What should I upgrade next?

KT88 is repeating a well known, and logical, premise. In real life though, your system transformation will unfold much more rapidly if you buy first rate sensitive speakers first. Only by doing that will you understand the monstrously poor system you now own. I have $6,400 invested in a reference system. That is not much more than two year's allowance for you, Lance. Except for the cd player, I bought everything used, and everything but the cd player has made the Stereophile Class A short list (KT88 must be wincing).

After the amp pre/amp and speakers are near perfect, all the smallest nuances exhibited by various front ends come out loud and clear. Now, I know the cd player is my worst link (but not bad at all). To help in my search for a repacement, I just hosted a bring your own front end party, and this is what one contester had to write afterwards:

"Your system is by far the most neutral I've heard in a home. Any change to front end is so immediately noticed that I feel comfortable that the rest of the system is simply getting out of the way."

The moral is, listen to sensible advice offered by war weary audiophiles, and not sales people. Buy only afer careful thought, and audition in your home, if you can. That way you can avoid common audiophile pitfalls like, for instance, trying to fix an offending amp with expensive cable rolling.

Jolida 100 cd player ($900)
Pass Aleph P pre amp ($1,600)
Pass X150 amp ($2300)
Apogee Duetta Signature full range ribbon speakers ($1,600)
Total ($6,400)

I want to make one additional point as to why, IMHO, I think an audiophile looking to upgrade everything should start at the speakers and work back from there (see my lengthy post above). Kt88 isn't incorrect in his GIGO argument (as I acknowledge above), it's just that a source-first approach, while maybe in some instances sheilding one's ears from stuff about your present system you'd rather not know, does not lend itself as well as the approach I'm advocating to the total process of system improvement. Above, I go into detail on two primary reasons why this is so, summarizable as: 1) The speakers chosen are going to have the most influence on, and the most interaction with, those elements of one's listening environment and listening preferences that are least amenable to errors in the selection, or least likely to undergo change during the system-building process, such as family considerations, the properties of the listening room, and types of music listened to; 2) Ideally, system-building will be best accomplished if one can perform meaningful auditions of gear under consideration in the context of one's own home listening environment and system, and this requires a "clear window" provided by revealing and resolving end-of-chain gear to aid in evaluating preceding components in the chain. I also stressed the importance of making a proper match between the speakers and the amplifier chosen to drive them as the most important subsystem within the chain when it comes to gear selection, with the speakers coming first, and then an appropriate amplifier chosen to complement them.

In response to the other suggestions about starting with sources, though, I'd like to point out one other advantage of my approach. An average system has, usually, just one end-of-chain subsystem (speakers, amplifier, speaker cable) and one middle-of-chain subsystem (amplifier, preamplifier, interconnects), but may have more than one source subsystem present (DAC, transport, interconnect) (phono preamp, cartridge, turntable, interconnect) (tuners) (A/V processors) (analog recorders) (digital recorders). Since an audiophile will basically always be listening through the same end-of-chain/middle-of-chain subsystems, it makes more sense to choose one's source components through auditioning that will account for the sonic traits of the rest of the system, rather than the other way around. If one began with the source subsystems individually, by the time the chain was completely upgraded to the end, the listener might well find that system synergy between the source subsystems chosen and the middle- and end-of-chain choices that followed was somewhat hit-or-miss. In other words, this ordering could promote good matching between, say, the CD subsystem and the rest of the system, but fail to accomplish the same with the analog vinyl subsystem - both source subsystems haven been already chosen prior to getting around to, say, the speakers. By starting at the end and working back, one is much more in control when it comes to selecting only gear that will ultimately create an equally synergistic balance between all subsystems present throughout the chain when completed.

I thank all of you for your input. Listening to all your suggestions is why I am have the next step problem trying to better my system. After all this I think I am heading toward doubling my budget $2000-3,000 used and buying speakers. Electrostatic most likely among the leading candidates Maggie 3.5-3.6. Then going to Pre-amp tube in the winter. Next summer the amp.

Keep the comments and suggestions coming, I am not firm on anything yet!

I thought it was interesting you happened to mention Maggies as a potential speaker choice as I couldn't think of a better example of why you should pick speakers first from a practical system building perspective. Ribbon speakers(which I believe the Maggies are--not electrostatic like Martin Logans) can present a very tough load for an amp, and if the amp isn't up to the task you'll never get the magic the Maggies can produce. It would be a shame if you flipped over the Maggies and found out the amp you just bought isn't suitable for power-hungry ribbon speakers(a lot of amps aren't)--your choice would then be sell your amp or forget the Maggies, neither of which is an attractive option. You just inadvertently pointed out one of the major reasons to choose speakers first(also one of Zaikesman's points above). Best of luck and have fun.

Tim

Zaikesman...thanks for your great elucidation of what I was clumsily delineating.
KT88...OF COURSE it's GIGO, but in absolute physical terms
(freq response, coherence, temporal/phase stuff) that are readily discerned, there is MUCH greater variability in the speaker-room coupling than in the sea of Redbook players.
And in the thread-head's case this is most apparent: his Nak CDP is in most ways much closer to supplying a musically-satisfying signal than his ADS boom-cha speakers are!
BowBow...the Acurus and ARC were recommended by NAD dealers as upgrades! Certainly the ARC sounded better, but the ACURUS was a gritty mess. The Alephs of course are another realm. I can't imagine that Lance's satisfaction with the ADS speakers will be improved with a more transparent amp!
Have you ever heard these speakers? And what if he buys a nice low-medium power high output impedence "sweety" and then tries it on the Maggies he just dropped on the thread?!
You really have to think of the speaker as a LOAD that must be properly DRIVEN. You don't build a car around a motor; you pick the motor appropriate to the load it must lug around, no?

Lance...if you try the Maggies then you WILL have to exercise care in setup and room-damping issues before you go preamp-hunting. I'm not sure I'd pick a tube pre next as the 2600 is colored enough to affect that decision too. As well impedence-matching issues may result in frequency response anomolies that could make your decision-making a bit complicated, and thus frustrating.
Get your speakers, then try to audition several pre/amp combos. If you're not sure, then at least try to use one you like long enough to audition several fine front ends.
The 2600 simply won't quite be transparent enough to make CDP comparos as easy as a great amp (and pre) will allow.
KT88's certainly correct here.
I'd focus on the amp chain as a WHOLE once you get the speakers selected. THEN get a real front end and your jaw will drop! Have fun.