2. misc-audio
  3. 119048-543

Which system would you rather have?

Which system would you like better? A system that offers one or two sonic attributes that are truly just "outstanding", but which comes at the expense of another sound category that is subpar, or a more balanced across the board system that may not rise above merely "excellent" in any category, but that does not really fall much below it anywhere either?

(Or would you rather take what's behind door number 3: truly "outstanding" in Every category and all the financial ruin that goes with it...)

I will go first. For myself, I believe the longer I've been at this game maybe the more I've come to appreciate a system that is well balanced across the board - even if nothing in particular is an overwhelming standout, and I may favor it especially so once all the sonic gremlins have been successfully tamed (no small thing that, sometimes). But, in my mind at least, maybe that comes the closest to anything I can point to as my "reference sound" anymore...or short of live music, anyway. Maybe the imbalance that I'm hearing in other systems these days is because most systems are simply "unfinished" and as such are in a state of flux. I'd say we can all appreciate how long it can sometimes take to consider a system truly finished. Maybe mine is unusual in that IS completed, I dunno, but I've now gravitated somehow toward more balanced, even if it must therefore be less spectacular in some particular regard. I find the better balance distracts me less when listening, when any shortcomings are not there to remind me that I'm listening to equipment rather than the performance...and even when no particular attribute, while it can certainly be wonderful to pay attention to in its own right, may actually be working to upstage the others, keeping all the musical facets from being on the same page. More of gestalt thing, perhaps. Or maybe it's just me. Anyone else feel like this??...or disagree??

128x128ivan_nosnibor
lynott
87 posts
 
Without going into the gory details, I spent a TON on this hobby, trying to achieve a system that was truly outstanding in all parameters. But, over time, it became increasingly clear to me that "outstanding" is a relative term. What may be outstanding and superior reproduction to me might not be to others, but for a long time, I wanted to shock and amaze with my system, and I became disillusioned when others didn't necessarily feel the same way I did about my rig.

Now I'm with you. I seek balance rather than fireworks (and internal satisfaction rather than externally derived satisfaction). Sure, fireworks are nice, and they tend to draw the attention of the ear more quickly than does a balanced system, but for me, at my age and after the experiences I've been through, I'm willing to forgo the WOW (all caps, knock you between the eyes) for the wow (lowercase and less obvious, but still impressive if one listens carefully). 

I've lived with my current system for several years now, and have zero plans to make any major changes. It's a thoughtfully assembled, high-performing rig that, while it may not scale Olympian heights in any one parameter, gets the overall WHOLE right. That's most important to me at this point in my audiophile journey.

ivan_nosnibor's avatar
ivan_nosnibor OP
1,052 posts
 
@ mesch:

I myself am of the opinion that maybe if I were in any other life than this one, I would be going through door #3 myself...but, I'd say door #2 is turning out to be pretty cool...perhaps unexpectedly so, from where I started out.

@ minorl: 

I believe that if one is looking down the ultimate road regarding where one
ends up at the end and the associated costs, then most wouldn't even start the trip.
I opt for door #3, but, with the understanding that it is a journey. If the goal is about accurate sound reproduction, or as accurate as one can get, then the journey is also based on real-world financial expectations.
You get the best that you can afford and if you received the correct/accurate advice along the way, you understand that you will be upgrading many times in order to get "there".
So, you do the best you can at first. Find something isn't quite right and begin the long upgrade path. One is never "there", but there is diminishing returns after awhile. Also a point where to get to the next real level would cost a ridiculous amount of money that may not be worth it to you.
When you get "there", can you live with what you have? If yes, then there you are. After so many years of getting "there", take a step back and add up the costs all along the way. It would probably be really high. to the extent that If you were just starting out on this path, and knew the costs, you probably wouldn't even start out.
Hey, I feel like I could've written every word of that myself! Couldn't agree more, really. Even though trying to mandate an exit strategy on myself to put a cap on it has forced me to choose carefully as possible, I originally thought I might be able to get away with something comfortably south of 10 grand, but it has turned out to be more like 16. And you may well be right, perhaps if I'd known from the beginning...! 

@ lynott:

I can recall reading, from time to time, at Agon about those who'd actually downscaled their rigs for one reason or another and, often contrary to their expectations, found that their levels of satisfaction in their system's overall performance had actually increased. I was looking from the start to avoid that problem of 'overbuying' if I could at all help it...(this was mainly because of a chance discovery of mine of a power solution that was turning the light on for me as to what was possible for me to achieve with lower-priced gear). But, the description of your system sounds like my kind of listening! Good to know that after all you went through, you've reached a zen with your sound. That is indeed what I'm shoot for.

Again, thanks to everyone for their responses!

Regards, John
infection's avatar
infection
808 posts
 
I'd say we can all appreciate how long it can sometimes take to consider a system truly finished.


What do you mean 'finished'...?


Maybe mine is unusual in that IS completed


What do you mean 'completed'...?
ivan_nosnibor's avatar
ivan_nosnibor OP
1,052 posts
 
Only that the hierarchy of components is in place and will not need to be changed and that no more component substitutions or additions need to be made. For me I think my wiring is complete with what I have as well. Tweaking here or there may continue for a while longer, but is nothing either major in effect or cost (as in approaching the cost of a component).

"Finished" is in the eye of the beholder to me, but once you’re there, you tend to know it. It may be a little easier for me in that I’ve put together mine in the form of a ’preamp-less’, active tri-amped system: CDP>distribution amp>3 power amps>standmount speakers + passive subs. If I wanted to think about bumping up to the next level (which I don’t foresee) I would have to basically undo my multi-amping and basically start over from scratch and upgrade from there, which would be a major expense. I may eventually add a DAC I have my eye on in a couple years, or not...even if I never did, I know I could actually be happy with what I have now for a very long time.
More to discover