[Diamond Dog]

It seems likely that single source systems will have a much higher percentage spent on speakers.

Or not. In it's current configuration, my speakers account for about 20% of total system value in a single-source system. When my new speakers arrive, that's going to bump it up to about 33%. I see a lot of different paths taken here and it's all good.

D.D.

[Elizabeth]

Interesting we now have three posts of owners of magnepan speakers where  the speaker cost is a very low percentage of the total cost.

I think this says a LOT about Magnepan speakers being a huge 'bang for the buck' item.. and  how the Magnepans can benefit so much more than average from really good electronics.
(sorry if this sort of derails the thread a bit, I am glad though, that I am not the only magnepan owner with this sort of percentage)

[rbbert]

Or not. In it's current configuration, my speakers account for about 20% of total system value in a single-source system. When my new speakers arrive, that's going to bump it up to about 33%. I see a lot of different paths taken here and it's all good.

D.D.

I don't know, that's a lot higher than 10% (one of the outliers posted above)

[kevin360]

Interesting we now have three posts of owners of magnepan speakers where  the speaker cost is a very low percentage of the total cost.

I think this says a LOT about Magnepan speakers being a huge 'bang for the buck' item.. and  how the Magnepans can benefit so much more than average from really good electronics.
(sorry if this sort of derails the thread a bit, I am glad though, that I am not the only magnepan owner with this sort of percentage)

I certainly agree with this. The cost of my amp is a few multiples of that of the 3.7s. That's not a distribution I would ever have predicted for myself. I have no regrets and my 3.7s are only mildly (as opposed to being as wildly edited as my MMGs) modded - Mye Stands and a simplified connection plate.

As nearly as I can calculate, the percentages are 7.12% of the total system cost and 10.11% omitting video and the surrounds (call that the stereo budget). However, subs and bass treatments are still in the equation because they are handling the bottom end which the 3.7s are not being asked to deliver. The bottom end represents a whopping 17.56% of the stereo budget (22.88% if I factor in the active crossover). Heck, cables (power, IC and speaker) account for 8.67% of my stereo budget...

Sorry, this thread inspired me to put it in a spreadsheet. I remember having systems in which my speakers represented a third of my budget, or more. At 10%, the 3.7s acquit themselves exceptionally well. I do not want for more.

[hakka26]

Sorry, but "Dollar Percentage," is a meaningless term associating  non-defined values that describe nothing. A dollar is a dollar, 20% is twenty cents. 20% is 20%. "Value or Budget Percentage," would be  more relevant.

[PDR]

If you dont believe that cables, or even different amplification
make a difference, then your speaker cost would represent more of
your system cost. If you are a cable and amp believer..... those
$3500 cables and brand 'X' amp are bringing your percentage way down, or that
lamp cord and AVR is bringing it way up.

And where does DIY come to play when comparing?

[hakka26]

Number of components is also a major factor.

[Diamond Dog]

I don't know, that's a lot higher than 10% (one of the outliers posted above)

I saw two like that, actually. One with multiple high-quality front ends and one where it was left unstated. Both using Maggies. Skews the outcome which is why blanket statements can be tricky, especially in this hobby as there are so many approaches. For example, some believe in in sinking a lot of money into their front end or front ends, others not so much. As PDR mentions, some believe in the importance of cabling or amps more so than others. Again, skews the outcome. Many paths to the audio Nirvana that so few ever seem to actually arrive at but for many, that's part of the fun. Again, it's all good...

D.D.

[GT Audio Works]

Sorry, but "Dollar Percentage," is a meaningless term associating  non-defined values that describe nothing. A dollar is a dollar, 20% is twenty cents. "Value or Budget Percentage," would be  more relevant.

It was a general question..I believe it is not meaningless..I was trying to get a feel for how much individuals put towards their speakers out of a total system investment..Which I found these responses quite adequate. Of course there will be inputs that skew the scale but again I was just looking for an average.. If you want to lay out an itemized list of components and cost fine, this would make the comparison even more meaningful..I just thought considering the large investments some make,, some people would not be comfortable with that.
I am assuming most people have a reasonably balanced cost system, and do not pair $50,000 speakers with $500 amps, which would make the percentage meaningless... So in this context the actual dollar value is irrelevant.  If I asked you how many slices of pizza you ate you would not need to tell me the cost of the pizza for me to understand the concept of what percentage of the pie you ate.
                           Greg

[GT Audio Works]

If you dont believe that cables, or even different amplification
make a difference, then your speaker cost would represent more of
your system cost. If you are a cable and amp believer..... those
$3500 cables and brand 'X' amp are bringing your percentage way down, or that
lamp cord and AVR is bringing it way up.

And where does DIY come to play when comparing?

