Audiophiles seem to be under the impression that in the best case scenario, with excellent equipment, excellent cables, excellent room treatments, even vibration isolation and CD treatments, that the sound thus obtained is only 5% or 10% from The Absolute Sound. Audio Nirvana. In other words, there is this concept out there people seem to fall for that there’s some magic ceiling above which audiophiles are forbidden to go. As if it were mathematically impossible, that Sound Quality Is some sort of hyperbolic function and once SQ gets to a certain point on the curve it cannot be improved without heroic effort. As if the laws of physics and mathematics cannot be broken. All of that, dear friends, is totally untrue. You've been hornswoggled. That’s the big can of worms I was talking about. Hel-loo! I hate to judge before all the facts are in but it certainly appears audiophiles have been following the wrong sheep.
What is most important part of a system?
I remember reading someone saying that the most important part of a system was the source. I thought "Wrong! Speakers are the most important".
Now, I have changed my mind. Source is the most important part.
Right or wrong but this is how I came to this conclusion;
I have tried the same system with a CD player and a turntable. By far LP sounds better than a CD. Btw, the system had all high-end amps, speakers, cables, etc.
What is most important part of a system for you?
Now, I have changed my mind. Source is the most important part.
Right or wrong but this is how I came to this conclusion;
I have tried the same system with a CD player and a turntable. By far LP sounds better than a CD. Btw, the system had all high-end amps, speakers, cables, etc.
What is most important part of a system for you?
129 responses Add your response
Interesting that a violin builder puts the most time and attention into the body which gives the tone, not the strings which sing. That could be translated as the source transmitting through the speakers. Then the auditorium (the room) determines whether the sound can rise and decay accurately, without getting screwed up. Kind of reminds of you of the three most important parts of your rig.. |
Lol, Everyone is right. I think also your ears are the most important part of any system. If I’m deaf, I could spend a 100k on a system but to no avail will it make a difference. Your ears determine whether you are happy with the playback or not, I probably have a joke as cost of a system. But the more I tweak it the more my smile n heart of music is brighter. My preference is pure 3D sound maybe because I’m older now, whereas back in my drumming days loud was the primary pt. Enjoy your Music.... |
LOL :=) Yep, agree, everyone is right.... Every link on the chain is as important as other. OK, I´m bit off from the start, but we need to definite the term "system" first....? I scent that OP probably thought of a physical/electronical gear? If so, my first vote goes to: speakers second vote goes to: preamp third vote goes to: amp |
melbguy Interesting that a violin builder puts the most time and attention into the body which gives the tone, not the strings which sing. That could be translated as the source transmitting through the speakers. Then the auditorium (the room) determines whether the sound can rise and decay accurately, without getting screwed up. Kind of reminds of you of the three most important parts of your rig. actually, the value of the bow often far exceeds the value of the violin, even very good violins. |
joejoe OK Geoffkait I’ll bite, what’s the reason? Let us call it mind-matter interaction. You could also call it extra sensory perception. The subconscious mind picks up on but misinterprets it’s surroundings, especially the immediate surroundings, and shuts down (degrades) the perception of sound as a response. Of course you’ve been accustomed to it your whole life so you take it for granted. You cannot control it because it’s subconscious. That’s it in a nutshell. That’s why, after the best laid plans have been implemented - the best electronics, the best cables, the best room treatments, the system still sounds edgy and shrill and distorted, especially in the treble. Especially when played at moderately high or high volume. |
gsm18439, your post intrigued me. I'm not as experienced as many here, but I'm not inexperienced. However, while the information you provide makes sense, I don't come to the same conclusion. I would conclude from your experience that the change of speakers resulted in a change in the significance of the amp with which they are paired. By the way, my most recent change was from SS to OTL tube amps and the quality/liveliness of the reproduction of the music has taken a very noticeable jump, given it's a good recording that I'm listening to. My next major upgrade is to hopefully to change to more efficient speakers, specifically the Zu Druids, to further advance this development. In other words, without your Zu speakers, you would not have fully appreciated the quality of your SET amp. I not sure which is the more important component, but I would say that both the amp and the speakers are important. Does that make sense? Mark |
