Speaker priority: high or low???

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).

Nrchy, you sure can stir up a good arguement.I like a good brawl.This is really funny to me.Ding Ding next round!

Not that I wouldn't rather have a balanced system all at once, but if I were starting out building my 'dream' system (whether to a particular price bracket or not), I'd buy my dream speakers first and work back through the chain. That is the only way to be systematically sure of what you will end up with. Nrchy's point about lesser source components not retrieving as much of the signal, and Paulwp's point about them more greatly distorting it, are both true as far as they go. But while the signal is traveling 'forward' from source to speaker through the system, your ears are listening 'back' through the system from speakers to source. Imagine your system as several windowpanes placed one behind the other - without having a clear window closest to you to 'view' back through, you will not be able to see (hear) well enough to make informed decisions about choices pertaining to the first layers (sources).

I've posted about this opinion of mine before, but to briefly recap: The first component is the listening room; the speakers must be chosen appropriately to the room; the amp must be chosen appropriately to the speakers (speaker cables chosen here too); the preamp should simply be as transparent, accurate, and neutral as possible (same for interconnects here) while still maintaing the level of functionality you'll need based on your number and comlexity of sources and outboard devices; with the components that must always be engaged in the chain (room, speakers, amp, preamp) then taken care of, the source components can be individually chosen for each source path knowing with a good degree of confidence that (unlike if they were chosen first) what you prefer when choosing will be what you end up with at system completion (interconnects can be chosen to fine-tune here, as well as power cords). The one great exception to this 'rule' of mine is the AC power and conditioning, which it could make sense to go full out with from the beginning, but that's not imperative. If I had to allocate funds progressively and upgrade in the future, I'd first lay the foundation with the speakers I really wanted, then the best amplification for them I could afford and still get my sources together, and then incementally upgrade the sources knowing I had the 'clear window' through which to listen to my progress and make my choices.

P.S. - Swampwalker, it's funny you should mention ML and NHT; I just went up to Philly where my brother recently moved, to by a Levinson 380S preamp from an A'gon member (the quest continues, and yes, it's slightly 'out of sequence' according to my above rant, though not entirely, but that's another story...), and my bro (not an audiophile) had SuperOnes being powered by his mid-line Sherwood receiver from a Pioneer DVD/CD source. I was quite disappointed with the pretty awful sound he was getting, since I thought the NHT's were supposed to be fairly decent (although he was apparently unconcerned, maybe even happy, it truly stank - I did what little I could tweaking his tone controls). I had fantasies of taking his speakers back down to my place and inserting them in my system to pass judgement, or of bringing up some of my idle replaced gear and wires to sub out with in his system and see what I could do. But I'm going to show valor through discretion and restraint, and leave the poor kid alone...