The best way to design an audio system.


What is the best way to design and assemble a high-end audio system?

Should you first adopt a system philosophy?

Or should you just pick out a component you really like and build a system around it?

These seem to be the 2 most popular methods of assembling systems that I have read here on the Audiogon forums. Of course, I have my own thoughts on this subject, but I am interested in how everyone else feels about this, and what are the reasons for their opinions. Considering that we have alot of new people on the Audiogon these days, it may be helpful for them to read about how the "old timers" and "experts" configure their systems and why.
twl

Showing 4 responses by rives

I think this is a very relavent and thoughtful question for A-gon. I have two systems that were built around different principles, but it's not exactly clear (even to me) if it was a philosophy or a component, because it evovled from one to the other. First is the reference system. This started from hearing a pair of Martin Logans and being extremely impressed with their transparency and imaging capabilities. I decided this was going to be the cornerstone of the reference system. So, already, is it the philosphy of the transparency and imaging or the component? I'm not really sure to tell you the truth--but I knew I wanted the sound that M-L could deliver. However, in building the system--as with most--there were weaknesses that were exposed as the system got better through upgrading components. The most problematic weakness was the bass. I had listened to Genesis 200s and wanted to recreate bass at that magnitude and realism. Now that is virtually impossible to go from a 12 inch woofer and try to compete with 16 servo driven woofers--but always set the bar high and see how close you can get. The first step was to actively bi-amp the system. This helped quite a lot, but still was soft in the bass. Even the Krell KMA-160 on bass didn't quite give the dynamics I was trying to acheive. At this point we have departed from a component in trying to acheive a sonic goal. The next step was to replace the bass drivers to Focal Audiom drivers. We reinforced the bass cabinet and changed the damping material. I did this with the help of some engineers to figure out how well it would be mated with the panel. It turned out extremely well and meshed better with the panel than the original woofer. At the same time I was able to get realistic dynamics. Was it up to par with the Genesis 200s--no, but it would match or surpass virtually any other 12 inch driver I had found. I could go on about the evolution of this sytem through the source components--but I don't think that answers your question any better than this one specific example.
The other system was a family room system, that originally started with the concept of a low cost monitor system. I purchased Epos EP-12 and a solid state amplifier--which I would up hating. I replaced the amp with Cary tubes to give the system some warmth and character. Not trying to design a high resolution system at this point, just something that would be enjoyable to listen to. I later replaced the Epos with Red Rose R-3s. These really sound great with tubes and now the system evolved into a high resolution system that also has incredible bass for such small monitors. With these monitors it was now time to increase the resolution by going to NOS tubes. The system as you can well imagine, which started with one goal in mind has changed dramatically (but it's still enjoyable to listen to--so that goal didn't change).
I'm not so sure Sugarbrie. It doesn't matter how much you start with--this whole hobby is a disease and the habbit becomes rapidly more expensive. I can't imagine where I'd be now if I STARTED with a lot of money!
Sugarbrie: I knew you were kidding to some degree--so was I. I guess satirical comments don't always come across that way in text only.