2. speakers
  3. 166005-136265

Speakers The single most critical component

I know we've been over this Q hundreds of X's over the past 20 years here on audion, You can find dozen of topics dealing with this Q <which is the ,,,,most important component...>>
well time for yet 1 more topic dealing with this,, perhaps unanswered, un-resolved issue.
I'm bringing up the old hachet due to my recent experience acutally hearinga FR in my system. 
Let me tell you, there is not even 1 traditional/conventioanl/xover design <The Boxed Type>> in the world that could convince me  , there is something that will beat out FR (caveat, FR requires  some sort of high sens =sensitivity, tweeter)  in  the Boxy world of speakers.
That is to say, FR + Compression Horn is the future of 21st Century high fidelity. 
One lab has already brought us these ~~~SHF~~~ aka SuperHighFidelity  single drivers. 
The code word here is ~~SHF~~~ which can not never be employed when describing xover/trad/conventioanl style  aka The Box designs. db level under 91 are _<<IN-EFFICIENT>> , = dysfunctional, out dated, old school , = Dinasaurs. 
For amps, I only consider tube amps (PP and SET) as ~~SHF~~~ I can not include ss amps in this topic. 
IMHO all well made tube amps sound very close,
 a  kt88 in brand X will sound  close to brand Y. 
So amplification takes a  distant 2nd place in critical component.  No need to break the bank buying amp A vs  a  lower priced kt88 amp B
CD players, nearly all  tube DAC's , tube cdp-ers sound  close. No need to braek the bank over X vs Y.
My Jadis DAC is  only miniscule gain over the Shanling,
 the Shanling
only a  miniscule gain over the Cayin CD17. 
Now as for  best source  , phonograph is the ideal playback medium vs cds. 
I have some LP's now , but my main collection are classical cds, most not on LP version. Cables , I did note some gains employing silver/copper wiring throughout my entire system including inside the Defy.
Tweak worthy.
New Mundorf caps in all componets, tweak worthy. 
Yet the main central component remaisn the speakers.
Here is where  the entire audio resolution either rises to Nirvana or falls to <<distortion/muddy waters,/pollution/anti-fidelity  voicing  issues.
Your system's fidelity is ultimately dependent on what speaker  you have chosen to employ.
Forget all you've learned over the years, 
The new mantra is <,The speaker is key component>
All else is just extra tweaks/nuances. 
To sum up, a  ~~SHF~~ driver will match even the top of line Wilson weighing in at hundreds of lbs priced $$$$$$$ overa single FR driver. 
FR beats out any/all xover box design speakers. Mostly due to that key specification ~~db level~~~ which is everything in speaker design and thus in resolution/fidelity. 

mozartfan
mahgister's avatar
mahgister
13,194 posts
 
and if you hire an expert in room acoustics the room is also very easy
I created my own "mechanical equalizer" which act on the room being part of it...It was not easy like buying speakers...

AND you can mitigate the room by listening in the near field ... .
It is not true i know it because all change in my room act on the nearfield listening... Save perhaps with big speakers in a small room but even with it then the room would not be able to help the speakers ....Speakers size must be in relation with the room....

Start at the other end... envision the perfect system.
To win your point you start with a costly system, most people dont own costly system...

Anyway i state my point and i dont doubt that your sound is very good your speakers also....

But all my system will be crap for you seeing it with a value of 500 bucks all in all...

I can assure you that my S.Q. will surprize you thanks to acoustic control....

Try my test with Kurt Weill and listen the singers ....If they comes from your back where there is no speakers then the room is not only good BUT under controls.... If not, the sound is good but the room is not under controls... Simple....

A room under controls must recreate the original acoustic settings of the live event when recorded....

The critical component for me is the room.... And for sure for someone owning for example some speakers costing 100,000 bucks, the thing to keep is the speakers not the room.... But when we speak about critical component with speak about what is critic S.Q. wise not about money....

I listen to a system on the net youtube the owner brag about it because its value is one million dollars...Mine value is 500 bucks... Do you think he will not be angry by my observation?

One thing is sure this man put his system in an undercontrolled room and the sound is unnatural....Not musical...Very detailed....Even through my own system..... Then.....People confuse details and quality, and often spectacular constrast in sound with timbre naturalness....







This one million dollars system is in a good room:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7lxYAaJ_oo&t=457s


This one million dollars system is in a bad room :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr8O_jZhpl4

What is the most critical component here?

The room.....
herman
2,263 posts
 
Try my test with Kurt Weill and listen the singers ....If they comes from your back where there is no speakers then the room is not only good BUT under controls.

I'm done with the "most critical component" discussion.

