[WC]

All of my systems are what I term as budget systems. They sound OK to me, but I also have not heard any more expensive systems to compare them to. I will upgrade the systems in time when components fail. Based on the amount of time I spend listening to any one system, I just can't justify the cost. Instead I have just been spending my money on music.

[frank111]

 If you click the systems icon under my name you'll see my gear in my living room. In my den for music I rely on a purchase (i think) $79.99 brand new- a Realistic Modulette 8, 8track/am/fm with a pair of small enclosed 3 1/2" full range when I was 15. I got to thinking that both systems give me equal satisfaction: the living room system for audio/video satisfaction , & my den system for the emotional satisfaction(hanging out with buddies back in h.school).

[simoon]

The most expensive audio system I have ever heard (probably in the $100K range, at the recent CAF) could be "blown away" by ten seconds of live music.

This is not always the case. With regards to most rock bands, live sound is crap.

If you're talking about live acoustic jazz or classical, or other forms of purely acoustic music, however, I would agree.

At some point you have to decide if it's about the equipment or the music for you.

You are creating a false dichotomy.

I am perfectly able to spend hours doing nothing the tweaking my system to eek out the last bit of performance. And I also am perfectly able to sit for hours doing nothing but listening (completely emotionally engrossed) and completely ignoring the equipment.

I guarantee there are people here who enjoy their $5K systems more than some who are sitting there trying to decide if their garden-hose-sized power cable gives their preamp the "air" they just paid $1500 for.

It depends on what the reasons people get into this hobby.

[kingdeezie]

The funny thing is, to most people, $1000 for a stereo is an astronomical, ludicrous amount of money. It was my limit when I started, and most people would never spend that much.

I have to disagree here. The Bose lifestyle systems cost upwards of $3500, and people still purchase them because, due to marketing, they believe they are getting something extraordinary.

If people are willing to spend that much change on Bose, imagine, if they were well educated about the subject, how hard audiophila could make a comeback.

[Poultrygeist]

I listened to some $32k Aerial Acoustics the other day and I swear my homebrew OBs sound better.

[TONEPUB]

This is not always the case. With regards to most rock bands, live sound is crap.

If you're talking about live acoustic jazz or classical, or other forms of purely acoustic music, however, I would agree.

You are creating a false dichotomy.

I am perfectly able to spend hours doing nothing the tweaking my system to eek out the last bit of performance. And I also am perfectly able to sit for hours doing nothing but listening (completely emotionally engrossed) and completely ignoring the equipment.

It depends on what the reasons people get into this hobby.

I agree with you on bouncing back and forth between geeking out and just listening.  I enjoy both equally and I enjoy listening to live music, whether amplified or acoustic.  It's all a lot of fun.  Just depends on the day.

[Elizabeth]

Using a small five disc CD changer into a 2.1 system self powered ($125.00) computer speakers for years left on for my pets.
It was 90% of my main system.
So for $300. i had 90% ?? 95% of the quality of the sound of my main $20,000 plus setup.

[dB Cooper]

If you're talking about live acoustic jazz or classical, or other forms of purely acoustic music, however, I would agree.

I was.
Making a point about 'live vs recorded".
It is still relatively easy to tell them apart, even at the megabuck level.

[rockadanny]

Unfortunately, no. I have yet to be anywhere near as emotionally engaged via a cheap system as I am via my expensive one. Not to say I can't enjoy a cheap system, because I can (and do). And if the recording quality is superb I can get into it emotionally on my cheap system, but not as deeply as with my expensive system. This was the reason for pursuit of my main system to begin with, which just happens to be expensive compared to my cheap systems. I am by no means concerned with status and did not set out to spend a lot (relative to my budget) of money, but it was obvious I had to, at least with certain pieces.

[djbnh]

When I put the Warpspeed in play with my Niteshade NS-40 amp and Zu Omen Defs, our enjoyment of music grew even more. I know one can pay more for higher cost preamps, amps, and speakers; however, the level of enjoyment we're getting from this system at this price seems difficult to me to be downplayed.

In particular, I think Srajan penned it right about the Warpspeed in his August 2012 review when he said, "You clearly needn't be a trekkie or DIY advocate to appreciate the Warpspeed and embark on an affordable journey of exploration about what a really good passive preamp might do for your system. Particularly owners of valve amps should consider this. They might already have all the tone and body necessary to now focus on maximizing the complementary qualities of transparency, speed and energetic immediacy. (emphasis added)" As a tube amp owner, I think he's spot on. YMMV, but I like keeping the $ saved for other items, whether audio-related or otherwise. Happy listening!

[SteveFord]

To answer the original question, yes, especially with headphones. 
My Stax Sigmas are ancient but they just sound right; same deal with my MMGs.
You don't need to spend a pile to make things sound great.  I simply found people who judgement I trust and did something totally out of charecter and actually took their advice.