SPeakers 90% of your sound


After "experimenting" with various cables,interconnects,conditioners,power cords, tube amps, and digital sources...I have come to this conclusion...the sound from my speakers was not drastically altered and at best marginally improved...with this in mind...I am glad I allocated the majority of my funds towards speakers and speaker stands...I have not thrown in a TT to the mix...which is my last and latest project...I am sure there are those who will disagree...but this is my findings at this time...any thoughts? That last 10% improvement will cost me what my entire system costs already....
128x128phasecorrect
Room 70%
Amp 8%
Speakers 7%
Source 5%
Pre-amp 5%
Cables 5%
electrical tweaks 5%
Racks, points, 5%

Total = 110%. That sounds about right.

Of course, aside from room percentage, any one of the other category percentages could weigh in differently depending on budget, preconceived notions, experience, knowledge, listening preferences, music preferences, time invested in system, adherence to popular folklore, etc., etc..

-IMO
I guess I must've been lucky, because during the 80s, I moved around alot, and had my nice system set up in about 10 different apartments over that time. Somehow my nice audio system always sounded good, no matter what shape or size the room was, but my boom-box always sounded like crap, no matter what the shape or room size. Amazing, huh? Pardon me for thinking that a good room is nice, but it doesn't supercede the quality of the audio system. It is an environment which will allow the quality of the audio system to be presented well. Nothing more, nothing less.

Does Johnny One-Note in Carnegie Hall, sound better than Pavarotti in your living room? I don't think so. Pavarotti may sound better in Carnegie Hall, than he does in your living room, but Johnny One-Note is going to suck, no matter what room you put him in. You have to give the room something good to work with. Rooms are not magic.
You can safely say that speakers display more variation in sound character from one brand/type to the next than any other component. It could thus be argued that they affect the sound of the system more than any other. This is not, however, the same thing as saying they are more important than other components or that one should spend 90% of one's budget on the speakers. To me, it says that speakers are the least perfected part of the reproduction chain. In general, as a component type reaches further toward perfection, the variations between brands tend to diminish. Speakers are still the furthest away from this convergence.
Speakers, in general, are the most imperfect link in the chain. How many of you would put up with 5% distortion in your electronics? Not me, that's for sure. Yet, we do this *every* time we listen to our speakers. The physical transformation from electrical energy to mechanical energy is the devil.

IMHO, the upstream devices (CD/DVD-A/SACD, amps, preamps, cables, etc.) are all pretty good in comparison. The sound differences between a $500 amp and a $5,000 amp is very small when compared to the differences between $500 speakers and $5,000 speakers.

My recommendation? Buy the best sounding speakers you can afford and then spend most of the rest of your audio dollars on very high quality source materials (CD/DVD-A/SACD). The rest of the chain is not nearly as important and suffers from the law of diminishing returns very quickly.
I also disagree that Speakers weights 90% in a system.
Assume the room doesn't change, it's all about system matching. In my opinon, I think the speaker and amp needs to be match before you can make your claim about what's the most important.