Aren’t the two main transducers, speakers and cartridge, the most important?
Regarding transducers: surely I was impressed by the difference between my $3K cartridge and my new $13K one. However, it also made clear the importance and central contribution of the cartridge. The role of the two transducers, cartridge and speaker, clearly are foremost in a system. The cart taking a tiny vibration and translating it into an electronic signal. And a speaker taking that electronic signal and turning it into sound. Surely, the up line/down line components all greatly contribute. But we would have nothing without the physical/electrical-electrical/physical process of the transducers. To describe from a lay and outline description. |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZxi1oZfvDA I first was interested in Townshend Seismic Podiums by reading many posts of users raving about them. Then I was convinced to buy them by watching the above video! The stick with the small motor attached on top sitting on a podium and an identical one sitting on a platform with just spikes. When turning the motors on, the difference in the movement of the sticks is radical and obvious. The podiums kill the vibration. The result in SQ is also radical and obvious. I have used hockey pucks under components and speakers. And still use them under the spikes of my rack. The difference between pucks and podiums is also radical and obvious. Posts that make comparisons without actually having experienced the criticized item are disturbing. |
@knotscott, "If your system has multiple colored/tinted/distorted pains, then you’re enjoying a kaleidoscope." ...which may end up with you favouring certain types of music but staying away from others. Shortly thereafter you may even find you’re only playing a very small portion of your music collection. Hang on?!? I think that’s already happened to me!! Some of my CDs haven’t seen the inside of a player for years. No, not some of them, many of them! Can’t even remember the last time Exile on Main St got a spin! Nor Electric Ladyland, nor The Joshua Tree... Perhaps it unsuspectingly creeps up you like dementia? By the time you might be in a position to realise, you’re usually too far gone to do anything about it. |
On fire and unfortunately a bit off the mark. I like Doug very much as a reviewer and when I met him in person. However, my experience differs greatly from his with burn in and tweaks in general. I have done exhaustive listening tests on cable burn in and footers and cannot agree with Doug. Heck, I build cables and have spent countless hours documenting sonic changes with burn in. Oh my! I am designing a cable right now that goes from being very forward and bright to just being nicely resolved in about 120 hours. I compare the exact same build with zero hours vs 120 hours and find the difference so easy to discern. Townshend Pods vs hockey pucks 🙂. Yes, I have used hockey pucks, pucks under butcher block, concrete/marble slabs, various types of wood blocks, brass cones, carbon fiber cones and on and on…..The Townshend products are on a completely higher sonic level. Again, most obvious. There are other Aphiles as intentionally curious, passionate and relentless in their search for sonic truth as Doug. Many of us have done the due diligence and just have heard different results. It happens. |
@douglas_schroeder , boy, are you on fire. Thanx for the honesty. I would just like to say that the speaker AND the room are the most important component. They function or malfunction together. They are, in the vast majority of situations the limiting factor. If you have a bad speaker/room combination no mega buck amplifier or turntable will save the system. But, you could run a great speaker/room with an NAD integrated and a Rega table and it will sound quite acceptable. It will not be as good as if you had Boulder electronics and an SME turntable but many people would have a hard time telling the difference. |
As far as important in the ability to play back, they are the most important. The FIDELITY of the system is 75% dependent on the refinement of it’s components. Vinyl can be wonderful. The same album in NEW condition 50 years ago vs NEW hot off the press today. There can be a night and day difference.. Somethings are just better than they use to be.. Hi, HI fidelity analog can be had... NOW.. ALL that said, the ROOM and the boundaries in that room, are still 50% of the total sound you hear.. I have a buddy that is going to Soundcoat his room top to bottom. This should be interesting.. 1000. usd for ceramic paint. I'll come up with my own concoction... :-) Regards |
