A well balanced system is one that never strays too far from neutral, all the components work together as a team, the overall presentation is pleasant and there are minimal conflicts or weak spots that draw attention to themselves.
All of this is done without an individual stand out player, as it would no longer be well balanced or a team effort if that were the case. If one piece were to stand out, the system would no longer be well balanced. It would have a noticeable high point with the equivalent low or lower points.
To use a comparison, system building and body building are not that different. Sinking all of your money / effort into one specific "star player" would be equivalent to exercising one's legs with minimal attention paid to the rest of the body or system. While the legs could easily support the weight of the entire body and do a lot of work, the rest of the body would not be up to performing at the same level when called upon to do so. The end result is that the body would run out of "air" and "energy" while quickly becoming "fatigued". Nor would the highly specialized "star player" legs be able to complete all of the tasks that a well rounded performer would be capable of.
With "star quality" speakers and the associated price tag, your audio system would do the same thing. The speakers would reveal the shortcomings of the signal source and amplification devices feeding them. Kind of like having someone that is far superior in every aspect pointing out all of your weak spots everytime that they see you. Again and again, over and over. While the flaws might be pointed out very fairly and honestly, this would not be much fun nor would it be enjoyable.
From the other point of view, each improvement that you did make might be duly noted, but you would have to make a LOT of improvements EVERYWHERE in order to achieve a level playing surface.
Logic dictates that it would be more intelligent to work every aspect of the body / system equally, making for a well rounded approach. This would provide performance that wasn't seriously lacking in any specific department nor leave you feeling "underwhelmed". While it may not have any specific "stellar" attributes, you could call upon any part of the body / system and feel confident that it would not let you down nor stand out so much that it became irritating.
Keep in mind that when you get TOO much of a good thing, you loose a sense of "balance" and it becomes less palatable with each exposure. The longer you stress the other areas of the system that weren't properly exercised or paid attention to, the more revealing the problem would become.
The bottom line is that my thoughts are: why "x-ray" cheaper / inferior components with high grade speakers when you can achieve something that is much more balanced / well rounded for the same price ? While some would say that this leads to a system of mediocrity, we all have to settle for that at various levels. That is, unless you have taken the "all out assault / never ending funds" approach to system building.
Just my $.02, if it's worth that. Obviously, some will and have disagreed. That's what makes the audio world go round. Sean
>
All of this is done without an individual stand out player, as it would no longer be well balanced or a team effort if that were the case. If one piece were to stand out, the system would no longer be well balanced. It would have a noticeable high point with the equivalent low or lower points.
To use a comparison, system building and body building are not that different. Sinking all of your money / effort into one specific "star player" would be equivalent to exercising one's legs with minimal attention paid to the rest of the body or system. While the legs could easily support the weight of the entire body and do a lot of work, the rest of the body would not be up to performing at the same level when called upon to do so. The end result is that the body would run out of "air" and "energy" while quickly becoming "fatigued". Nor would the highly specialized "star player" legs be able to complete all of the tasks that a well rounded performer would be capable of.
With "star quality" speakers and the associated price tag, your audio system would do the same thing. The speakers would reveal the shortcomings of the signal source and amplification devices feeding them. Kind of like having someone that is far superior in every aspect pointing out all of your weak spots everytime that they see you. Again and again, over and over. While the flaws might be pointed out very fairly and honestly, this would not be much fun nor would it be enjoyable.
From the other point of view, each improvement that you did make might be duly noted, but you would have to make a LOT of improvements EVERYWHERE in order to achieve a level playing surface.
Logic dictates that it would be more intelligent to work every aspect of the body / system equally, making for a well rounded approach. This would provide performance that wasn't seriously lacking in any specific department nor leave you feeling "underwhelmed". While it may not have any specific "stellar" attributes, you could call upon any part of the body / system and feel confident that it would not let you down nor stand out so much that it became irritating.
Keep in mind that when you get TOO much of a good thing, you loose a sense of "balance" and it becomes less palatable with each exposure. The longer you stress the other areas of the system that weren't properly exercised or paid attention to, the more revealing the problem would become.
The bottom line is that my thoughts are: why "x-ray" cheaper / inferior components with high grade speakers when you can achieve something that is much more balanced / well rounded for the same price ? While some would say that this leads to a system of mediocrity, we all have to settle for that at various levels. That is, unless you have taken the "all out assault / never ending funds" approach to system building.
Just my $.02, if it's worth that. Obviously, some will and have disagreed. That's what makes the audio world go round. Sean
>