I would concur with speaker/room interface being the single most important factor, and would only add that this further implies that, among the individual components, speakers are the most crucial. However, I'd have to add a few conditions to that. . .First of all, this assumes that one is at using at least decent "upper-mid-fi" components. There's no point "proving" that the source component is not the most critical by playing, say, a Wadia (pick your ultra-high-end brand of choice) CD player through to a $99 boom box (my old Sony has the inputs). Nor do I think the latest, expertly setup Linn-SME-vdHul (again, pick your favorites) analogue system will give much joy played through, say, my first system, which was a Dynaco 40 wpc solid state integrated amp and a pair of Dynaco A-25s. But if you played the analogue setup I had in that old system -- Thorens TD-160 with Shure V15-III -- through that Dynaco into a pair of really fine speakers -- for me, horn-loaded Tannoys or modded Altec 604-8Gs -- that were properly set up in a compatible room, that would be best of all. Of course, adding a better component will make an improvement. Once, when out of work for a time, I had to sell my Tannoys. I used the other components (including a big Crown/SAE combo) and a small pair of bookshelf speakers that I had long since retired, but weren't really worth selling. I was amazed at how good they sounded with the separates compared to the Dynaco I'd used them with before. A very real, obvious and delightful difference, to be sure. Having said that, in my experience, among the components themselves, speakers are the main contender. To put it another way: I imagine someone gives me one signed blank cheque and another for $3000, and says, "Buy a five-piece stereo system (analogue rig, tuner, CD player, preamp, power amp) plus speakers. For one component you may spend as much as you want. But $600 each (or, for the speakers, a pair) is the limit for the other components. I know I'd fill in the blank cheque to buy the best (for me) possible speakers and then spend $600 each on the source components and the amplification.
What's most important?
I had some friends over last night, and we started to discuss the different things that go into assembling a high quality stereo playback system. The level of disagreement, and the heated discourse, was both fun and surprising. Here is what I think, in order from most important, to least: 1).THE ROOM/SPEAKER INTERFACE- choosing the right speaker, and placing it properly in an acoustically "sound" room with a dedicated power line. If this is wrong (like a Wilson Grand Slamm in 12 x 12 x 8 room) well, then why bother with the rest. 2). THE SPEAKER/AMP INTERFACE- this is a close second, and depending on the circumstances, might even be first. If there is a REAL problem here(like low impedance/sensitivity speakers w/SET amps) nothing else will matter much. 3). THE AMP/PREAMP INTERFACE- again, this seems to be the next place where things can go really wrong in an audio system. 4) SOURCE COMPONENTS- I know, this is lower on my list than most people would like, and I don't mean to infer that source components don't affect the quality of a playback system. Of course they do. I just feel that if the above issues have not been addressed, then simply throwing a reference quality source into the system might not be the best way to maximize the potential of said system. 5). INTERCONNECTS AND SPEAKER WIRE 6). ISOLATON DEVICES, A/C CORDS, POWER CONDITIONERS, AND OTHER VARIOUS TWEAKS.....Well there it is. Again, in an ideal system, ALL of the above issues would (should) be addressed sooner or later. But how would you prioritize things, and why? Release the hounds........Robert K.
- ...
- 17 posts total
- 17 posts total