my setup.

Maybe I'm over complicating this now, but perhaps an equally interesting ratio to discuss could be: "Performance impact in the final listening chain". But off course, the term "performance" could be pretty relative when talking about sound reproduction. :)
 

Willem

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
3,654
Likes
5,276
It is all about declining marginal returns to expenditure. Here, the returns are contributions to sound quality. With electronics, marginal returns are rapidly declining to zero, so there will be no point in spending more. Since speakers contribute most to final sound quality and are far from perfect, it is plausible that you can keep spending more on them much longer than on other links in the chain. The best mix is where one extra dollar spent on electronics contributes as much to sound quality as one dollar extra spent on speakers. Of course, this presupposes that each component is the best of its kind per dollar. With electronics, this is relatively easy, but much less so with speakers.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom