I say the room itself is the most under-rated component. If you've ever stepped into a recording studio while listening to a live session, you'd know. No piece of equipment can reproduce the acoustic space, unless, of course- the room is the right shape, dimension, and provides proper sound treatment. Reflections, speaker distances, diffusion and refraction all come into play. A weak amplifier and efficient (and ruler flat frequency response) speakers, with a good front end can produce uncanny realism, dynamic impact and "in your face" soundstage in the right room.
Ok this will be a good thread.
What in your opinion is the most important part of a good 2 channel system. Or what has the biggest impact on overall sound. For example if you feel Speakers are most important, or Preamp, Amp, Source. I am not looking for a ss vs. tube debate, just what do you feel is most important.
I will start:
I feel speakers are the most important part. I know lots of you are going to say electronics, but keep it to one part, like Preamp, Amp, etc.
Steve
I will start:
I feel speakers are the most important part. I know lots of you are going to say electronics, but keep it to one part, like Preamp, Amp, etc.
Steve
220 responses Add your response
I would maintain that speakers are the weakest link, and until some one can make a point source that can reach peaks of 100 db from 20-20K, this is unlike to much improve. Basically, you have to chose your poison. When and if you ever find a speaker capable of reproducing a 1000 Hz square wave capable of such levels, you will be able to move on with confidence. Apparently the LSA Model 10s can do this for a mere $60k!! Start saving now. |
A vote for speakers and this is based on my experience of change. Every change in the system has an effect, but the biggest change and or improvement is the speakers. So this is my order of declining significance, which is not to say items on the bottom do'nt play a big part. Speakers. Amp Turntable/tonearm/cartridge Phono stage Tuner CD player Interconnects Stands and tweaks Power conditioning power cables Just what I have found, but in there are some dramatic changes from small things. Two examples and strong recommendations, Walker Audio HDL links, Marigo stealth Signature mat. Some of the reason for the items lower in the list, is, I believe, because of a general rise in quality and performance convergence. IN particular, CD players, it is far harder to find really bad players now. Even the cheapest give a creditable performance. At the top, there are so many conflicting choices and compromises in making a good transducer, sound varies enormously and not related to cost. Having just installed Acoustic Zen Adagio's, I can't think of any item that has improved/changed the sound of my system by so much |
Some folks maintain that super accurate speakers, used at the end of a fairly flawed system, would theoretically make the sound WORSE (than if just serviceable speakers had been used) because all the upstream flaws would be revealed that much more blatantly. I once heard a system that had some low level Phillips CDP, a VTL Ultimate pre', VTL Wotans, and huge Dunlavey speakers (don't remember the model). Sound was not very good at all: murky, veiled, disjointed. One of the most unsatisfying large systems I had ever heard. |
Speakers will always have the biggest impact in sound, but both the source and speakers are equally important for the final signature.. Speakers of course will always make something sound far different guaranteed, but the question is what is most important.. I would say if you have a speaker to small, too big, not enough bass, not enough imaging to create the big picture, than you could keep throwing the biggest best source at a pair of 6" bookshelf monitors till your blue in the face and not find the end of it.. So I guess reality is you gotta start basing your final sound and taste on a speakers performance making it the most important decision.. But you could argue that new Esoteric CD player should be a reference and everything behind it should sound good if it is that good. I say both are closely equal. |
Jax2, did you say you too busy on Rel's Haiku? Keep on busy with it, some meaningful words. Don't get me wrong, it will turn red. Once it does, you will thank Rel for it. We talk all day (weeks), Rel only writes one quote! How powerful... Rel, did it turn red for you? Or rather... Look! The sky is red... |
The finger's only use is to point to the moon, it's not the moon; words, sentences, languages only use is to reflect the "true meaning" (non-dual). Once the meaning is understood, words themselves'-destructed; "No perceiver, no perceived, only perceiv-ing"; no path, no searcher, no searching... Well said, Asa... |
Thanks guys. Came back from wkend and got a big laugh form above! Call me thoroughly "grok'd"!! Question: what is the sound of one green Chia dog clapping; when I look at a green Chia dog walking (Sean Penn to be cast in the new Miramax film), is the dog moving or my mind? When you are listening to your stereo and deep into the Music and your thoughts are settled, quiet in the mind, receptive to "what is", and you open your eyes and there is a green dog standing in front of you. In the moment before you say "green" what is the dog? What are "you"? Answer: 6ch's No-thing. But as I say this, 6ch hits me with a stick! Why? The Galena woods are green. |
Marco, While impressive, THE POWER OF CHI cannot hope to match THE POWER OF CHIA. Once you fully grok this deep truth, meditate on this haiku: If your dog, Green with envy, applies right filter will he be well Red? |