This is a big can of worms I opened...DIY and vintage gear don't figure into the generality of the question...slice it any way you want to..I got the answer I was looking for.  Thanks, Greg

[SteveFord]

I'm glad you opened this can of worms, I find it to be really interesting.

[kevin360]

The percentages I quoted were in accordance with the parameters set in the OP. In actual dollars spent (including the extra cost of the speakers from the loss in the short term ownership of what preceded them), the main speakers adjust to 17.23% of the total system budget. If I consider the cost of the subs and ancillary hardware as part of my speaker cost, then the percentage spent on my speakers represents right at 50% in actual dollars spent.

[G Georgopoulos]

excluding the source...

50% amplifier

50% speaker

cheers 

[satie]

I was going more by what it is worth now vs. what I paid for it.  When I adjust for the value of the system as is instead of price paid, I come closer to the %40 figure.  My speakers have the highest resale value of any component in my system... and that's as it should be IMO.

I guess since many folks have a mix of new and older and even vintage gear, the thing would be to figure out replacement values.

In my case that would still be a little complicated because there is really nothing current that is like a Tympani IV or IVa. Since I modified them with $1k worth of BG Neo8 drivers and >$1k electronic XO, then maybe an equivalent is a 20.7. So that would be like $14K
So amps, bass amp is still current, $3600, Classe DR9 - the current high bias 150 watter from them is the 2300, but it is more powerful, so the prio ca2200 would be the reference and is $5k - pretty much the same as the DR9 in its day ($4K) though that was outrageously expensive for a simple SS amp. A current Dyna Mk3 would be about $2k for an assembled knockoff. So about $10k for amps.
The Sources, The current technics (stopped production a couple years back) when modified  by KAB should come out at $1500, and the cartridge - 205cmk4 with modern SAS stylus would set you back about $500, but it is competitive with the best MM's like the Soundsmith's Voice - with MR stylus -  so maybe $1500? The sony 707ES CD + DAC is equivalent to the current SACD 5400 $1500, but was more heavily built. The current version of the Bruce Moore Dual Mono design is about $6k. So that is also about $10k for sources 
So that makes for a bit more than 1/3rd - under 40%.

[Elizabeth]

Yeah, change the fomula to fit what the op wants to hear. No problem.
Then I too have 50% speaker
50% amp.
Happy?
Then another 50% preamp. the a second preamp I use as a fancy  tube buffer list $4,000 includes another $1K in mods.. So that is 50% too.
Another preamp I use for it's great phono section, that was list $6,000 so another 50%
Then $5,000 worth of turntable so another 50%
$5K for the digital stuff another simple 50%
Then $5,000 worth of power conditioners and yet another 50%
So I am glad i am in agreement: 50% for speakers LOL 

[GT Audio Works]

Yeah, change the fomula to fit what the op wants to hear. No problem.
Then I too have 50% speaker
50% amp.
Happy?
Then another 50% preamp. the a second preamp I use as a fancy  tube buffer list $4,000 includes another $1K in mods.. So that is 50% too.
Another preamp I use for it's great phono section, that was list $6,000 so another 50%
Then $5,000 worth of turntable so another 50%
$5K for the digital stuff another simple 50%
Then $5,000 worth of power conditioners and yet another 50%
So I am glad i am in agreement: 50% for speakers LOL 

Is that 50% listening with one ear or two ??
It changes the formula... Using a turntable add 3.33 %   

[Wayner]

In my digital room, I run 4.1 surround with my Martin Logans. So I'd guess somewhere around 30% of the cost is in speakers (including surrounds and a sub-woofer).

In the vinyl room, that factor is really skewed, because I have about $3,500 of electronics (amp and preamp) running a pair of Pioneer SP-BS22-LR speakers that cost $90.

I have another system that has about $4,000 running a pair of Focal 706v Chorus (at the time of purchase, $599). And yet on another system, are my modified Dynaco A25XLs sitting on about $4500 worth of electronics.

If the OP is looking for a magic dollar equation for matching electronics to speaker costs, I'd say there isn't one. Or if there is one, perhaps the one clue would be room size, as large rooms usually need large speakers and large speakers usually cost more then small ones.....

Wayner

[Ron D]

If I use the list prices of my components and not factoring in cables, etc. - just using source, preamp, monoblocks and speakers, my Maggie 3.6s account for 20% of the total value.

[rollo]

    To answer the OP question about 40%. My thing is source and speaker cost. Garbage in garbage out theory. The amp speaker combo as well. Cannot hear the speaker without an amp. Or system for that matter.
    If I hear a speaker I think I like how do I know if it is the speaker or the system hooked up to it ? The $64,000 question.




charles

[DTB300]

15% here...