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
Ag insider logo xs@2x
cleeds
5,944 posts
 
herman
Garbage in = garbage out is a red herring.. even entry level source and amps are pretty good.. therefore there is no "garbage in". There is a little bit better in, there is I like the sound of that in a little better than another in, but there is no garbage in ...  end of debate, you can close this thread
Not so fast. You're insisting that everyone accept your values at the expense of their own. But what you call "a little bit better" is completely subjective. Some might not hear any difference at all in your "little bit better" while others might consider what you call a "little bit" to be a very big deal, indeed. The notion that your opinion represents the "end of the debate" is really silly.
mahgister's avatar
mahgister
13,011 posts
 
The idea that speakers is the most important part of a system is not an absolute...

There is, for most of us, ordinary owner of ordinary speakers, under 10,000 bucks, a more important factor, the room acoustic controls that can help or impede, or compensate in some degree for the limitations related to any "ordinary" speakers....

My 10,000 bucks borderline limit is arbitrary but the fact i pointed to is not...

We listened not to speakers but to a room integrated to the speakers.... the 2 are ONE organ producing the 2 different acoustically mixed frontwaves of sound which each one of our ears will process for the brain to create music body....

Imaging, listener envelopment factor or LEV are related on timing tresholds linked to these 2 frontwaves interacting coming from each speaker...There are "more" power related to acoustic than to the spec sheets of the speakers... Timbre perception will greatly be affected also by the distribution of the pressure zones in the room related to his geometry, topology but also to the timing of the frontwaves but also to their crossing of different pressure zones...

Acoustic is queen, the sleeping princess, speakers are only the biggest of the 7 dwarves...

For most of us, owning normal speakers at normal price, the room acoustical settings will determine our impression about speakers more than any other factors in play....

Average Speakers are like average headphones, they all have many problems that are linked to the shell/room controls....

The only "relative" apparent  exception are some very costly headphone or speakers set that are out of reach of most average users anyway....They can sound good in spite of some acoustical property of the room or less limited by their  "shell" particular design....
dletch2
455 posts
 
@herman 


This thread is weird isn't it. I don't think anyone discounts the importance of fixing acoustics if you are not listening near field, but if this was any time before about 1990(ish), there would be no discussion at all. Speakers would be the critical component and almost no one would dispute it.  It shows the power of marketing though.  If you are not a speaker manufacturer, there is motivated self interest to create artificial importance in a whole range of products both those that can make some difference, and some that are highly questionable. It sells magazines, it generates clicks, it supports manufacturing companies, etc.  Only thing it has not done, it appears, it resulted in a focus on better sound. A concerted effort to eliminate any form of critical evaluation was the last nail needed to seal the coffin. Now we don't even have to worry about the outlandish claims, we will just blame the listener.
dletch2
455 posts
 
@herman


And like fine Pavlovian dogs, we see that many totally fell for the kibble. They are on here every day, vehemently defending those that put them in the cage, happy to get their piece of kibble. 
mahgister's avatar
mahgister
13,011 posts
 
First i dont promote the buying of costly tweaks... We can replace most of them or replicate them at no cost... I did it myself... The results are complete transformation of my average system....I speak about a conplete transformation after a hundred of small modifications in the 3 working embeddings dimensions here, not about a borderline audible effect needing blindtest to be confirmed like in a cable swapping marketing operation.... 😁

My own acoustical controls cost me nothing... 😊


This thread is weird isn’t it. I don’t think anyone discounts the importance of fixing acoustics if you are not listening near field,


🙄


Second, relatively to the room size and the particular speakers, nearfield listening is not immune at all to the acoustical settings of the room...It is a pretext in audio thread which falsely rassure those who think that no acoustic settings is necessary when nearfield..... It is not the case in samall room but for sure many distance lenght factors and particularities of the speakers specs. enter in consideration.... BUT in my own 13 feet small room ANY change in the acoustic settings reflect in my near listening ( 3 feet from the 2 speakers....) ANY change are audible..... Not at the same level nor in the same way that in regular listening (8 feet) but any acoustical change like introducing a new pressure zone will be audible nearfield...

It is easy to figure out with the speed of sound and the size of the room, and the relation between the millisecond limit treshold for the brain to treat acoustic cues and the number of times the frontwaves cross the room before the brain react...


The speakers are the main "solid" component , nobody can contest that.... BUT the room acoustic in most of the case is more important .... It is simple to understand why....

What is weird is the people superstition for the "solid" product they personaly favored or owned or sells....

My system is 500 bucks value , and will never be upgraded, because i dont feel i need to, he does not sound like a 500 hundred bucks system, thanks to my embeddings controls especially the acoustic controls.... All my embeddings controls are homemade and cost almost nothing....

My system is not the best and i NEVER boast about it, i sell creativity and common sense.... Acoustic is the key to audio by the way we record and by the way we listen to music.... Is it not simple?
The rest of the story is good or bad marketing practise with good or less good products...

I prefer to promote homemade embeddings controls, and creativity and  common sense because any system works in three dimension where it needed to be controlled;  basic acoustic science is the most important factor between all those....


😊


More to discover