Law of diminishing return kicks in early, but the point where the ratio of return / investment becomes so small the extra investment is not meaningful anymore is another thing - a very much personal thing. Also, the answer will be different if we are talking only about improved sound quality, or take into account all other variables like the attractiveness of the design, the quality of materials etc...
-
Welcome to ASR. 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!
What's your vote for where the Law of Diminishing returns starts for tower speakers?
- Thread starter 2Sunny
- Start date
DanielT
Master Contributor
Let's say a pair of fully functioning, in good condition used Infinity Primus 360 tower speakers for around $150.
Erin says this about Infinity Primus 360:
The Infinity Primus 360 speakers, released 20 years ago, showcase superior sound quality and measurement performance compared to many modern speakers, despite their age. The review highlights their design, listening experience, and how they relate to contemporary audio standards.
Highlights
Are Infinity Primus 360 a starting point where the diminishing returns are starting to kick in?
That said, HiFi enthusiasts probably know that it costs a lot extra to get that little extra icing on the cake if they want an "end game" solution.
It costs money to have a hobby and strive for something really good. That's just the way it is. Everyone knows that.
_____
For non-HiFi enthusiasts who just want sound, I think this is a rough guide, or gives an indication of where people are willing to spend. Where the Law of Diminishing begins and that is at that level where I buy my stuff way of reasoning that is:
(note this is just a guess on my part)
www.smarthomesounds.co.uk
Erin says this about Infinity Primus 360:
The Infinity Primus 360 speakers, released 20 years ago, showcase superior sound quality and measurement performance compared to many modern speakers, despite their age. The review highlights their design, listening experience, and how they relate to contemporary audio standards.
Highlights
- Found a treasure: Discovered Infinity Primus 360 speakers at a record store.
- Exceptional measurements: Speakers measure within ±2 dB on-axis, indicating high quality.
- Balanced sound: Optimal positioning and slight toe-in enhanced mid-range performance.
- Low-end limitations: Bass response drops off below 50 Hz, requiring a subwoofer for deep bass.
- EQ-friendly design: Early reflections harmonize with direct sound, allowing for effective equalization.
- Value comparison: Speakers from 2005 outperform many modern counterparts at similar price points.
- Personal experience: Listening tests revealed subjective sound differences among users, highlighting the importance of individual perception.
Are Infinity Primus 360 a starting point where the diminishing returns are starting to kick in?
That said, HiFi enthusiasts probably know that it costs a lot extra to get that little extra icing on the cake if they want an "end game" solution.
It costs money to have a hobby and strive for something really good. That's just the way it is. Everyone knows that.
_____
For non-HiFi enthusiasts who just want sound, I think this is a rough guide, or gives an indication of where people are willing to spend. Where the Law of Diminishing begins and that is at that level where I buy my stuff way of reasoning that is:
(note this is just a guess on my part)
Sonos Best Sellers | Smart Home Sounds
Get the Lowest Price Guaranteed on all Sonos Best Sellers, only at Smart Home Sounds! ✓ Free Next Day UK Delivery* ✓ Free 6 Year Sonos Warranty ✓ Expert Advice
www.smarthomesounds.co.uk
Last edited:
A little story: Here in the UK there are charity organisations that receive occasional functioning but discarded items from the recycling/refuse centres and which they sell on through ebay or retail premises. Looking for some cheap speakers for testing purposes so I didn't blow expensive tweeters when messing about with crossovers I bought a pair of simple 2-way Elac tower speakers with 6" drivers for £15 (plus a small donation to the cause). To my surprise they were actually quite fun to listen to, easy to drive with any amplifier, and sounded better than many a system I have heard or started my own audio journey with. Difficult to improve on substantially without a lot more than 4x the budgetVery personalized in my opinion. For me JBL 4329P I got for $3500. Of course that's including amps, dac, network . I've had speakers costing 4x as much I didn't really like 4x as much. To each his own.
JBL 4329P (review and measurements by Erin)
Video review: Spinorama: Review: https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/jbl_4329p/ These are studio monitor powered speakers that retail for US$4500/pair. Discuss!
You'll hit diminishing returns on the used market quite early, IMO.Let's say a pair of fully functioning, in good condition used Infinity Primus 360 tower speakers for around $150.
View attachment 437717
Erin says this about Infinity Primus 360:
The Infinity Primus 360 speakers, released 20 years ago, showcase superior sound quality and measurement performance compared to many modern speakers, despite their age. The review highlights their design, listening experience, and how they relate to contemporary audio standards.
