What should be the first component when upgrading?

Absolutely...front end first. There's nothing wrong with running a hard-drive based system though, so your Powerbook is a good start if you already have your library on iTunes (forget about the iPod as you'll be limited to the internal DAC there and it can be easily improved upon). Best to rip to your hard drive in Apple Lossless or WAV files, though, if you want to get the best reproduction. So then your next step would be a good USB DAC to feed from your laptop (in place of the CD player option), unless you absolutely have to play those silver platters. I'd then move on to your amp and finally speakers (or both at the same time if you can swing it), paying careful attention to pairing off these two components. Do you live in a small space? The speakers you mention are quite small aren't they? Not that small is bad, but there are better choices. If you are sticking to small, monitor speakers I'd point you towards offerings by Silverline and used options by Soliloquy (no longer made). What kind of music do you like to listen to? That may be an important question in choosing amp and speakers. Don't skimp on the interconnects and speaker cables either. You don't have to spend a fortune there, as many would have you believe...IMO of course.

Have fun!

Marco

I don't know that I am steadfast in that sense, because overall I think 'balance'in the chain, though if pressed I'd say source. The reason for the source-first camp is the old adage; garbage in = garbage out. If you start with garbage as the source, there is absolutely nothing down the line you are going to be able to do other than make the garbage smell a bit sweeter, but it's still garbage when it comes out the end. So if you take a source that is not capable of nuance, that is fatiguing, lacking in detail and soundstage, and harsh in the highs, I don't care what you put in the rest of the chain...you can have speakers that look like screen doors, or public waste cans, or giant horns from Dr. Seuss...you can have amps with enough power to light a city, preamps with glowing NOS tubes from the 1950's, and cables that cost enough to feed a family of four for a year; you can have all this stuff in place and it can be working in perfect synchronicity in a room that resembles a miniature world class concert hall and is acoustically perfect..you can add your clever lil' clocks and magic bricks and lead-weighted everything...you feed that crappy source through that otherwise perfect system and you will be treated to harsh highs and no soundstage and you will be fatigued from listening to it at length. You feed the signal from a Close-N'-Play turntable throuth that system and it's not likely to bring any smiles other than smiles of mild amusement at the novelty that you made it sound a lot better than it should. But it still is not going to be something you'll want to keep listening to. Reverse the situation and put a world class front-end with a world class middle components, and crap speakers and I'd bet you could listen and be amazed for a whole lot longer than compromising the source. These are extreme examples to illustrate the point, but the fact is it's all connected in a chain and you should go for balance and strength throughout. That said, I do think that speakers do make a big difference in the kind of sound your system produces...the sonic signature perhaps. This is an endless debate, repeated over and over here. There's my .02 lincolns again.

Marco