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
How do you know your system isn’t phase shifting some frequencies more than others and exaggerating these effects?

It is easy to use a test to verify...

https://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_polaritycheck.php

It is also impossible to create a 3 dimensional soundstage (sounds from behind or outside the speakers) without manipulating the signal.

It is possible when someone use simple acoustic laws..

For example tresholds of timing linked to the first wavefront law

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223804282_The_relation_between_spatial_impression_and_the_law_of_the_first_wavefront

I use my homemade mechanical equalizer to do it and my Schumann generators grid with the appropriate passive room treatment... But passive material room treatment is ONLY half of my acoustical settings... The more important half is the mechanical 32 tubes and pipes Helmholtz equalizer tuned for the room... I use it in a way to reinforce the first frontwave law for each speaker....And the Schumann generators grid is a complementary help to create this holographic effect... Some company sell costly device to do it with radio frequencies like the shumann generator frequencies... But i never bought any tweaks i prefer to replicate them at no cost...I called this the three controls over the working three embeddings dimension for any audio system: mechanical : ( i use an original method of my own to tune my speakers with springs) electrical: ( i use my own homemade device all along the electrical grid of my house the "golden plates") and for acoustic:( many devices but the most important being a couple of cheap ionizers, S.G. grid, and H. M. equalizer + regular passive teatment balanced between reflective,absorbing and diffusive effects)..
My system value is 500 bucks and all my device controls cost me peanuts...

You forget also that owning near 10,000 files if these artificial effects were only artefacts regularly used i will listen to them on many other files....(Like in some electronic music....I dont like electronic music and listen mainly jazz and especially classical....)

They really walked and turned their heads singing in the studio and the final impression is like a real event...

I feel this impression of 3-d with others classical very good recordings....For example i can " see" the hands of an harpsichordist on his instrument 3-d like if the instrument were in the room...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_R0eCGPhXko

But the sound of this youtube file is horrible....I own ALL the cd she played with his marvellous instrument very well recorded all his Bach recordings...I know this file from the time i was 20 years old to this day70 years old.... This cd was never 3-d holographic 50 years ago even coming from better speakers my Tannoy dual Gold compared to my actual Mission Cyrus 781....but acoustic is more powerful than speakers specs differences between 2 good speakers .... Now I listen all the pedals strokes and slidings,frictions, of the feet and of the mechanical inside the instrument...The instrument is spread our like a 3-d object in front of me out of the speakers not between it, but in front of it and spread it slightly behind the speakers with the keyboard where his hands walk and plays in some "diagonal" spread, the head part of the wood keyboard in front and the end tail behind the speakers...

Same thing with Vladimir Feltsman well tempered Klavier where the piano is in the room completely and fill it wall to wall...

Samething with Chopin piano Nocturnes recording by Ivan Moravec ....

I will stop here....


Regards and best wishes...
Although not ideal, you can mitigate a lot about a bad room by listening in the near field , there is nothing you can do to overcome bad speakers

~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Yep, I  never had issues with  room distortion , I listen very near field,  + low/mid gain. 
which makes room issues negligible. 
If you calculate with the speed of sound in a room you will discover that reflected late and early waves mix in the brain with direct waves coming from the speakers under the critical treshold of 80 milliseconds...

Then nearfield listening is not immune at all from the room characteristic.... I verified this myself by many experiments listening always in the 2 positions nearfield and regular in my own room....

The scale from totally bad speakers to very top high good speakers is a LARGE scale....

The acoustical settings of a room can help and put some intermediary relatively good speakers nearer to the top S.Q. at no cost... A room must be mechanically tuned for a specific pair of speakers....I dont use electronic tuning or equalization of speakers from the room response... I prefer to use each speaker  to change the room....

Acoustic is not magic but almost.....
@mahgister  have you any experience with time aligned speakers?  Vandersteen, etc.

Thanks
@mahgister have you any experience with time aligned speakers? Vandersteen, etc.

Thanks
No not at all.... Vandersteen price are 39,000 US bucks..... 😁😁😁🙄

All my system cost 500 bucks...

I dont doubt that they are extraordinary...

Myself i use the timing of the sound waves in the room  and i use the direct sound of each speaker but with for each speaker different resonant tube and pipes near them to gives some acoustical cues for the ears that make able my brain to create a 3-d holographic space...It is a success... At peanuts costs...