Which area of components to spend the most $ on? Boy I was wrong all my life!
I have been an audio junkie for about 25 years. All those years, I have read plenty of discussion posts and recommendations where to spend the most money on. The majority, even the experts recommend to spend the most money on speakers. Up to as high as 60% of the total budget.Example: CEO of PS Audio-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYwL7vPkPhg I believed this all my life. Today, my eyes are opened. My total budget is about $15K.Before today, my system was:Speakers-Revel F36 Concerta 2 (For the money, this is the best speakers I’ve heard. I like it more than my previous Dynaudio Contour 30)Integrated Amp-Marantz PM-10 (Class D, balanced, 400wpc at 4ohms)CD Player-Oppo UDP 205 & Marantz CD 6005 (Some of the best in class)Line conditioner-Furman Elite PFi 15Cables-Kimber 8TC Speaker Cables (Sorry, not a cable nut. I’d rather spend money elsewhere) I upgraded my front end CD player to... Marantz SA-11S3. I was BLOWN away! This is the greatest upgrade I have ever heard in my life. For 25 years, I was taught to spend the most in speakers. Sorry! It’s the FRONT END! The best source you can afford. The purity transcends down the river. I am blown away by the sheer improvement in detail, clarity, depth, the air around the instruments. My philosophy has changed.
Your madcap, pseudo intellectual humor, mixed with an occasional flourish of mysticism is pointless. I grow weary of your predictably repetitive Shtick!
Clearthink is a misnomer. I’ve gone down the hole and back again. Kippy’s work on interstellar was either ignored or he was on something when they asked for his help. What let down that hot mess was!
It sounds to me like many of the contributors here have consumed quantities of mind altering substances and that accounts for the confused, disoriented, juvenile imaginings here!
LOL. Confused. Disoriented. Yes.
Hardly Juvenile though.
Music is far from a juvenile pursuit even though it definitely starts that way with nursery rhymes.
It sounds to me like many of the contributors hear have consumed quantities of mind altering substances and that accounts for the confused, disoriented, juvenile imaginings hear!
Agreed. It is frustrating in a way. May be Carl just got carried away by his enthusiastic dreams. We are aware of our universe and billions of galaxies but nevertheless at our current level of understanding we can only watch and appreciate but never touch any. Trapped like a spec of dust carried by the wind. We are like tears in the rain. Synchronicity expresses that connectedness, wonder and sadness.
“There’s a dead salmon frozen in a waterfall, is my soul up there?”
Wave theory of particles and quantum physics expresses it too - but so far our understanding is that the only form of physical connectedness exists at the atomic level. Like the single electron that somehow goes through both of two holes at the same time.
Gravity seems to suggest a force acting over great distance or is it simply our incorrect representation of space-time that necesssitates a construct called gravity to explain observations in our Cartesian view: much like other fictitious forces such as centrifugal force - your frame of reference demands these constructs but do they actually exist?
The rabbit hole goes as deep as you can go and always deeper....
BTW - if you want some mind blowing stuff check out Sir Fred Hole and his theories on life being everywhere. Despite Fred’s hypothesis not having been fully fleshed out and likely still full of holes, the concept is not without an undeniable logic. It starts in tradition of Copernicus by challenging the logic “why did life start only on earth in a random way in a primordial soup?” - probabalisticly life is much more likely to happen if it could have happened anywhere in the much larger Petri dish of the entire universe.
He may have been inspired but his idea for Jodie Foster’s character to travel to Vega in the book and movie Contact via a black hole was totally screwed up. Fortunately Kip Thorne convinced him that wouldn’t work out too well.
Thx. Great post. Reminding me that Sting is such an intellectual. In these lyrics he really expresses the connectedness we all feel at times. I am as far from being a hippie as it gets but I still sense the connectedness in absolutely everything.
“The cosmos is within us. We are made of star-stuff. We are a way for the universe to know itself.” ― Carl Sagan
or, interestingly you can replace Cosmos with DNA (curiously DNA is similar and largely shared between disparate life forms)
“DNA is within us. We are made of DNA. We are a way for DNA to know itself.”
That everything is connected is a universal law. Music is a language that well expresses this form of spirituality that is so hard to express in words. Written and spoken languages are mostly about our materialistic world (for practical reasons - “pass the peas please”). Music is consequently such an important and higher art.
The Police offer us some insight regarding our Audio Obsession:
With one breath, with one flow You will know Synchronicity
A sleep trance, a dream dance, A shared romance, Synchronicity
A connecting principle, Linked to the invisible Almost imperceptible Something inexpressible. Science insusceptible Logic so inflexible Causally connectible Yet nothing is invincible.
