jayctoy, thank you for the complement! There are only a handful of people who can do audio on a scale as those men.
A thread like this will result in lack of agreement because there are different types of audiophiles; "Music Lovers" which I classify as Mediaphiles, the typical Audiophile who is a blend of media and gear junkie, and persons such as myself, the System Builder, who enjoy making systems as much as hearing the music. It should be no surprise, then, that the methods and results of the three groups will vary widely.
|
Geoff,
+1 your post
I have not had nearly as much upgraditus as others. I believe it is because I have chosen carefully and wisely. I don't try to achieve a sound or sugar coated flavour filled sound. I seek accuracy and total neutrality. My thrills come from the music and the recordings and realistic convincing presentation that conveys the true dynamics of live music and real instruments (requires more than 120 db of clean headroom). Audio systems should be like a great camera lens - as clear as possible.
If you stick to this goal rather than chasing different flavours (as you would with good wine) then swapping stuff is not necessary because the goal remains fixed and achievable in incremental fashion. Others will just say I have tin ears.
I believe most equipment swapping audiophiles are just chasing their tails because they DONT know what they are trying to achieve and end up chasing every pretty skirt they see, getting nowhere other than having a lot of fun in an aimless chase with endless equipment rotation.
|
Doug I agree 100%, good example is Mike Lavigne and Albertporter this are audiophile who knows what they are doing, you can have all the expensive gear but if you don't know what you are doing, you can't max their performance.Especially Mike L, His room is every audiophile dream. True, it's easy to make mistake, when you don't have good experience in this hobby.Doug thank you, this a very good post,. |
@onhwy61 that's not sentimental, that's keeping it real. Perspective is your friend, thanks for the reminder |
This is how I would put in order:
1-Source
2-Room
3-Speakers
4-Amp
5-Pre-amp
6-Power
7-Cables
I can sort of agree with this order, as long as the recording is considered as part of the source. i.e. Personally, I find the recording quality to be at least as important as the source quality. 1) Source/Recording 2) Room/Speaker interface
And I’ll go out on a limb and speculate that the reason why many audiophiles are always in upgrade mode and can’t get no satisfaction is because, drum roll, if you don’t learn from the mistakes of the past you’ll just keep on making the same mistakes. How can you explain why some audiophiles have had, let's say, twenty systems or fifty systems?
As one who has done a lot of experimenting with gear through the decades, I can own up to this. Again, for me, the problem falls back on the recordings. Some recordings just sound better with different equipment. I think I would probably change gear less often if I had more systems. Then I could tune them to suit my tastes to different styles of recordings. Have a system for bright recordings, a system for warm recordings, a system for 80's digitized recordings, a system for high resolution quality recordings, etc. I was at a fellow audiophiles home about 10 years ago who had systems setup like this. A SET/horn system, dynamic/SS system, dynamic/tube system. His main system even had one turntable with 4 different arms/cartridges/phono stages. He used a different arm/cart/phono stage for different types of recordings. Unfortunately, I am forced to try to find one system to do it all. While a multi-arm turntable is not out of the realm of possibility, I'm not there yet. As time moves on, and the recordings in high rotation change, so does my opinion of my systems sound. It's like trying to hit a constantly moving target. I suppose I could just listen to the same 50 recordings over and over again, the ones that make my current system sound it's best........nah. |
OP, your final analysis has a complete dependency on what turntable and what CDP was used to arrive at that conclusion. Different models of each would have resulted in a different conclusion. All things being constant including the listening room, listening volume, and the music content, I personally think changing the speakers will make the most sonic difference in a system. |
My audiophile answer is the loudspeaker/room interface, but my real answer is my wife and family. Without them how much would I really care about how my system sounds? Call me sentimental.
|
There is an expression that someone who represents himself in a courtroom has a fool for a client. Now, I don’t want to be too alarmist here, but I believe that expression can also be applied to the listening room. 😀 And I’ll go out on a limb and speculate that the reason why many audiophiles are always in upgrade mode and can’t get no satisfaction is because, drum roll, if you don’t learn from the mistakes of the past you’ll just keep on making the same mistakes. How can you explain why some audiophiles have had, let's say, twenty systems or fifty systems? |
Thanks for all the replies. Of course everything is important in the system. As I mentioned, every component including cables were all high-end. You cannot just expect a $10K turntable sound the best with $100 speakers.
In my experience same speakers and some other components sounded much better with the turntable. I never heard this much of a change with any other components before.
Once I had Nordost Blue Heaven interconnects. I wanted to try the Alpha Core Goertz interconnects (cannot remember the model). The sound was warmer. I know that even a cable (opening another can of worms here?) can make a difference but the difference with my last experience was a "WOW!" difference.
This is how I would put in order:
1-Source
2-Room
3-Speakers
4-Amp
5-Pre-amp
6-Power
7-Cables
|
Al.....*clap*clap*clap
*clap*clap*clap
*clap*clap*clap*
Thanks for being tonight's voice of reason & rationale...;)
We all 'tweak' 'n 'fiddle' with whatever to achieve some form of goal that scratches that itch that drives us to do so. Twas always thus.
I enjoy reading the details and commentary about the various forms and 'cures' for those itches. It's the 'potions 'n lotions' and their applications that never cease to...uh, amaze...*L*
Keeps me coming back...;)
(speakers...MHO) |
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.
