Ia a good amp more important than a good DAC?

Honest1: I have found the system sounds no better than the weakest link.

I agree. The often stated rationale for "source first," that the imperfections of what comes first in the chain cannot be undone by what comes later, makes no sense because it ignores the MAGNITUDE of the imperfections in each link of the chain. Although that is not to say that for SOME listeners and some systems, the choice of source component will necessarily be less important than the choice of what comes later.

The most influential early promulgator of that philosophy, btw, was Ivor Tiefenbrun of Linn, ca. 1980. Of course, it just so happened that his major product was the LP12 turntable.

Freediver: The HIGHLY respected speaker designer Bill Dundleston(I hope thats right)of Legacy Speakers once stated in an interview that the importance of the individual components in a music reproduction system was:Recordings-Speakers-Amplification-Source-Cables.I agree completely.

FWIW, I agree also.

Regards,
-- Al

On contrary Al,the rationale for "source first" has and always will continue to make a whole lot of sense irregardless of what is downstream.

"rationale"?

"rationale"?

Yes, that's correct. "Rational" is also a word, but it has a different meaning.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rationale
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rational

Mark -- I don't question that for many people "source first" may be the best approach. My contention is that the explanation/justification/rationale that is commonly offered for that approach is flawed.

Best regards,
-- Al

I know it's a word, but I haven't seen the "rationale" presented.