I'm with Asa. If you get a speaker that has only errors of omission, and a good pre (I like the fulcrum analogy), you can then upgrade source and amplifier and get a significant improvement in sound. I have posted before, "modest speakers with great electronics will (almost) always sound better than great speaker with modest electronics. On my most recent system, I worked from the pre-amp out in both directions (new DAC, then speakers, then amp). Now I am going back to seeing if a new pre-amp will have a significant impact, now that my front end and speakers are up where I want them. Of course, this is not true if the speakers have fundemental flaws. And while it may not be realistic, I would much rather listen to a Levinson with the Superzeros, than Soundlabs driven by a Technics (maybe that's not quite fair, how about Soundlabs driven by a Creek).
Speaker priority: high or low???
I have been reading the threads here for some time and following many of the discussions. During an interchange with another well known AudiogoNer we were commenting on peoples tastes and priorities. The discussion turned to speakers and he made the comment "many people on AudiogoN still think that speakers are the most important piece of the system." I was floored by his statement.
I'm not trying to start a fight with anyone and people can see what I have previously posted about this and other subjects, BUT are there still a lot of people that share this opinion?
Do you think the most important componant is your speakers? If not, what do you consider to be the most important? Why do you place so much emphasis on this componant?
I'm not trying to start a fight with anyone and people can see what I have previously posted about this and other subjects, BUT are there still a lot of people that share this opinion?
Do you think the most important componant is your speakers? If not, what do you consider to be the most important? Why do you place so much emphasis on this componant?
- ...
- 59 posts total
- 59 posts total