But I'm curious how you determined that this test proves your point? The recording you reference is not live. It is a studio recording so there is no  "back of the room" as far as the recording is concerned. Any effect of depth and width of soundstage is artificially mixed into the recording  so it seems to me you really can't have any confidence what  you are using as your reference is accurate or what was intended. Maybe they wanted it to sound like the singers are out in front of the orchestra?

mahgister's avatar
mahgister
13,194 posts
 
I listen to the singers walking on the scene in the studio and even turning their head while singing then their voice increasing or decreasing in loudness......



Any effect of depth and width of soundstage is artificially mixed into the recording so it seems to me you really can’t have any confidence what you are using as your reference is accurate or what was intended. Maybe they wanted it to sound like the singers are out in front of the orchestra?
The singers voices are around me, in front of me, and many times comes from behind my head in songs number 15-16-17...


In a non controlled room you will always listen to them in front of you not coming from behind your head...

Here i discover on the net what someone with a bad system or a bad room says of this very good recording:

« Don’t bother at this stage with the 1958 German language STEREO version with Lotte Lenya conducted by Wilhelm Brückner-Ruggeberg. It was weakly recorded, too much echo,»

What he confuse with "echo" is the walking speed and changes of position while singing of the singers...They move constantly on the stage or in the studio and their head is never fixed but turn right or left singing or speaking... It is easy to hear...In a good room we SEE the singers...

It is one of my best recording....

Anyway i wish you the best and your speakers by the way seems marvellous....

My deepest respect....


lucky_doggg7
130 posts
 
Frankly, all components are important; in a system, a stereo system, it is the system that brings sonic enjoyment.  Have a weak part even in a top notch system, and the system is only as good as the less than stellar component.  

Here is my story...  some years ago, I settled on Pass Aleph 1.2 mono's for my amp, then I got Von Schweikert VR-6 speakers.  My source was a Nakamichi Dragon CD player, and my line stage was first a Adcom something, then a Sonic Frontiers SF-2.  I still couldn't understand why my system wasn't singing like it should.  Finally, my stereo guy said, ditch the SF-2 and get a Pass X0.2, a three box line stage, which was just introduced.  I did, and once that was in, the heavens opened up and my system was, at least in my opinion, making some very fine music!  My past line stage choices were not up to snuff; at the time, I didn't think a line stage would be such an influencing piece to the puzzle, but it is.  Frankly, in a system, it ALL is.  

Just get the best stuff you can afford, and work with a stereo guy who'll work with you, meaning let you listen to it because listening to it is where the proof in the pudding is.  Anyways, happy hunting in your quest to assemble your ultimate two channel system.  
herman
2,263 posts
 
What he confuse with "echo" is the walking speed and changes of position while singing of the singers...They move constantly on the stage or in the studio and their head is never fixed but turn right or left singing or speaking... It is easy to hear...In a good room we SEE the singers...

I’m glad you enjoy this recording so much, but your conclusions about what is correct are nothing more than guesses. By manipulating the phase of the signal from various microphones while panning them left - right - left the person mastering the recording can create the illusion of movement when the singer is standing in one spot behind the microphone. I’m not saying this happened, I have no idea how it was recorded, but given it is a studio recording it is unlikely the singers were moving about the room, but perhaps they were. It is also impossible to create a 3 dimensional soundstage (sounds from behind or outside the speakers) without manipulating the signal.

Listen to a recording by Steve Swallow called "Running in the Family" on his album Deconstructed. His bass is waaaaay off to the side completely disengaged from the rest of the music. It is so pronounced I find it difficult to listen to. This effect is created by shifting the phase of the signals in the left and right channels after it is recorded.. Note the word "created." If the same sound arrives at one ear later than the other, (phase shifted) our brain interprets this as the signal coming from the direction of the ear where it first arrives. By manipulating the phase and amplitude of the bass in the 2 channels it can be "pushed" off to the side.

So I agree that if your system/room has issues with phase shifts it will change how the sound is produced, but we have no way to know if what we are hearing is an accurate representation of what happened unless we were there. It seldom is and definitely is not if you hear sounds from behind you. How do you know your system isn't phase shifting some frequencies more than others and exaggerating these effects?

Frankly, all components are important;

duh

Of course a system is a sum of its parts. That’s not the point of the thread.

I settled on Pass Aleph 1.2 mono’s for my amp, then I got Von Schweikert VR-6 speakers.

so you did it backwards. . The point is, various electronics are much more alike than different while speakers vary widely. So find speakers you like then optimize the rest. Matching speakers to amps is a fools game.. sorry to be blunt but can’t come up with a nicer word than fools at the moment
More to discover