Speaker priority: high or low???

I have heard or read about a stereophile article from the 70's that described a blind test, where no one could (to any statistically valid degree) pick out the finest electronics from "a consumer grade pioneer receiver". I haven't read the article myself, but its intriguing. I'd also like to think that I could pick out the difference in a blind test....

That said, there's clearly no doubt in the vast differences in speaker quality. My vote's for speakers being the most significant contribution to your overall sound "output".

I believe synergy is the key. No matter how good the electronics ,if you put a crap speaker in front you get crap sound.The same goes for electronics it will work either way!A quality system from front to back is the only way to go regardless of price.I want make a compromise for any part of the system.It's all or nothing for me!

Gmood1 I don't think anyone ever suggested using products in their system that are disproportional to the rest of the system in regard to quality. I think the amount of money usually spent on speakers in relation to the rest of the system is foolish. The whole point is getting the music off of the CD or LP, and speakers have nothing to do with this.

I'm not suggesting using $250 speakers on a $30,000 system but speakers have nothing to do with obtaining the original signal. I would much rather hear a superior signal through average speakers than an average signal through superior speakers.

Keithr your example though valid was one of an unreasonable extreme. Who would use $500 worth of electronics to drive $30,000+ worth of speakers? Wilson speakers are so good they probably would sound good with radio shack junk driving them, but don't be fooled into thinking they would be reproducing what actually is present on the CD or LP being played.

No speaker will reproduce what does not get to it from the source.

Nrchy, I have heard $16,000 cd players fronting some unassuming speakers, and a $900 cd player pumping spectacular speakers. Need I tell you which was infinitely better?

Most speakers are too dull to transmit the "bit more" of a first rate front end. The hundred and fifty five star happy reviewers of the inexpensive Sony ES didn't think they were being short changed.

I didn't either, until I got a resolving speaker.

Of course, you'll disagree, Nrchy etc., but I am of the opinion that resolution is the result of accuracy, low distortion and low noise. Except for some amps that are rolled off on the bottom and top, and some that are just strangely designed, the problem is not with detecting and transmitting the signal. Rather, the problem comes from transmitting noise and distortion that are not on the cd or the lp along with the signal, to muddy it up. Of course, speakers do more of that than any other component.

Exactly what part of the audio signal do you think is being left behind by the average cheap cd player or amp? (Btw, I use a meridian 508.24 and, since I am delusional, believe it is better than the meridian 506 I also own, ie, the 508 has better resolution but it isn't picking up any more of the signal than the 506).