If we share this nightmare Then we can dream Spiritus mundi.
If you act, as you think, The missing link, Synchronicity.
We know you, they know me Extrasensory Synchronicity.
A star fall, a phone call, It joins all, Synchronicity.
It's so deep, it's so wide Your inside Synchronicity.
Effect without a cause Sub-atomic laws, scientific pause Synchronicity
This was a great thread, I had replied earlier but it never posted..... I believe the source and preamp are for most people the most important items in the chain. Speakers are obviously important , but I have had many speakers that sounded markedly better as the quality of the components upstream improved. Speakers in general are so good now that you can take a really good $2k speaker and it sounds pretty good with modest electronics. Pair it with a really good amp / pre , or integrated that's $5k or $6k plus a $2k or $4k source and in many cases it brings that speaker to a different level... same speaker but great electronics.
So the question I have is how many speakers have been swapped in the quest for better sound , only to be a lateral move?
You could spend $10k+ on a boutique single-ended tube amp and have it sound awful with a pair of $50k speakers, but amazing with a pair of $300 diy ones.
If your components don’t cooperate properly, you’re throwing money down the wrong rabbit hole in any direction.
It never ceases to amaze how we all prioritize and react differently to the same gear in the same room! That's why we all have to listen to as many different rigs, rooms etc. with music that you know well to overcome the huge challenge of wrapping your head around it and make conclusions that will best apply at home with your gear.
This has become one of the most interesting threads lately. Keep it coming! Cheers, Spencer
What a Thread...! First thought: it's generally conceded that speakers have the toughest job - transducing electronic energy to physical. It follows that here is where the "soundpath"is more likely to degrade. The source starts the journey at 100% (?- or less). All the stuff that follows can't improve, but will likely alter the signal to some degree. Speakers are the component most likely to add or subtract the most: They have the toughest job. Second thought: Audio experience has more to do with what you hear than any math calculation. Seems as tho' some folks work back from their experience to justify their %s as universal. Third thought: Too few responders have fully qualified their observations - it's THEIR sound: their equipment, their room, their ears and their brain (memory). Lots of variables here. Too many to attempt to allocate a hard and fast priority to certain components alone for every listener. Personal comments & suggestions make for good conversation, but they are only that - personal. 2Psyop has it right and bigbobbydmoney's first sentence covers it all - simplistic, but true, non-the-less: "Building a system is a process based on one's listening preference and ears". (Oh - and the brain!) Bo
Where to put your money is always important to consider when you first set up a higher end system, however once your first "true" higher end system has been purchased and and balanced properly based on budget then the merry-go-round starts for many and the notion of front end vs. speakers or any other components does not fall into a tight set of rules. If your budget was high enough initially then the front end might be sufficiently high to warrant the next upgrade being the speakers or if you bought an integrated amplifier you might want to then purchase an amplifier and preamplifier, so after that first initial "big" investment you made in your first stab at creating your first true high end system then you go with what you perceive would be the smartest next step in moving into the merry-go-round phase of upgrading.
One of the most important considerations is the length of time your investment will be retained is can be considered with respect to changing technology.
For these reasons I feel that the most significant investments should be placed initially on speakers and amplification as these technologies are not as Quickly evolving.
Cables also make respect to investments. For digital front end I would then get the best possible however always keeping consideration the fact that I will probably upgrade at some point
Ask yourself, what factors in my listening environment remain constant regardless of any component changes you may make in the future. The answer is probably the power coming from your wall and the room itself. If we provide appropriate power (components can be fussy) and improve the cleanliness of our A/C, we can make any component sound better. The influence a room makes is well known, so why do we think putting the horse before the cart is the logical procedure.
That was Linn's theory for as long as I can remember. I recently unpacked some speakers I had in storage for 20 years. I put a new Anthem front end for decoding on them and must say I agree. It all starts from the source.
All these percentages boggle my mind. There are far too many variables.
I'm a speakers first guy. Find some speakers that fit your room and sound good. Then get amplification that has the right synergy with the speakers (this forum is a great place to get information on that, and a good dealer is priceless). Then buy as good a front end as you can afford with the money left over. Tweak and upgrade as you go, and have fun!
PS: Start with the room first if you can afford it.
PPS: It's no surprise the OP noticed a significant difference with a CD player that cost 7x the original. I would venture to guess, however, that the OP would have noticed an even more significant difference if he would have kept the Oppo and bought some $14,000 speakers!
