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
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
12,961 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....


😊


Ag insider logo xs@2x
cleeds
5,921 posts
 
dletch2... 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 ...
Huh? What magical event do you think happened around 1990-ish? Did it change the orbit of the earth or something like that?
... If you are not a speaker manufacturer, there is motivated self interest to create artificial importance in a whole range of products ... Only thing it has not done, it appears, it resulted in a focus on better sound.
So you don't think anything in audio has improved since 1990-ish? That's pretty silly.
dletch2
455 posts
 
Huh? What magical event do you think happened around 1990-ish? Did it change the orbit of the earth or something like that?


Earlier mistakes w.r.t. THD while ignoring IMD were recognized, fixed the most egregious problems with digital, shift to portable listening habits, MP3 in the mid-90s, demographic shifts, off-shore manufacturing, you name it. It all resulted in a commodification of audio with less emphasis on high end and less "real" things to sell to audiophiles/budding audiophiles.

So you don't think anything in audio has improved since 1990-ish? That's pretty silly.

Coming to that conclusion is pretty silly, but look at amplifiers, most of the "improvements", except Class-D, would fall under art, not engineering, i.e. voiced for a particular target listener. Sure there are ever more expensive units every year, but pick two with the same design goals, and you would have a hard time telling apart a 30 year old and 3 year old one. Old is new w.r.t. tubes, which comes down to preference, not engineering.  Digital has plateaued effectively for some time, though, again, voiced products result in differentiated sales, but not an advance in state of the art, no matter the level of special pleading.  One area that has probably advanced is power delivery, but is that due to poor product design?

More to discover