as a person known for building a system without gear limits or room limits, it's easy for me to say the most important thing for me has been the sonic reference in my mind i am trying to attain. as my sense of where i'm going has progressed, my system performance has followed. and recent room tuning success was tied completely to my minds grasp of the goal. previous frustrations were tied to a less than clear target. if we are ranking pieces of a system in order of significance, then the whole speaker-room interface is dominant. are the speakers scaled to the room so the music works in the room? some speakers are more flexible than others. some driver topographies are less room dependent than others. but at the end of the day you cannot overcome this obstacle. and if this is right, you can go modest levels of everything else and you can have excellent music reproduction. next is the amplifier-speaker relationship. can the amplifier properly control the speaker? and is the tonal and dynamic synergy good? again; getting this right makes everything else pretty easy. preamps are important, especially at the top of the food chain. and an uber system needs a great preamp. but at more modest levels of gear sometimes eliminating the preamp is actually preferred as it can get in the way. there is not one truth in this issue. these days sources can be very modest and yet make great music. so again the significance of sources depends on the overall level of the system. at the top of the food chain they are limiting, but at modest levels lots of choices work great. (1)have a reference in your head at to where you are going, or trust someone who does. (2)get the speaker right for the room, and (3) an amp that works well with the speaker. get those right and you are in pretty good shape. |
As said previously, YOU, are the most important link in the chain. My personal thoughts are; Sh*t in = Sh*t out. If the source is poor, anything downstream is just reproducing, and perhaps trying to compensate. I totally agree with @jmcgrogan2 on the medium being the absolute beginning of the chain. Whatever our choice on playback of the LP/CD/ etc. is, it's the starting point of what will follow quality wise down stream. Just my opinion, for what its worth. |
There are a lot of interesting answers in this thread. In considering what's most influential in our listening rooms, which I believe to be important, I want to step back to ask a question with a wider view, specifically because listening to music is more than a technical exercise created with 'equipment'. To admit my own bias here, I want a presentation of music that takes my breath away, affecting me deeply at an emotional level. In my not so humble opinion, I would like to ask whether, based upon the [predicted] variety of answers above, we, and the OP, might benefit from an examination, and perhaps refinement of the question Celo originally posed. Here's one / the reason the answers vary so widely, and it may hint at which of the previous posts are more likely to be on the mark: every listening room differs; every Combination (caps used for emphasis because italics is not available) of components interacts differently than another combination. Further, every combination of components sounds different in a Different Listening Space. Finally, the same components' sound can differ Wildly in the same listening space depending upon their Physical Position in the room and the Attention that has been invested (yes, Invested) in their Complimentary Selection and equally, their Setup. Let's rephrase / refine / and divide the question this way (for example, to accommodate those who have WAF to consider, though that's just one example of the reason to refine the question). What is the aim of the listener? I've heard three quarter million dollar systems, one that sounds like a wall of Marshall rock amplifiers, a second that sounds not much at all like Any form of music I've ever heard, and the third that sounds pretty good but that certainly, for the investment, should sound one Heck of a lot better. The first plays at ear-splitting levels yet doesn't image and can't render classical music with depth, nuance or delicacy. Is that important to the owner? No, and it's a dedicated listening room not subjected to WAF, highly --if not well-- treated for sound quality. The second was at a stereo store, set up by the manufacturer's setup specialist, and the third has a custom designed listening room in a dedicated Building. Hmm. Something's questionable about this situation, but what? Some rooms can be no-holds-barred, well bankrolled and sound less than satisfying [to my ears], yet fully satisfy their owners. Price point does not determine quality: in the room mentioned above, everything was of a very high quality (cables cost more than my entire system and I'm in no way jealous of the sound; just the opposite) and those components were selected with considerable care to work together by an intelligent person. Clearly self-knowledge is diagnostic in this case; the listener gets what he / she wants. Whether it pleases me or others is irrelevant. What about the listening room that has to share space and / or function with other family activities? What is most influential in the quality of listening experience in a non-dedicated listening room? That's arguably a different question, due to the shared / multiples application(s) of the space, and as such begs the posing of a different question, based upon its unique combination of applications --the