Thank you for the inputs. I did not expect this discussion became a hot topic. I am enjoying everyone’s perspectives.@oem-wheels & @curiousjim-I could not test the Dynaudio + Marantz SA11S3 combo since I had to sell the Contour 30 & Oppo 205 in order to switch components. Many of you still have the opinions about keeping the speaker budget higher, but my ears do not lie. I am forever a firm believer in front-end. Even the Oppo 205 (bought from the manufacturer) do not come close to the Marantz 11S3. My wife was a voice major(soprano) in her university days. The day that I hooked up the 11S3 and turn it on for the first time, she immediately told me that the sound is amazing. I cannot imagine if I had the budget to keep the Dynaudio Contour 30 to this Marantz. It will be even better.
I am slowly branching into cables now. All my budget went to components so I only have little wiggle room for cables. I am planning to get Wireworld Eclipse XLR interconnects. I will keep my Kimber 8TC speaker cables for now. Money is tight.
Over many years and many systems. Synergy is everything and synergy is a constantly changing and evolving event. An upgrade in one area creates a weak link elsewhere. And this scenario continues until one dies or gets out of audio. Is it possible to be an audiophile and maintain a static system?
Also, I have found that the pre amp is the "heart" of the system. Everything passes through it so you want it to be as transparent as possible. To get the best from your speakers you have to have the best components upstream. They can't perform their best with garbage being fed to them. So, if you are starting from scratch, spend approximately equally on all components. I consider cables a component by the way.If you are on an upgrade path, spend the most on the pre FIRST, and "grow" into it with your other component up grades.Good listening,Z
"The front end sets the limits of resolution for the system." As many have said in this good thread.
How does that signal get to the rest of the system? Wires. No matter how good the source component is and how great the signal it produces, if the wires won't let most of that signal through, very little has been gained by the otherwise correct focus on front end.
Learning the effect of wires a few years ago was the biggest, most unexpected--and most cost effective--piece of learning in my decades of building a system, and one that has been repeated many times as I've gone through a total upgrading of my system's wires. Jim Heckman
I have been buying high end speakers for the past 20 plus years. I find speakers make the biggest difference in overall sound than any other components. I usually keep speakers about 6 month and then move on to something new. It is fun to try different things.
I also like to try speakers that look good as well. MBL's come to mind. Currently I have Stealth 6's and they are great looking speakers. Everybody who comes into the sound room has something to say about them. They do steal the show!
I invest some of my money every 6 months to get my ears professionally cleaned. Best trick I have ever found. A good Ear, Nose & Throat Doctor will use a vacuum device and not the old bulb and warm water routine. You can put this on your insurance also. So here is a low cost fix that is a great help.
My feeling is that AMPLIFIERS are the weakest part of the whole chain. They always have been, in my audio experience going back 50+ years.
The amps are FAR worse than the speakers.
In 2019, I find that 99% of the amps one can buy, don't cut the mustard. Also, VERY few people, active in audio, have long-term heard these amps in the 1% bracket.
The best sounding amps, IME, will be 2 Watts or less, tube, with absolutely NO negative feedback loop. Only from this amplifier topology have I heard playback that is long-term satisfactory to me.
You pick the amplifier first, ................and the rest of the system follows suit.
The speaker will be a two-way, highly efficient / sensitive, in the 99 to 101 dB or higher range, and the woofer will be a 15 inch. The speaker's enclosure will be ten cubic feet as the minimum size, no open baffles. ALE, GPA, or some vintage ALTEC drivers can be used, with care, slight mods.
To obtain maximum dynamic contrasting, and wide band response, the audio wire will have silver content, and I like to see multiple paralleled wires, the total equaling about 8 AWG , per polarity, for this 2 Watt amp. Use of 8 AWG equivalent wire STARTS inside the amp, with the Power Transformer's High Voltage winding's center tap, and it extends, amp-to-crossover, through the crossover, and all the way to the voice coil terminals of fifteen inch driver.
The "ultimate" useful amplifier topology will " only and always " be simple - as follows : Two Stages, Direct Coupled, either SE or in Push Pull, using triodes. This topology is hard to find, done really well, so I DIY design and build my own. Its a lot of fun. Good luck in your quest.
Front end ( source ) equipment in 2019, is NOT the weak link. We have some very good sources these days, if selected intelligently. Amps that are truly superb, as always, still in my opinion, remains as the problem.
My experience that the Room is the most important "component". The second most important "component" is matching the speaker to the Room. I have heard systems at shows that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars yet sound worse than a Sonos. I have heard mid priced systems that make me smile when played in a room that has been set up correctly. If you check the major magazines and dealers (what is left of them) you find a plethora of great manufacturers. So Room, then matching, then fill in the rest.
I would take a Marantz SA 11s3 over any Oppo. Both are good, but the Marantz is really top notch. Anything designed by Ken Ishiwata is going to be superb sounding. Also not knocking Oppo but I think they are stepping away from audio.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
