Chicken or the Egg

[atomicAdam]

What is more important to get first -

Source or Speakers?

I'm talking high end. Like $2000ish for digital | $6-8000ish for analog | $6-10,000 for speakers.

Just curious based off a conversation I recently had with a speaker maker.

I personally could see it both ways but am thinking that high end speakers are best to get first, because then you can actually here the slight or significant characteristics of the source. So auditioning at home would be more informative. As well, shipping a digital source or TT back if you don't like it is way cheaper than speakers. But that is a side note. Anyways... The speaker manufacturer saw it the other way.

You thoughts?

[E-Stat]

What is more important to get first - Source or Speakers?

Seriously, I've always been a transducer guy. That dates me back to the day when there was such at both ends of the chain - speakers and the cartridge. I believe the foundation of any great system always begins with the choice of speaker since that has a greater impact on the final result and better defines the chosen tradeoffs between various speaker approaches. In the main system, my speakers represent more than half the investment of the entire system. They are remarkably transparent and coherent in a way matched by few other speakers. The only thing I would do differently with a bigger budget would be to create a larger array of Sound Lab panels. A double pair of Majestics would do nicely.

Having said that, I can also see the other side of the coin. My vintage system is an eclectic mix of hand-me-down components from the main system centered around the speakers I used when I was 16 - double Advents. In this system, the speakers represent only about six percent of the "retail" value. To put this further into perspective, the speakers cost less than the power cord I use with the amplifier! Advents have always been neutral and faithful reproducers if not being a bit veiled and only cover a nine octave range. Nevertheless, they are still able to convey the subtle low level dynamics and resolution that better sources, cabling, and amplification can deliver. Since I enjoy the outdoors, I spend more time listening to the vintage system than I do with the "big" system. Zoe the cat frequently joins me listening. And I roll the bike outside when its not raining!



rw

[poppachubby]

Source, all the way...

[nightflier]

...poster on the wall.

Just kidding.

My take has changed over the years. As we upgrade our systems, the chicken and egg question isn't so clear anymore because we may already have very revealing speakers, but that aren't as pleasing to listen to (hence not what we would like to end up with). Despite that, the speakers are ideal for auditioning other gear up the chain, in this case, sources.

So in short: it depends.

[atomicAdam]

Source, all the way...

Why?...

[poppachubby]

Seriously, I've always been a transducer guy. That dates me back to the day when there was such at both ends of the chain - speakers and the cartridge. I believe the foundation of any great system always begins with the choice of speaker since that has a greater impact on the final result and better defines the chosen tradeoffs between various speaker approaches. In the main system, my speakers represent more than half the investment of the entire system. They are remarkably transparent and coherent in a way matched by few other speakers. The only thing I would do differently with a bigger budget would be to create a larger array of Sound Lab panels. A double pair of Majestics would do nicely.

Having said that, I can also see the other side of the coin. My vintage system is an eclectic mix of hand-me-down components from the main system centered around the speakers I used when I was 16 - double Advents. In this system, the speakers represent only about six percent of the "retail" value. To put this further into perspective, the speakers cost less than the power cord I use with the amplifier! Advents have always been neutral and faithful reproducers if not being a bit veiled and only cover a nine octave range. Nevertheless, they are still able to convey the subtle low level dynamics and resolution that better sources, cabling, and amplification can deliver. Since I enjoy the outdoors, I spend more time listening to the vintage system than I do with the "big" system. Zoe the cat frequently joins me listening. And I roll the bike outside when its not raining!



rw

Hey E, you must be playing the cat equivelant of Al Green because that feline is lookin totally laid back and chill. "I'm just a smooth, soul kitty..."

[atomicAdam]

poppa maybe i wasn't clear.

which would you upgrade 1st. which do you think is more important to have be top of line 1st. the source or the speakers, not which is more important.

[02audionoob]

When I started upgrading, speakers came 1st...and then again after about three amps, three preamps, a turntable, a CD player, two phono preamps...well, you get the idea.

[poppachubby]

poppa maybe i wasn't clear.

which would you upgrade 1st. which do you think is more important to have be top of line 1st. the source or the speakers, not which is more important.

OK Adam, I guess I should have read a little more closely, it was late when I looked at this. When you put it that way, it becomes harder for me to answer. Alot of variables involved, assuming that your current gear is evenly matched up I think I would still have to say source, specifically amp/pre-amp. Unless you're going to REALLY outclass your present speakers by upgrading way beyond, I feel the most realized value will probably come from a better source. We would assume that it will right away increase your present speakers sound, and open the door for a speaker upgrade. Going the other way around, you may be limited in your purchase based on what your present source can do. So basically, that would force you into a source upgrade that you maybe aren't ready for. I think that it's an easier task to match speakers to a source, sure it might not be as "easy" in terms of ordering online, shipping, etc., but what does easy matter when you're spending top dollar? Convenience and such should take a back seat to necessity which in this case is getting your source upgraded 1st.

