What improvement came first?


I was sitting here thinking, listening to David Gilmour. Be that as it may, What equipment improvements came ahead of others? For example, in order to hear the difference between amps, wouldn’t you need better speakers first to hear the difference? So in my thinking, speakers advanced ahead of amps.  It was only once speakers became good enough, that the more subtle differences could be heard. But is that correct? What improves came before other ones? Did tone arms need to improve ahead of more advanced cartridges? If so, then improvements of one part can totally depend on advancement of another part first. Improvements in equipment are not just incremental within a category but between categories. 
128x128deadhead1000
For sure all things matter, not on the same level or degree, but all things play their part...

You cannot match 15 inches Tannoy speakers dual gold with a 10 watts tube amplifier and wait for an optimal performance... No speakers sellers will recommend an inappropriate coupling between amp and speakers for example and any good sellers will give an advice about their speakers... It is well known fact....

Synergy matter, but room matter enormously, if all people know some basic about synergy, most people UNDERESTIMATE completely the room acoustical settings enormous impact... That is the point....

Then in an optimally well treated room a 10 watts amplifier at low volume will do correct with the Tannoy, even if this is not ideal synergy.... That is the point....
No speakers sellers will recommend an inappropriate coupling beween amp and speakers

@mahgister  Like a certain speaker seller stating 4 ohm speakers are always best? lol Look, I completely agree with you.  That's why it's so disappointing to see people on this very forum state ridiculous things like " Speaker amp problems are speaker problems." 

Incredible...I know.  I can't make this stuff up, and this kind of poor narrative is doing such a disservice to folks who are truly trying to understand component synergy better.  Thanks for all your sensible and eye-opening contributions.
Thanks for all your sensible and eye-opening contributions.
To say the truth i know only a few things about audio.... Others here know very much more than me, acoustician, engineers, very well experienced audiophiles etc...

But the few things i know of, are ALL learned by myself and by listening experiments and experience....It is so true that if you read my posts you will see that i only speak about the same few things.... But what i said is about what i called embeddings controls, and these facts are not so well known or publicized for the benefit of all... Then i speak about these little but important facts i played with and understand...

All i know can be resume in 6 words: dont upgrade before embedding it all...

I am creative tough, even if ignorant, and all my embedding devices are low costs, and homemade, they are the fruit of my experiment and of my desire to live an audiophile experience without much money...Anyway i succeeded.... Thats all....

Thanks then for your kind and generous appreciation.... Merry Christmas and stay healthy.....
At first there was no goal of highest fidelity and reproducing recognizable sound at all was fairly impressive. Then pretty much every improvement could be considered low hanging fruit. It would just be a matter of doing the best you can in your own area of expertise without much concern about who else is doing what. The real world isn’t like a video game where you have to level up in a certain order. If you recognize an area that has room for improvement and no one is doing it, that is an opportunity. Never forget that this is a business as well as a hobby. There is no master plan in the free market.