listener's biases and expectations. What are your Listening Priorities, Preferences and Expectations? How well, and how honestly, have you asked this of yourself? Does the system you assemble 'Fit' your listening preferences? If you listen exclusively to E. Power Biggs on the Busch Reisinger organ, mini monitors aren't likely for you. Chamber Orchestra wasn't well presented on the expensive system mentioned above. A friend who sets up systems had a client who fell in love when he heard my friend's system. He bought every single component my friend had, set it up. Hated the sound. Sold it all and got out of audio. The deal is that Those components, In my Friend's Room, set up with his His Experience (and highly educated ear) sounded Wonderful. The components were Top Flight, so it wasn't the gear that was at fault. I had the unusual good fortune to have an expert evaluate my system In My Listening Room. Jim Smith --of Get Better Sound fame-- did a what he calls Room Play, measuring the room's technical characteristics and adjusting the position of the components and the room based upon his reference selection of music. My system is arguably middle-range high end gear. I had worked with Jim's book and got the system sounding better than ever before. His work, however, took my system far beyond the best I could do, resulting in what I found a 'Musical' listening experience. The music, the gear, And the room never sounded better. It is, in my experience, safe to say that no Single factor or component can said authoritatively to be Most Important in determining sound quality of Any room. However, no room, component or system will ever sound its best without attention to the whole. A wholistic approach to audio is, in my opinion, what causes so much disappointment in many people's approach to creating a listening environment that fully matches their needs, expectations or hopes. What's sad about this is that what's behind this thread --asking a revealing question-- is so seldom 'tuned' to the listener's needs. But that, too, is a Catch 22: like getting your first job, you have to have experience. But how do you get your first job? The degree to which a listener knows, admits and works with his / her listening preferences IS determinitive of outcome. In That sense, it is the listener him- or her-self who is Most Important in achieving the satisfaction that high end audio can offer. In this sense, Every choice, selection and matching of components, (careful (and often tedious)) positioning of them in a listening room, vibration isolation, tweaks and continuous curiosity brought to focus on how sound might be improved are subservient to a listener's willingness to be honest about the preferences, biases and desires they bring a priori to their listening chair. No room treatments, component choice or amount spent can outweigh the 'Listening Life Unexamined': start there. To paraphrase Eric Clapton, 'Before you accuse [your system/ listening room, etc], take a look at your self'. And then pose, or if necessary rephrase, the question of what you want from your listening experience. That will lead you first, to a refined understanding of your priorities and second, to a substantially improved listening experience, perhaps taking some considerable time. But it is an investment of those hours in fulfillment. Can you put a price on that? It will help you raise the bar. |
"My own answer, expressed in general terms, is that a chain is as strong as its weakest link, wherever that link may happen to be located in a particular system." Fully agree with Al. The music will find and expose your weakest link like Tom Brady and Julian Edelman going after a rookie slot cornerback. In my case, upgrading the pre-amp from a Plinius M8 to a Symphonic Line tube pre-amp made the biggest difference. The Plinius was nice enough, the SL is great (even if it is an older model from 1999). Another sizeable leap occurred when I changed swapped tubes in the pre-amp from Electro Harmonix to Telefunken. Perhaps the most bang for my buck came from putting two $30 Majesty Palm trees in the corners behind the speakers, which helped tame reflections from the windows in the room. |
cdk84 wrote, "In considering what’s most influential in our listening rooms, which I believe to be important, I want to step back to ask a question with a wider view, specifically because listening to music is more than a technical exercise created with ’equipment’. To admit my own bias here, I want a presentation of music that takes my breath away, affecting me deeply at an emotional level." Mountaineer to Guide: I finally made it! All that time and money finally paid off. The view from the top of Everest is a once in a lifetime experience. The view from here is breathtaking! Alone at the Top of the World! Nothin’ but blue sky! Guide to Mountaineer: Whoa! Hey, take it easy, McGillicutty. Don’t get so choked up. You’re only at Base Camp. 😛 |
| Post removed |