Jax2, you are very funny! I had a good laugh! I am not worthy of yor praise. I am no intelligence, I don't use big words, I am bad in literature, and don't care about philosophy. I'd only read Lao Tzu twice (one time in my language, other time in English), at the time I don't understood zap. I read Krishna once in English, in the library; now, compare my English to date to about a couple dozen years ago, need I say more? I hardly read pass the sixth page! I read a lot of Buddhist Sutras, again my little brain could not hold it, so mostly forgotten, same as the Bibles! Marco, the word "weekend" is only a a word. Pick any moment/minute/hour/day/month/year/centuries/pass/present/future, etc... and call it a "weekend" it will be a "weekend"... "They" as of who? YOU! You get the meaning you can change the wording, You don't get the meaning, you're stuck in word! Live word is word that refects meaning. Have a nice weekend. :-) |
Gosh, I've been freelancing my whole life, when did they go and change weekends to Thursday?! I want to be in your time zone Mark! Or is it one of those weird holidaze dictated by who knows who....the Dairy industry perhaps?! Is it Elsie the Cow's Birthday?! Wish I had a boss who would stop me.....bet you wish I had a boss who would stop me too! Perhaps the moderator will catch on and stop all of us! Auggggghhhhhh, Ahhhhhhhh, uhh, uhh, uhh, ohhhhh! I think I made a mess of my keyboard8oeiuy9()0(**)(09(&()(&&$%### M*a&(*(r_((#c)(()@#$o |
No sweat Asa! I was hoping the reference to Melville at the end might have clued you in to my intentions of 'oneness-in-wanking', but I can see it could be easily overlooked or misinterpreted. Nevertheless, as I said, I did enjoy your retort regardless. Loved the image of the "people out there, in the hinterlands, just waiting to crest the hill with pitchforks" ...had me laughing out loud! You are a gifted writer! Hope you put that gift to some good use. I always cross-reference folks I enjoy (or sometimes don't particularly enjoy..in your case it is the former) with their answers from the past to get a better point of reference. I must say, I really enjoyed your responses on a thread titled "TUBES Do It -- Transistors Don't. I have never read that particular position so eloquently and articulately posited as you did in that thread. I just happen to agree completely and that contributes to my appreciation of your mastery of the word. You can still have 6chac beat you with a broom if you like, but don't do it on my account! Regards, Marco |
Ah Asa - you mistook my post as agressive and I regret to inform you that it was not intended that way. My apologies if it came off as being contentious. Your "welcome to the circle" was more the response I had expected as I was fully aware that, in posting what I did, I was most certainly spanking the monkey online. Ain't we all? Indeed the net IS the circle! Well put. As far as "understanding" the BIG words, and your in-depth analasys of my conflicted motivations; In truth I am amused and delighted by yours and 6chac's verbal jousting, as much as I was amused by your criticisms above. Love to be challenged, entertained and 'enlightened' to the chi and the tao in such an unlikely forum. On that note I clasp my hands together, close my eyes, and bow ever so slightly from the waste so as not to give either of you two master-fisherman access to my nether-regions, and back towards the door never taking my eyes from either of you! All the best, Marco |
Marco, the net is the circle. You know how to spell Krishnamurti; congrats, by that act, you are in the circle! BTW, I'm sure there is someone out there that, even though they know how to spell "Krishnamurti", will say you are purposely using big words to, well, you never really say... (volitional obfuscation, is that want you want to say, but, for some reason, don't?). But, hold on a second, you understand the words here, but are saying the same thing as what some undoubtedly feel on your Krishnamurti-Ghibran name drop! Hmmm, I wonder what that incongruency means? People, when they know what a word means, do not recoil from it per se, but rather from its meaning. A common ploy is to attack the "big-ness" of a word when you are really not willing to engage on a conceptual level. This ploy assumes, in fact counts on, that there are other people out there, in the hinterlands, just waiting to crest the hill with pitchforks, that feel similarly but who have not said so. The rallying of people against "big" words - even though, incongruently, you understand them - is an inauthentic action to suppress the idea or meaning that the word or words denote (Stone the witch!). Marco, I don't think anything has been "obfuscated" from you, either intentionally or not, but rather you are just having a little temper tantrum (don't blame the dog-feeling this week...) that you are not able to "win", and which I assume you are used to most of the time. Close enough to the bone? |
Asa & 6chac - If you had a few more participants you could have an Audiogon Circle-Jerk going on. Sounds from his last post like Asa already spent his wad though! Heck, a bit of Viagra and you'll be up and hummin' in no time. I don't know if you'll find many more A'goners who can talk that Alan Watts- Krishnamurti-Kahil Ghibran schpeel, but I'm getting myself all hot and bothered by all that intellectual, literary and philisophical prowess being demonstrated! My word, what big vocabularies you two have!! What wild imaginations!! OOOHHHH, don't point that thing at me sailor, it might go off! Marco PS Thar she blows!! Man the harpoon!!! ;-p |
6ch: in mine here, being = soul and mind = think. I like the action stuff, though. Dog's mind is even more thing orientated than we are; it doesn't "like" the postman-thing in its place-thing (territory). It is a child... Who here hates the postman (message delivery man)? Twitch, twitch goes the popper. |