[gcos]

 I continue to be amazed at the SQ of this cheap and cheerful combo.. The AricAudio tube preamp ( now 400 bucks was 340 ) with all you need re inputs and pre-outs. It came with a nice sounding Baldwin nos 12AU7 which I changed to Pavanes..sweet !!!! The Emo monoblocks are perhaps the best value in audio..200 watts of pure heaven..together both are barely over $1000..incredible

[srb]

I'm sure it's very nice but the "barely over $1000" preamp/amp combo isn't really any different than someone suggesting a $1000 integrated amp - they both need a source and speakers to make a complete system.  And that Cheap and Cheerful system should meet the guidelines of ~1000 for everything (source, amp and speakers).
 
Steve

[Gopher]

Can they sneak in if you consider used prices?

[srb]

Can they sneak in if you consider used prices?

I don't know .....
 
Mariusz originally came up with the requirements in August 2009, including:
 
"- maximum stereo system price = $1000 (I'll accept 20% overhead given variations in 2nd hand market and currency difference)
 
- Individual components shouldn't exceed $350 however in cases of full featured components like integrated amps with DAC, phonostage or headphone amp - its value can be as much as $650."

And then more recently in April 2011, I know you were also active in this discussion along with Letitroll98 and JohnR, when Letitroll98 said:
 
"Here's how I see it. The rules say $1000 max limit with $200 wiggle room, with some sub limits on analog etc. If you can convince a reasonable person that your special component combined with anything you can beg, borrow, or steal could possibly make a functioning audio system come in under the limit, you're in. For example the $500 DAC thread could be combined with a $29 DVD player transport, a $50 chip amp, and some Parts Express DIY speakers to come in way under the limit, therefore passed muster. The same standard passed on to the sub system limits. Therefore your Omen thread would be moved if posted today, despite being grandfathered in at this time."
 
If you use the example of combining a $500 DAC with super inexpensive components, and also allow used gear, by that thinking why wouldn't a used pair of Zu Omen's at $900 plus a new $29 DVD player and a new $59 chip amp be allowed?
 
Everyone is going to have their own vision of how the component pie should be split up.  For me, if I put together a $1000 system, I would probably portion 50% to speakers.  I would not combine a $900 amplifier with $39 Parts Express speakers, although the $39 speakers could go with a $29 DVD player and a $59 amplifier for a < $150 complete system.
 
As far as used components, a particular one may not show up on the used market for 6 months or more.  Specifying new components that meet the price guidelines means that anyone can get that Cheap and Cheerful system now!
 
Like I said, I don't know .....
 
Steve
 

[gcos]

I'm sure it's very nice but the "barely over $1000" preamp/amp combo isn't really any different than someone suggesting a $1000 integrated amp - they both need a source and speakers to make a complete system.  And that Cheap and Cheerful system should meet the guidelines of ~1000 for everything (source, amp and speakers).
 
Steve

You are right...just checked the guidelines..reading the blog for over a year I had the mistaken impression based on posts that no individual item should be over $1000..which is considered cheap in the audiophile world...will remove...

[srb]

You are right...just checked the guidelines..reading the blog for over a year I had the mistaken impression based on posts that no individual item should be over $1000..which is considered cheap in the audiophile world...will remove...

If you read my second reply you can see that I am still a little confused on how to best choose and recommend components for this circle.  I don't know that you need to remove the topic, I just thought that any single component (source, amp or speakers) near $1000 was pushing it, although you can see by some of the examples that component selection and combinations can be skewed and fudged to meet the total system cost depending on your point of view.
 
Steve

[ltr317]

If you read my second reply you can see that I am still a little confused on how to best choose and recommend components for this circle.  I don't know that you need to remove the topic, I just thought that any single component (source, amp or speakers) near $1000 was pushing it, although you can see by some of the examples that component selection and combinations can be skewed and fudged to meet the total system cost depending on your point of view.
 
Steve

While I agree with your reasoning, spending almost all of the allotted $1,000 on one component doesn't make component matching or sonic sense.   

[srb]

While I agree with your reasoning, spending almost all of the allotted $1,000 on one component doesn't make component matching or sonic sense.

Nor to me either.  I was just quoting some examples from others of systems that might "pass muster" for the circle, but not necessarily make sonic sense as you said.
 
My example of component matching using ultra bargain basement components was with each other!  "I would not combine a $900 amplifier with $39 Parts Express speakers, although the $39 speakers could go with a $29 DVD player and a $59 amplifier for a < $150 complete system."
 
Steve

[JLM]

The cheap and cheerful concept/goal of $1,000 USD systems fustrates me, but at the same time makes for a good exercise in shopping.

I'd be happier with a $2,000 USD system cap, but that would be "too easy".

[Letitroll98]

1st of all guys, I'm not all that into removing threads or posts unless it's really a last resort, heavy handedness is never appreciated by anybody and this is all suppose to be fun.  Sometimes things very obviously belong in another circle, but that's a different matter.  I think the arguments that the Arci combined with the Emo monoblocks is pushing the C&C guidlines a bit is valid, but note that you could substitute the Emotiva UPA-2 (brand new in box) offered right now on eBay for $349 BIN and come in comfortably under guidelines with some modest speakers and transport.  Do you really need the monoblocks?

(Stand out of the way of the thundering heard exiting the site to get to the eBay auction    )   

[eclein]

I never really added up my stuff, I just know that there are a ton of great pieces in all hi-fi categories that are cheap and cheerful and that's what I look for. I kinda think that the whole "you must have your entire system come in lower than $1000.00" is a bit radical, but hey I could be wrong.

[Letitroll98]

I never really added up my stuff, I just know that there are a ton of great pieces in all hi-fi categories that are cheap and cheerful and that's what I look for. I kinda think that the whole "you must have your entire system come in lower than $1000.00" is a bit radical, but hey I could be wrong.

Since this thread is getting to be a referendum on the C&C guidelines, I'll comment on that.  I took over the circle with the proviso from JohnR that we would stick to the original guidelines set up by the dear, departed Mariusz, who started the circle.  I might have set up more liberal limits, but I wasn't there at the time.  However part of those guidelines are how they are interpreted and applied, and as Mariusz was very liberal with them (to say the least) I think it falls upon me to continue that as well.  So the main thing is to have fun trying to get incredible bang for the buck, with some guidelines so it doesn't just become another "General Audio" circle.  Therefore I see nothing wrong with this thread at all as long as we view the OP as a starting point. 

[eclein]

Thats exactly what I meant with my post except you worded it so much better than I...Thank you Letitroll!!!
I have found a bunch of awesome stuff over the past year or so like the OP was pointing out, the value aspect is what the main point is. I'll start a thread for people to post a list of the all time great value items they purchased over the years.

[JohnR]

Too many people see the guidelines as restrictive, rather than a challenge.