"maplegrovemusic Anyone who stated source first in their list of importance please let me know what source will turn any speaker into some magical transducer . I really would like to try it ! Thanks, mike." I build DHT components. So IMO the source made the system sound the best. I began by building a better preamp, settled on DHT preamp with no caps in the signal path and as good as it sounded, the source (DAC) I built made the sound something that I never experienced before. So that is how I came to my conclusion source first. Same with the phono stage I build. By better the components they created a sound that had details, could produce dynamic swings, micro/macro dynamics, separation, clarity, depth of soundstage (4D), placement, etc. that I never heard before. Once that happened, I came to my conclusion that I everything else I tried over the years was to me chasing my own tail around. Better speakers only improved what I was hearing. I also came to this conclusion because when conducting auditions for other audio systems in those homes, those people after 30 seconds (yes 30 seconds) asked to purchase the components. Recently had a person with very expensive Magico speakers and what I would consider a cheap DAC, SS around $2K. OK sounding to me but after we switched source components, he heard things he never heard before. It transformed his system. It is the same change I hear in every system that we auditioned our components in, the source made the biggest sound improvement no matter the price of the speakers, Type of speakers, amps, cables, treatments, etc. Happy Listening. |
I agree that it all starts from a source, but if preamp is not able to deliver it without veiling and distorting the signal, the source makes no big difference. Most mid-fi preamps are actually not able to transmit everything that a good source has to offer. Therefore for lower cost and budget systems I suggest a decent passive preamp like TVC for example. Start building the system from speakers
to source. If everything below is up to the task then it makes sense
to experiment with a source components. |
I respectfully disagree. Of course, it is critical that amp works well with your speakers and is powerful enough to properly control them, but the rest will not fall into place with this. Maybe I never had any bad amps in my system, but in my experience the difference between (rightly chosen) amps is smaller than a difference between preamps and source components. |
plutos I agree that it all starts from a source, but if preamp is not able to deliver it without veiling and distorting the signal, the source makes no big difference. I would disagree with that statement. Again, I have built various preamps, amps, DAC's etc. I also have repaired components for over 25 years. Any preamp that I have repaired goes into my system just to make sure it works as it should. I hear the differences in them but having what I consider is one of the best sources, you can hear what my source does without question. Each preamp has a sound but they do allow the source to flow though without an issue. The sound only gets better with better preamps. Someone mentioned TVC, yep I use one in my active preamp that has no caps in the signal path. The amps make a difference but overall the source IMO again from building my own components does not have the degree of sound improvement compared to the source. The speakers improve the sound but the source still has the most effect on the sound. Happy Listening! |
| Post removed |
bigkids, Of course, experiences will vary because they depend on so many different things. There`s no absolute truth. Different people, different experiences. I suspect that you`re premap sounds remarkably good. TVC for volume and no caps in the signal path. This can`t be bad :=)) BTW. Did you use single or double transformer per channel? |
I guess there are many different opinions on this topic! I agree with the above well described weakest link theory. But to my logic and ears, speakers will impart the biggest personality influence on sound quality. Yes, lousy room acoustics, poor recording and distorted amplification will ruin sound quality and it goes without saying that these weak links must be removed in order to have even decent sound. With none of the weak links present, a change of speakers will have the biggest impact in sound. Spending extreme sums on cables, cords and other minor influences prior to getting speakers, room and source right is a fool’s folly propagated by ultra high end manufacturers who make serious profits. Speakers and room, if done right, are unfortunately the most expensive part of the equation requiring the most time, money, effort and wife acceptance. Cables and cords, to my obviously tone deaf ears, don’t make much difference relative to the cost. I have heard great speakers with average electronics and have been wowed but have been underwhelmed by great electronics paired with sub par speakers. Speakers.....60% room............20% source/music/ amp.....15% all else.........5% Estimated margin of error 5% depending on component combinations and sound preferences. The above is my ball park assessment of importance relative to achieving sound quality. I too cringe when I see a virtual system with a large fortune spent on components with no attention paid to room, furniture and acoustics. Take a look at one celebrity’s $500k system with marble floors, glass walls and no acoustic treatments (he must have limited upper end hearing if he thinks that echo chamber sounds right). In the end, to each his own. |