Any time you elevate a given element (or elements) of an audio system over others, you are building a worse system. It is one thing to have a budget and work up one component at a time, but it's entirely different to subjectively dismiss some parts as less important to sound quality. One outstanding way to achieve mediocrity in HiFi is to focus attention on a couple of elements of the system as though they carry the preponderance of sound quality. The most important aspect of speakers is their genre, which dictates preference for most. Suggesting that platforms are more important than transducers is one of the most ridiculous comments I have ever seen here. Why do I suspect that the person who arrogantly made that comment has not done an actual comparison between the Moab/stands versus the Ulfbehrt? We are talking serious ego problem and lack of sensibility. Follow that sort of foolishness and the odds are very good that you will build inferior systems. You will be wasting your money relative to what you could have done. It reminds me of the ludicrous comment years ago that someone made wherein they claimed that particular stands made their speakers sound not like their $20K MSRP, but like $60K. It doesn't get much more stilted than that! Most audiophiles seem ignorant of the fact that it is not the exotic construction or materials that is the vast majority of the benefit of stands, but it is the lofting of the speaker, raising it up, effectively elevating the soundstage. This has a dramatic impact on the performance. I use hard rubber hockey pucks to do so. I am not going to spend an inordinate amount of my money on subjectively indistinguishable tweaks and methods. Feel free to read my article Audiophile Law: Burn In Test Redux at Dagogo.com, wherein I tested stands, isolation devices, cables, etc. along with break in and found ALL to be a waste of time in actual comparison using my Imbalanced System Test (only half the system, one channel, treated). Now, before you start shooting off your mouth, go read the article. If you simply want to argue out of ignorance, I'm not interested. Go ahead, do the Imbalanced System Test with one channel using hockey pucks and the other your vaunted stands - if you dare! Are you prepared to face the possibility that you blew thousands of dollars on a device that raises a speaker, and it can be replicated sonically by a hockey puck? If you don't have a gratuitous shift, an awful imbalance, a rift in the sound in terms of tonality, center imaging, soundstage, etc. then you have wasted your money. Remember, the claim is that the stands make SUCH a huge difference, transform the sound, etc. So, if that is the case, using humble hockey pucks for one channel should cause sonic disaster. Go ahead, try it. I do not mean to be particularly harsh about this, but enough foolishness already! :( As you can see, I don't support marginal methods to build superior systems. I use methods that show better results in building hundreds of audio systems. |
The transducers (speakers, phono carts) tend to have more impact on tonal balance and overall sonic presentation than most components, and is a reasonable place to focus early in the game or when you want big changes, but we still hear the sum total the system like a chain. Sort of like looking through multiple pains of glass at a picture of a band/orchestra (envision a few water spots on each), the system is only as good as the weakest link...one extra dirty, distorted, or tinted pain, and the whole system is affected. If your system has multiple colored/tinted/distorted pains, then you’re enjoying a kaleidoscope. |
Yes, I’d say so. Mechanical transducers are well known to be the areas where the greatest amounts of measurable distortions are to be found. You could say the same about microphones which are often said to be like loudspeakers in reverse. The entire world and their dog seem to have given up even trying to measure distortion in digital formats, cables and amplifiers (non tube) decades ago. |
Your huge improvement from Townshend Podiums answers your own question: No. In fact we just had a recent discussion where all the really experienced vinyl guys agreed the turntable and arm are more important than the cartridge. Likewise if you notice the Podium you put your speaker on matters more than the speaker. For proof, $4k Moab on $2k Podiums total $6k sounds better than $9k Ulf. So the Podium matters more than the speaker. We could go on all day, from one component to another, with examples. The best you can say is if your speakers or your cart are truly crappy relative to everything else then yes in that case they are your most important to fix. Generally speaking however, no. Not even. |
Nope. Two ends of the same chain. Ones important IMO of many. I'm torn and don''t think it is black & white. In the opinion of most of the yesteryear that I learned from, the cartridge is the least of importance in the vinyl chain. I believe speakers are at the top of the list but is dependent on the amp. The lower the db rating of speaker, the more power usually needed. This isn't set in stone but it is predominate in thought. |