[atomicAdam]

thanks poppachubby

[basite]

depends...

buying better speakers first, could (and probably will), reveal the 'lesser quality' of your not-upgraded-yet-source. It will show it's shortcomings, and your speakers won't be able to truly shine.

on the other hand, upgrading the source first, you'll have that beautiful front end, from which you can't hear the full capabilities...

option one (the speakers), can be more enjoyable (you feel more of an upgrade), if your source is already somewhat decent (in high end factors) IMHO...

keep them spinning,
Bert.

[RGA]

I see it the way you see it Adam. Speakers first.

The argument for source first makes much sense and UHF magazine has touted that for years. But I think they touted it back in the early days of CD and with CD players sucking so badly their view made sense - more then than 2009 IMO.

The source first idea largely hinges on the following premise - no speaker no matter how good can put back something that was missed or ruined by the source.

Solid logic except that they give far too much credit to inexpensive loudspeakers that not only can't fix something ruined or add what was missed but lack the resolution to capture what is there. A terrific set of speakers will also be able to show up more of the foibles of the front end.

Since the speaker is responsible for the vast amount of the end result it makes more sense to invest as much as possible there and deal with the rest later. No wmatter what front end you buy and no matter how much you spend a Quad 2905 sounds like a Quad 2905 and a B&W D800 sounds like a D800 - and no front end is going to change one into the other.

The front end is responsible for getting the best results you can possibly get out of the speaker you chose. I personally would rather look at the whole stereo system - a system's approach and when you listen to one that raises the goose bumps - write it all down and buy each one that you can starting with the speakers.

For instance you can "get by" with inexpensive very good front ends especially on CD replay. Amplifiers - if you're a Solid State lover instead of spending the $3k on the Bryston spend $1200 on the Odyssey Stratos. You get the 20 year warranty, more power, 2ohm stable and IMO sounds better. If you're smart about it there is money to be saved on the front end. On a SS amp I'd buy used anyway - you're dollar will go further.

The source first approach makes more sense on turntables. Going from a $100 cartridge to a $200 can make more difference than going from a $500 CD player to a $1500 CD player. And besides you can always add an external DAC later. I am reviewing a Grant Fidelity tube Dac/09 that retails for about $300 and it's quite a unit - this thing has elevated inexpensive transports tremendously and holds in with a much more expensive back end.

Plus as you note speakers can be a 20-25 year or longer deal - if you pick one that really fits for you then you have your reference point. I also believe choosing the right amplifier to fit your speakers is critical. A Bryston works great with PMC but sounds completely rubbish with my speakers. So the Amp/Speaker match is critical.

I'm not against sources - When you get up there in budget they can be truly terrific and worth the cash - but a solid good sounding non irritating cd replay system with something like the Grant Fidelity Tube Dac 09 or Audio Note DAC Kit 1 in the right system can be very pleasing. Sure a Dac 5 is way better but you need to take out a mortgage.

I have spent the least on digital because to me it's more about the design than the expense. I prefer the a one box $2,700.00 AN CD 2.1X to the $30,000 Linn, or $15k mark Levinsons. I could live with the AN for life. Why spend more to satisfy other people's perceptions? Buy until you personally are happy with the result that may mean you need to spend $25,000 on an interconnect or $25. But don't think just because it costs $25,000 it's better.

The Grant Fidelity Tube Dac 09 is already better than most $1k digital replay that I've heard over the years for less than half the price. And it's also a full preamp, USB Dac, and a pretty darn good headphone amp. (will comment on the preamp stage when I get some uber powerful monoblocks next week).

[RGA]

One other point to look at:

You can always fix the treble with a new DAC or preamp quite easily. It is not easy to replace the tweeter.

Assuming you go "all separates" then you can do a lot of things. With preamp power amp you have multiple combinations to try out. If you have transport/DAC you have piles of combinations. Get a good turntable and there are endless arms and carts to try.

With speakers - if you choose the wrong one that could lead to piles of costly front end decisions that you could have a negative view of - all because the speaker was the real culprit.

As a reviewer I am limited because for instance I have a 10 watt amp. This severely limits what speakers my editor can send me. Also because it's an integrated I can't review preamps.

Having separates allows you to do a lot more things later - something to keep in mind. Of course I became a reviewer after the fact. So now I have to look around for separates at higher power but that I also like.

lastly - IMO speaker shopping is the most fun - take lots of time and listen for long periods - I would often spend an entire day at a shop listening to just 1 or 2 speakers. Do that for many sessions then pick the best ones - keep notes, pick ones that will fit your room - and then get down to 3 or 4 and take them home. If you plan to spend the bigger money - dealers will do this - some will do it on cheap ones too.

[JoeE SP9]

Speakers first. That way you can hear every other upgrade better speakers push you to make.