Help: Order of importance: Pre, Amp, DAC, speakers


I am a bit confused now. I bought a pair of 1.3SE's with an Sim Audio i7 and a benchmark DAC1. I am very impressed with the results. A buddy of mine came over with a pair of generation old Tannoy reveals which performed remarkably with the setup, very close to the 1.3SE. Now I am a bit stupified why I should spend so much money on a speaker. Am I just dreaming? Does the Pre, amp and DAC really shine above a speaker purchase? Thanks for the feedback!
rkerv
Source > Preamp > Amp > Speaker

Everything matters, but if you are going to have a heirarchy, your source should be best and things should get gradually worse as the signal heads through the chain. Starting with maximum resolution at the source and then throwing bits away as you go will give better overall sound than any other variation. Ivor T. of Linn has taught this theory for many years. Garbage in > Garbage out.

The loudspeakers are your window into the sound of the electronics and the recordings themselves. No amount of money thrown at a great speaker can recreate or repair a flawed signal from the electronics. Actually, a really transparent speaker will show you more of the limitations of weaker electronics.

Ideally you want to have all things at a comparable level even though it rarely happens in the real world.

Imagine your playing a grown up game of pass it on. You are the captain of a team of 4 players who have to have a very long series of numbers whispered to the first player and then that person must retain as much of the string as possible and whisper it to the 2nd player and so on and so forth. The four players on your team have memory retention abilities which range from poor to superb. As the team captain you must pick the best batting order. What do you do? IF you put the player with the worst memory first, you will have a disaster. That player will lose much of the information right out of the gate while insuring that the better players don't even get the chance to use their superior memory skills to help the team. Your best order would be to have the best player first, 2nd best player next and so on. The same is true of the heirarchy of your stereo system.
Ivor T. of Linn has taught this theory for many years. Garbage in > Garbage out.
True, but Linn touted this *particularly* at the time they were only selling source components in the audio market.

While losses incurred fm the source cannot be regained, true, the spkrs (& their placement) are ultimately the "lossiest" of all items in a conventional chain.
The room.

Sorry--couldn't help that, but I do think the room and the speaker interaction (thus speaker selection is very important) are the most critical things to getting good sound.
Nobody has mentioned power conditioning in this discussion. Although good highend equipment with solid internal power handling does a pretty good job of insulating itself from lousy ac lines, I was shocked how much improvement came with addition of my ps audio p500. The difference was kind of shocking.
With some wonderful exceptions, speakers tend to be the most expensive component to acquire. So starting at this end of the chain makes the most economic sense to me. Ivor is right about GIGO, however even a great source can sound crappy through inexpensive or badly matched speakers. Now that digital/analog front ends are getting more sophisticated (read: expensive) it might prove to be a wash. But, IMO, I'd start with speakers.