I think everything is important. In my system, the least expensive component is my Revel M106 speakers. Computer modeling, material advances, and inexpensive overseas manufacturing has dropped the price of quality speakers compared to high end electronics. My DAC, Pre, amp, and Sub all cost over $2k each, and the system sounds phenomenal to me. Minor changes upstream are very obvious. If I change 1 of the 3 sets of tubes in the preamp, it's noticable. If my amp isn't warmed up, it's noticable. If Tidal turns my chromecast volume down a single notch, I can hear the compression. I think people are putting WAY too much importance on the speakers, because you can get terrific speakers for $1500 or less, that use the same drivers as $5000 speakers. |
There are so many variables that this equation is unsolvable. Different - expectancy, taste, room etc. etc. etc......................... But I suppose that most will agree that there are no point to buy an expensive source if you have a mediocre preamp. My suggestion is to start building your system from speakers to up. |
plutos one pair of transformers in the preamp. As good as the preamp is, the DAC made more of a difference in every system we installed it. In some instances it was night and day. We were stunned at that - the light was off and then the light was on kind of difference. The sound of the DAC was transforming no matter what speakers, preamp, amp or cables. Same goes for our phono stage. Happy Lisening. |
It should be obvious to anyone with ANY electronics knowledge at all, that not all parts are critical. The critical parts are the transducers, e.g. speakers and cartridge if analog. This why the advice to put half of the budget into speakers is both common and good. Room treatments are also critical, but are not electronic - they will require some knowledge of acoustics. The amp needs to be able to drive the speakers, which can be difficult if they are highly reactive or require high current delivery. The pre-amp is a control center and at the high end can enhance certain euphonic characteristics (tubiness). The DAC is easy to get good sound from at a few hundred dollars and there is no need to spend $35,000 on it. But $35,000 spent on speakers can be very worthwhile -- unless you buy Magneplanars for $6,000 and like their advantages over their dis-avantages. |
The "Chairman" of anybody's system is indeed media: It could be fantastically recorded mostly classical, jazz, folk or it could be poorly recorded rock or combination of both One way or the other, no tunes to play -- no need for other components unless you're stuck to your tuner or playing your guitar via microphone :) To that owned recorded media, the listener should than take first most important step to find synergy with system that one is about to build of course having budget in mind weather it's limited or not (just like in case with ebm :-) Categorizing importance and quality of components is deep error IMHO, because at least each an every separate component has dedicated function. Finding components in proper synergy within the budget is far more important PART than having single component as most or least important part of your system. Therefore the sound system that pleases you have importance of ALL components logically EQUAL unless you wish to literally define amplification components as secondary importance. You can therefore connect your $5k speakers directly to the output of your CD player with no volume control, because it ain't gonna be to loud anyways :-) Also in case with analogue -- not even phonostage or even speakers important(you may logically assume) -- just position your ear as close as possible to the needle or lean it firmly against the stand and you will be able to hear tracks. Why not? At least we will have golden ears evidence haha ! :-) |
Categorizing importance and quality of components is a good idea because some things are more important than others, and because improvements in some things for a given cost make a larger SQ improvement than other things. If you built your own listening room (properly) and spent over $25,000 on speakers you are in a different category than someone who spent $850 on speakers. |
randy-11"The DAC is easy to get good sound from at a few hundred dollars and there is no need to spend $35,000 on it." I guess I am in the wring business then! I recently demonstrated my DAC to a person who had a well known company that builds a inexpensive DAC around $1K. You know the rest. The guy had Magico speakers in his system. He sold his DAC within 30 seconds because it could not compete with the sound he heard from my DAC. Same goes for a $5K DAC owner, and a $18K DAC owner. He played the Lou Reed famous song take a walk on the wild side. His DAC did not get the spacing, soundstage, tone, etc., correct and when the backing vocals came on, they switch from left to right speakers, his DAC barely showed the switch. With my DAC it was like they walked across the room, faded out in the left speaker, came on to the right speaker, and then the vocals got louder and faded away with decay that his DAC could not reproduce. With my DAC you could hear the number of persons singing in the backround, with his just a flat wall of sound, no dimension, hard sounding, no emotion. You cannot make statements like this unless you have really heard what a really good DAC can do for a system. With the $1K DAC the system sounded like every other mid-fi system I have heard even with $30K speakers. Just saying - Happy Listening. |
