I'm faced with the eternal dilemma. Many TB spread across many disks or all the information in a single container? Nothing might happen and the physical space saved is significant, but... As I always say, no one is exempt from suffering an unfortunate accident at the least expected moment, and the causes can be countless.
Of course, we take for granted that we are among hardware experts and that care would always be desired, but as such we also know that it has a limited lifespan, even if it sleeps on a bed of roses.
Considering the news precisely, one might think that the progressive increase in capacity in manufactured units and in data transfer speed will make it easier for us to replace the aforementioned when we detect that its end is approaching. But the key lies in your post, @amd125. Prices have not dropped much in recent years, and this shows that these high-capacity solutions will continue to be limited in access due to their high cost.
At the same time, a window opens: the SSD market is gradually becoming more competitive. While in its origins reliability was its weak point as a clear alternative to mechanical disks, now they have consolidated in durability and efficiency.
However, the price of TB in an SSD unit still leaves them far behind mechanical disks, and if the size scales in the latter at the same pace that SSD prices improve, and at the same time the weight of the material we move in our computers increases, personally I see that the situation will be the same as 12 years ago when I went to buy my first "large" hard drive (200Gb SATA - 139€): Large-scale storage will continue to require a large investment, at least if it's new from the factory.
Forgive the rant, I was reflective 
Best regards!