+1, well said Al!! I agree with this method 100%. A system is about balance, and carefully balanced and selected system will sound best in my experiences. Focusing on one area while ignoring the others is a sure way to find disappointment.
IT'S THE TRANSDUCER, STUPID!
If I buy a top shelf $10,000 phono cartridge, put it on a $1,000 turntable, with $1,000 speakers, and $1,000 AVR, can I still wear that T-shirt? |
+1 for the T shirt.
Room and Speakers together are the most important choice and investment you can make.
Many if not most audiophile grade sources and amps are very good to fantastic in our modern world.
The room and speakers usually leave the most to be desired and have the most impact on cost and sound of the system.
$100,000 system with a poor room and poorly placed and inappropriate sized speakers with listening chair against a wall ...will sound awful.
I have never heard a really terrible sounding audiophile grade source or amp but I have heard many many awful sounding audiophile grade speakers.
|
@cymbop pretty sure a phono cartridge is a transducer so you agree with the OP? :-)
|
Here is one of several prior threads in which this question was discussed: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/most-important-componentsFollowing is my answer as stated in that thread:
Do not expect any consensus among the answers which will be provided, or
among the answers that have been provided about similar questions that
were asked in the past.
Some will say the source is most
important, because its shortcomings cannot be compensated for by any of
the downstream components. I dispute that rationale, for two reasons:
1)That logic ignores the DEGREE to which different types of components may have shortcomings.
2)The source can't compensate for the shortcomings of the downstream components either.
Some
will say the speakers, because in general they (and their interaction
with the room) arguably make the biggest difference in the character of
the sound that is heard.
Others will say the preamp, contending that it is "the heart of the system."
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.
And more specifically my own perspective
leans in the direction of "speakers first," but to a greater or lesser
degree depending on how "important" is defined (especially the degree to
which price is reflected in that definition), and depending on whether
the source is analog or digital, and depending on the degree to which
the particular listener values deep bass extension and the ability of
the system to handle recordings having particularly wide dynamic range. Regards, -- Al
|
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.
You are correct, it all starts with the source, get that right 1st (digital or analogue) and your 1/3 the way there. If not right, it’s a never ending battle to get the truth, and everything after it becomes just a band-aid fix. Ivor Tifenbrun (Linn Sondek) Cheers George |
I think I'll buy one of those T-shirts that says:
IT'S THE TRANSDUCER, STUPID!
|
IMO, the pre-amp is the heart of any system. Some will view this as the most important. After the pre-amp, Speakers are on-deck.
Happy Listening!
|
One thing for sure.I sold audio for years. By far the most distortion is your loudspeakers. Even 1-2% is far more than any other piece of equipmrnt.That is where probably more money should be spent to get the highest quality. Your sourse for sure is the most critical for precision
Of the event. Everything starts from the sourse and detail once lost
Cannot be made up else where that is why you should get the best turntable
Including Arm and cartridge and sound Different this includes Digital .Makes sure it's sonic signature is a good fit before pulling the trigger. |
I have been saying the source for many years. I get the other posts also but if you are using a cheap $19 Walmart CDP and you think that will get you the best sound out of your $100K amps, $100K Preamp, $100K Speakers, Your $100K dedicated lines and line conditioners, Room treatments, etc. then who am I to argue?
Happy Listening. |
The most important part of any audio system is the person listening to it, and their confirmation bias affected brain. Also, what they are drinking...
Note: the OP does not know if the CD and LP were mastered the same... |
czarivey
you are the most important part of system.
ordinarily I'd agree with you but I prefer to restate your comment as,
you are the most important problem with the system.
Fair enough?
|
you are the most important part of system. |
Just like any question in this hobby, ask 10 different audiophiles and get 11 different answers.
That said, my answer would to the most important part of the system would be: the room. |
You are the most important part of the system. Knowing your priorities, goals and circumstances can save a lot of $$$. No equipment, no matter how good, is going to "make" you enjoy listening.
|
The most important part of any audio system is the person setting it up. The individual who puts up the rig controls everything from the larger parameters of performance, such as cost, to the minutia, such as listening position and position of speakers. I have for years stated, "The single greatest impediment to building a high end system is the audiophile." Why say that? Because most audiophiles inhibit system development through mistakes they make. They do not wish to spend enough money, or they do not care enough to find highly synergistic gear, or they ignore aftermarket power cords, or a better digital source, or USB cable, etc. Most, perhaps 75%, of audio systems are not that good because the person putting it together doesn't care all that much, or is chintzy, or depends on someone else's advice versus actually trying several things to improve it. It should be obvious that ALL parts are critical, that any one which is poor can submerge the performance. It's self-defeating to discuss which one component is most important. That is like asking, "Which parts of this system can I skimp on and still expect great results?" It's a loser's game. :) Don't expect cheapskates, who are always looking for a way to skimp on it at some point(s), to build a superior system. :(
|
Give me a $20 dvd player to spin cd's on the best speakers made . Would not want the best source made to play on bose speakers |
All of it, from dedicated 20amp circuit to last possible tweak. And above all my ears which helps me analyze the importance of each and every component in a system to sit back and enjoy music. |
I think I'll print up a t-shirt that says:
IT'S THE TRANSDUCER, STUPID! |
|