Highlights
- Found a treasure: Discovered Infinity Primus 360 speakers at a record store.
- Exceptional measurements: Speakers measure within ±2 dB on-axis, indicating high quality.
- Balanced sound: Optimal positioning and slight toe-in enhanced mid-range performance.
- Low-end limitations: Bass response drops off below 50 Hz, requiring a subwoofer for deep bass.
- EQ-friendly design: Early reflections harmonize with direct sound, allowing for effective equalization.
- Value comparison: Speakers from 2005 outperform many modern counterparts at similar price points.
- Personal experience: Listening tests revealed subjective sound differences among users, highlighting the importance of individual perception.
Are Infinity Primus 360 a starting point where the diminishing returns are starting to kick in?
That said, HiFi enthusiasts probably know that it costs a lot extra to get that little extra icing on the cake if they want an "end game" solution.
It costs money to have a hobby and strive for something really good. That's just the way it is. Everyone knows that.
_____
For non-HiFi enthusiasts who just want sound, I think this is a rough guide, or gives an indication of where people are willing to spend. Where the Law of Diminishing begins and that is at that level where I buy my stuff way of reasoning that is:
(note this is just a guess on my part)
Sonos Best Sellers | Smart Home Sounds
Get the Lowest Price Guaranteed on all Sonos Best Sellers, only at Smart Home Sounds! ✓ Free Next Day UK Delivery* ✓ Free 6 Year Sonos Warranty ✓ Expert Advice
If you're using subwoofers (which every system regardless of budget would benefit from) and don't need insane SPL, I'd be happy with the objective measurements of towers from the KEF Q Meta, Polk Reserve, or Revel Concerto lines. Moving up in price bracket, you're looking at KEF R, Revel Performa Be, Ascend ELX, etc, which for passive towers, could be truly end-game for many people.
a4eaudio
Active Member
- Joined
- May 7, 2024
- Messages
- 223
- Likes
- 296
I was going to post that it seems most people don't understand The Principle of Diminishing Marginal Returns, but I got to gwing and Noske's posts and see that they have it covered.
antcollinet
Grand Contributor
I suspect we are not sharing a common understanding of the term "diminishing returns". Let alone a common understanding of what is meant by the "start" of diminishing returns.
If we were to look at a curve of "sound quality" (Y axis) against price (X axis), the curve will start off steep, and gradually level out to near horizontal.
There will not be a discontinuity at which dimiishing return starts.
And since the slope is shallower, the more you go up in price, it could be argued that diminishing returns start right at the lowest price.
Or you could try to come up with a definition along the lines that the start of diminshing returns in is when Quality/$£€ is x% of starting Quality/$£€
But I don't think we are getting there with a poll.
If we were to look at a curve of "sound quality" (Y axis) against price (X axis), the curve will start off steep, and gradually level out to near horizontal.
There will not be a discontinuity at which dimiishing return starts.
And since the slope is shallower, the more you go up in price, it could be argued that diminishing returns start right at the lowest price.
Or you could try to come up with a definition along the lines that the start of diminshing returns in is when Quality/$£€ is x% of starting Quality/$£€
But I don't think we are getting there with a poll.
Is there a name for the point where the returns mostly flattens off?
If I had to guess, I'd think that is what most people mean when they mistakenly call it 'diminishing returns'. If it costs 100% more but is only 90% better, I'd assume most would still be happy with that.
"Point of very little returns"? Isn't quite as catchy. "Point of minimal returns?"
True, we end up with things that some people count as improvements not mattering to others. Better bass? But I have subwoofers. Wider dispersion, But I don't need that in my setting. Better......
Sokel
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2021
- Messages
- 9,106
- Likes
- 9,727
Don't think that such law applies to speakers.
And I mean speakers as speakers for simplicity, not considering aesthetics, at all.
In fact I think that the line goes backwards, from the best it can be done (that would be mains monitors ALONG with the cost of the soffit-mounting or in the 8183A fashion) to a series of compromises from then downwards.
If one wants to be pragmatic that's the reality. If wants to buy smart too chooses the compromises that suits room and ears (the later are far easier than the former) .
Putting a price tag to it could be difficult.
Usually,it's about effortless SLP to reference level (the one who just changes distance, not make the speaker unbearable) along with decent extension low (to 30's at least) .
Of course is up to taste also, if someone wants to listen to a lady crying along with a small mandolin or listen to a constant SPL with no high CR at a small room 2 meters from the speakers things can go easier.
Is up to needs,compromises and taste really.
And I mean speakers as speakers for simplicity, not considering aesthetics, at all.
