Which area of components to spend the most $ on? Boy I was wrong all my life!
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. |
| Post removed |
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! |
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. |
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 |
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. |
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 |
| Post removed |
@ivan_nosnibor Great post! 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 |
| Post removed |
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? |
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 |
@dave_b 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. |
@geoffkait 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. |
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. |
Yes, Kat...we understand the difference. It was fiction. Why are you even fixating on such a trivial detail? If you have something interesting to say or can elaborate politely on a given subject, please do so. Smarmy usually masks smart...so why the games? Just converse cogently and make sense. I would love to hear some insights that you may have obtained over the years if they are relevant and help move the conversation forward. Random bursts of Katino waves are of little value and only create a sterile and unproductive atmosphere. |
dave_b"you must understand so much more stuff than practically anyone else. We are so blessed to have your insights here on AGon." You are indeed blessed, fortunate, and lucky so why don't you act that way instead of your continuous, incessant, and repeated attempts at smug "humor" and passive-agressive, sarcastic, and self-important language, assertions and claims. |
| Post removed |
