Component matching expertise - how do you do it?

Well, great question. But there is no easy answer. While components must be technically compatible. For the last fifty years I have chosen components and generally looked no deeper into technical aspects than watts per channel, current of the amp and sensitivity of speakers. While you can get into additional parameters… typically they don’t get you very far in terms of sonic compatibility and synergy.

Getting a compatible and synergistic system is about pairing like sounding components that are in line with your personal tastes… and your personal tastes are likely to change over time as your listening skills and appreciation evolve.

Getting knowledgeable on the subject can be accelerated with study. First I recommend Robert Harley’s book, The Complete Guide to High-End Audio. This addresses listening terminology, components and system building. Subscribe to Stereophile, The Absolute Sound, and HiFi+. Learn to read in between the lines. And listen to as many of the components as you can, reading reviews on them.

There are broad categories of high end sound quality. There is the muscle group (similar to the muscle car lovers), powerful, loud and dynamic (MacIntosh / B&W), there is highly nuanced sound with a huge sound stage and good slam (Boulder / Magico), there is really showy flashy high end sound, holographic (Rowland / Wilson), sparkly showy / brassy ( Luxman / Focal (?) ), and highly musical warm natural sounding (Audio Research, Conrad Johnson / Sonus Faber) systems. I am sure there are many ways to cut this.

One thing I have noticed is that people tend to have systems that reflect their personality. So it doesn’t hurt to look at who you are. So if you own a Corvette then you are probably going to be going to appreciate a powerful sounding system, if your highly analytical, then a very detailed system so every nuance of sound is in your face. If you are pretty laid back (like me) and into realistic musical reproduction then the latter category is like to please you. Also, most folk tend to move toward the latter category over time. I started off in wanting details and slam, then huge images, and finally highly musical (with details and imaging)… with realistic presentation.

One danger to try and avoid is getting, say a really detailed trebly first component (for instance a sound source ((streamer / DAC))), then to adjust for its over sparkly presentation you get a really warm rich component (say preamp)… then to balance them you get a trebly amp with not tremendously detailed speakers. This is a signal path where each subsequent component subtracts more sound quality. It is preferable to have all components voiced similarly. For instance my main system is all Audio Reseach with Sonus Faber… they are all of the same voicing… natural and musical. As I dropper each additional ARC component in I got greater synergy.

I did not think that could be done, but excellent synopsis @ghdprentice . I fall into the musical category as well, so this made a lot of sense to me. 

@ghdprentice Nicely done! Thanks very much.

I'm not the expert that you mention, but I can tell you how I arrived at my current system. As @ghdprentice mentioned, I sought out components that I felt would satisfy my personal tastes.

I first selected my speakers based on prior experience with Von Schweikert.  I liked what I had, but I wanted a better version of them.  I spoke to Von Schweikert and they assured me that the Endeaver RE would be a big step up from my VR-4s.

I next looked for an amp.  As with my speakers, I liked my aging Coda amp, but wanted an improvement.  I consulted Doug Dale with Coda and he recommended the V1 version of the Continuum No 8 as a good pairing with my speakers.

Next came the preamp.  This time, I veered away from c-j and went with a Linear Tube Audio MicroZotl.  I spoke to owners of them and it appeared to have the aspects that I liked from c-j, but an improvement in other areas.

Some of it is luck, but I ended up with a system that I like.  I've tweaked things with different tubes, cables, etc.  

Nothing really scientific about my approach, but I ended up with something that I enjoy.

ghdprentice+1, it is also good to have mentor to teach you as simple as it can be. Listen to his system and ask questions. Robert Harley’s book is very helpful.

What you listen to, and the people you’re getting info from are certainly factors. I don’t consider myself an expert, but anyone’s subjective audio expertise is only as good as what they’ve been exposed to, and the info you get is only as good as the source.

A complicating factor is that there’s really no wrong way to build a system that you’re satisfied with. What we like is subjective. One of the things that catapulted my audio hobby was the opportunity to get well acquainted with audio gear that performed at a very high level, and was well above my pay grade. Otherwise I was stuck with reviews and what’s popular in the stores.

Determining what you like in a system is a big step, and that can change as we age and mature. Some people want thumping bass like the system in a dance club, some want high volume like a rock concert, others want their system to sound more like what they hear a symphony hall. I prefer the latter, and am a proponent of listening to a lot of natural acoustic instruments and voice so you’re well versed in what they should sound like, because it makes for a good reference.

Technical info is fine, and it’s great to have some basic understanding, but unless you’re designing audio equipment, or looking to measure you’re room, most measurements don’t really tell us much about how a combined system is going to sound.  It's good to gain some knowledge about room acoustics, because it's a huge factor in the sound you get.  Setup is critical.  Getting to that elusive system synergy is somewhat of an artform combined with dumb luck. Again, knowing what you like is useful.

One aspect of audio that I have learned with time, is that corporate greed is alive and well, and has an ever present influence on what’s available, what’s reviewed, and how things are built. The bigger companies seem most likely to be guided by shareholders and boards of directors. No harm in being a bit skeptical.

Get out there and hear as many systems as you can....join an audio club, go to audio shows, visit the dealers you have nearby. Flipping used audio gear is another possible way to get familiar with pieces of equipment in your home. Good gear that’s priced right should be worth what you paid if you opt to sell it. In the end, what YOU like is really the most important thing. It’s long journey for many of us. Enjoy!

I spent 5-6 years doing trial by error buying used gear and then found a great local dealer and finally got the sound I was looking for. I say if you have a good dealer stick with them.

Take a look at Srajan Ebaen’s 6moons audio reviews. For example check out his speaker reviews for the Cube Audio Nenuphar v2 and Qualio IQ. Two speakers made by the same principals that have two different approaches, requiring different considerations, and resulting in very different amp choices. He’s very good and consistent in his review approach and you can glean a lot of useful information from them.

I know stylistically he’s not everybody’s cup of tea, but if you can get past that, then there’s a wealth of information on offer. 

Experience with a lot of different gear really helps, plus learning how to listen.

Gear by the same manufacturer is probably going to have great synergy. Although I have not followed that advice. 

@mofojo

Yes, but no one really knows why or if it’s even true. A lot of that is probably marketing driven.

mr @ghdprentice gave a really great comment up above. I like to mix and match, I think it shows Independence. Definitely need to use matching speakers and matching mono amplifiers. How strange to mix and match those.

esthetically - yes, the same brand gears in the rack look awesome! from the sound side, not so much.. I’ve got great tunes out of SS pre+tube amp, all different brands..