In fact I think that the line goes backwards, from the best it can be done (that would be mains monitors ALONG with the cost of the soffit-mounting or in the 8183A fashion) to a series of compromises from then downwards.
If one wants to be pragmatic that's the reality. If wants to buy smart too chooses the compromises that suits room and ears (the later are far easier than the former) .
Putting a price tag to it could be difficult.
Usually,it's about effortless SLP to reference level (the one who just changes distance, not make the speaker unbearable) along with decent extension low (to 30's at least) .
Of course is up to taste also, if someone wants to listen to a lady crying along with a small mandolin or listen to a constant SPL with no high CR at a small room 2 meters from the speakers things can go easier.
Is up to needs,compromises and taste really.
a4eaudio
Active Member
- Joined
- May 7, 2024
- Messages
- 223
- Likes
- 296
The problem is the OP is using an economics term but wanting it to apply in a technical sense.
Typical markets work where diminishing marginal returns apply. Each individual buys to the point where there marginal utility is equal to marginal cost (where marginal cost equals price assuming you are a small enough buyer that you are a price-taker).
My preference for rye bread is pretty low, so at the current price of bread I buy one loaf a month. Someone who absolutely loves rye bread, facing the same price, buys 4 loaves per month.
One persons' preference for high-SPL, low distortion speakers is very high, and they are willing to pay $10k for high-SPL, low distortion speakers. Another person's preference for high-SPL, low distortion speakers is very low, and they are willing to pay $100 for some mediocre speakers off Amazon.
Which is the reason that there is a positive number of votes in every category of the poll. The diminishing returns likely starts at $0 (as already mentioned) and just gets more severe as you move up in price, but where you end up purchasing is a personal/subjective decision.
For raw speaker drivers, some people buy GRS, some SB Acoustics, some Scanspeak and others Purifi. Many people can't understand how someone else is willing to pay for Purifi drivers to get that extra little bit of lower distortion for quite a bit more money. And of course the user of Purifi drivers can barely imagine using GRS drivers.
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 23,575
- Likes
- 44,214
Less than $1000 is diminishing returns for sure.
Where the curve flattens requires perspective about needs, like size of room, SPL needed etc etc. Also would include just what the limits of the budget are.
$5k is probably not a bad place to put that. One of the better $5k speakers is definitely not bettered by even 20% using the better $10k speakers. Ignoring stupid under-performing designs of course.
PS-I had in mind pricing per pair. If per speaker I would cut things in half.
DanielT
Master Contributor
I think we use the term, on HiFi in this thread, more in the form of approximately where it will cost so much more to get it just a little better.
How should one actually use the term, or concept/principle? The term itself, what does it mean, how can it be applied to economic phenomena?
We talk about input and output in HiFi, so do economists when they talk about term diminishing returns. For those interested, see here:
How should one actually use the term, or concept/principle? The term itself, what does it mean, how can it be applied to economic phenomena?
We talk about input and output in HiFi, so do economists when they talk about term diminishing returns.
For those interested, see here:That was the interpretation I voted on hence voted 5K - I think it's the only meaning that make sense in the context.
Otherwise it's fifty quid speakers, sound comes out of them, what more do you want? Well, quite a lot more as it happens.
kemmler3D
Master Contributor
I think if you spend $200 you get a speaker that's twice as good as you get for $100, at least close to that.
Beyond that I think it's more money for not as much improvement.. but where to get off the increasingly slow rollercoaster is up to the passenger
Beyond that I think it's more money for not as much improvement.. but where to get off the increasingly slow rollercoaster is up to the passenger
The package of qualities a speaker brings home cannot be quantified, at least not in general. Regarding the basics even cheaper, but tightly selected models will work perfectly, see examples, esp/ the HECO above. And one cannot oversee, that the raising price goes a lot into the visuals.
When I read the poll I immediately asked myself, what feature would I drop coming from my (virtually perfect) speakers? The question is, what's the point where savings become unreasonable? The industrial design, I really like how it looks so humble. The sound, now that I have them, no way. But do I want more, nah, really, I'm happy.
I paid 1k / pair in a sell-out. So I would say, if savings are appropriate 1k, if visuals are more important 2k. More than 4k cannot be justified, see Genelec Neuman etc - perfect, and visuals are pretty much o/k at least. Towers wanted? Use two subs as stands.
Voted over 5000, but the question is too much open for interpretation, strictly speaking it starts at very low price points. Doubling the price from 500 to 1000 will not give you 100% improvement.
