Originally Posted by andytoh
Will the sound quality be much better if I spend the same amount as I did 5 years ago?
I have a set of Klipsch speakers and am under the opinion that dollars-to-dollars, our nineteen year old speakers vs today's equivalent, we'd have to increase our adjusted for inflation budget by fifty percent to improve on the sound quality. In the meantime, the facts of life included, my hearing ain't nothing like it was eighteen years ago. So in direct response to your question, spending the same you did five years ago, would be a downgrade as you haven't adjusted for inflation.Inflation Calculator
I paid $2,200.00 for my speakers (Epic, CF-3's) in 1993. Using the calculator, I'd have to spend; $3,488.00 to buy similar priced replacement speakers.
A set of Klipsch, RF-7 II's can be had, depending on where they're purchased, for about $3,200.00, or if B-stock, much less. To beat the sound of the Epic, CF-3's, my opinion, I'd have to step up to a pair of Martin Logan, Theos and change the accompanying center channel to replace our current choice, a RC-64 II. To get an improvement in the subwoofer sound quality, current technology vs old technology, would be much easier (subs have improved dramatically) by stepping up to a pair of Epik, Rythmick or Hsu subs of equal size. But to get an improvement that's a step above, I'd have to step up to a pair of Martin Logan, Depth i.
The point of the above, one would have to set their budget according to inflation just to break even and if they don't adjust for inflation, they'll be expectedly stepping down in quality. If the individual is wanting an improvement, I say it's a safe bet, adjusted for inflation, they'll need to increase their budget by fifty percent.
Hope the above helps give you sufficient insight to answer your question.
-Edited by BeeMan458 - 9/3/12 at 8:16am