Better defined questions could be:
- At what point does doubling the price give you less then 10% improvement in measurable performance (Freq.response, Distortion, max SPL, etc.). But then how do you define 10% improvement?
- At what point would you be unlikely to hear an improvement in a blind listening test, if you double the price?
Better defined questions could be:
- At what point does doubling the price give you less then 10% improvement in measurable performance (Freq.response, Distortion, max SPL, etc.). But then how do you define 10% improvement?
- At what point would you be unlikely to hear an improvement in a blind listening test, if you double the price?
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 23,575
- Likes
- 44,214
Of course qualities can be quantified. Harman has shown how to compare speakers. If the designer cannot quantify anything he has no basis for design parameters.
Now yes visual appeal can be a part of it as well. I've also seen some beautiful speakers that are sub-par performers.
Would your virtually perfect speakers be your preference in a blind test against any speakers in existence? I doubt it.
I'm not sure what you mean by savings become unreasonable. Do you mean you make a cheaper speaker and it compromises performance so much your speakers become unsatisfying?
My idea of very inexpensive speakers that are very satisfying are the LSR 305s. $300/pr. Remember you don't even need an amp for these. There are better speakers, but those are quite good. Which is why diminishing returns start well below $1000. Speakers costing 10 times as much are better, but not 10 times better. I've heard the Revel M106 speakers. Definitely better than the 305s, but not proportionally to the price difference.
There are speakers around $5k that may not be bettered by anything being twice as good at any price. Maybe not even 50% better. That is what I refer to showing the curve in a previous post.
Any person's room, appearance and other needs will place some boundaries, but diminishing returns sets in at the very low end these days. The flattening of the sound quality curve vs price is not at $50k or $100k either. It is lower than that.
antcollinet
Grand Contributor
But I don't think we are getting there with a poll.
In fact, I suspect the poll is just "what is the price I personally am prepared to pay for speakers?"
Because most of us will choose the point at which higher prices don't bring us sufficiently higher value - by our own personal criteria. Ie our own personal "diminishing returns" point.
DanielT
Master Contributor
Speaking of SPL, which was raised earlier in the thread.
Correlation price and low or acceptable distortion with high SPL there I think it levels out relatively high up in price. But again , its individually. Even individually from time to time. Nowadays when I live in an apartment. I want to have a good relationship with the neighbors so a high-capability SPL system is rather unnecessary to have. To lay down a hefty sum on something that can only be used a little now and then, for shorter periods of time, is just unnecessary to do. However, I still want it to sound good at normal listening volume but for that you don't have to open the big wallet.
More money on headphones on the other hand.....and so on.
A little waffle, old man barking at clouds: High SPL that doesn't cost much, yes it does exist. These damn young people in their cars where they have loaded in big bass woofers/drivers that pump out a terrible incredibly loud distortion-filled sound exist as you know. But it's not home Hifi. It's just distortion noise.
(said with a humorous tone, it doesn't annoy me that much, hardly at all to be honest)
Correlation price and low or acceptable distortion with high SPL there I think it levels out relatively high up in price. But again , its individually. Even individually from time to time. Nowadays when I live in an apartment. I want to have a good relationship with the neighbors so a high-capability SPL system is rather unnecessary to have. To lay down a hefty sum on something that can only be used a little now and then, for shorter periods of time, is just unnecessary to do. However, I still want it to sound good at normal listening volume but for that you don't have to open the big wallet.
More money on headphones on the other hand.....and so on.
A little waffle, old man barking at clouds: High SPL that doesn't cost much, yes it does exist. These damn young people in their cars where they have loaded in big bass woofers/drivers that pump out a terrible incredibly loud distortion-filled sound exist as you know. But it's not home Hifi. It's just distortion noise.
(said with a humorous tone, it doesn't annoy me that much, hardly at all to be honest)
Last edited:
Preferrence as defined by Dr. Olive lives on an "ordinal scale", it can't be mapped to money, which lives on a rational scale (wiki).
Regarding the 305, yes it is in order, and it has its amp built in. The step, though, from that up to my 1k (2k regularly) pair plus a 150 $ Fosi etc amp is pretty steep in all categories, except for stereo imaging. Even the industrial design is flawless, for me: neutral, no excesses. The more expensive speaker in my example is way more versatile. But of course to say it is 2,749 times as "good" doesn't make sense.
I'm finally satisfied, and as said, don't long for more ever. That logically also says, I personally would not get "more" of something if I would spend extra. Not 'diminishing returns', but 'no returns'. I love to approve my decision to buy them