Rollcall time: subjectivists and objectivists, the headcount

The biggest difference in what sense? It very much depends on what aspects of a performance are important to you. If the source doesn't get those aspects right then the best speaker in the world will not change that.

Furthermore, there are not many truly bad speakers out there. There are, on the other hand, lots of CD players out there that are, to quote another esteemed member, 'as rough as a badger's arse'. Until you have a source that plays what's on the disc without undue softening and without added roughness, any further money spent on speakers is wasted.

And even when you have a great source, if your amplifier doesn't have the balls for the bass or is grainy and hard in the treble or is just plain slow, then again, no amount of money spent on speakers will save you from audio purgatory.

On the other hand, it is possible to get a superb performance out of a £900 CD player, a £600 amp and a £300 speaker. I know, I've done it. And what's more, improving the amplifier will give, within the loudness limits of the chosen speaker, a far bigger improvement in musical enjoyment than spending the same on speakers on the end of a less than superb amplifier.

Whilst I wouldn't disagree that the speakers have the greatest influence on the character of the sound you hear, when it comes to sound quality and particularly musicality and enjoyment, it has to be source first.

Oh and finally. If you take a great source and amplifier and feed them crap mains then you have wasted your money. So perhaps it should be mains first, then source, then amp, then speakers.

:JOEL:

 

There are ... lots of CD players out there that are .... 'as rough as a badger's arse'.

I don't think that this is true at all. They all sound remarkably similar to me.

 

I'm glad to see the badger's arse analogy is catching on.

-- Ian

 

You might think so. Others would disagree.

Some thought that - although there was some value in the 'source first' philosophy - it was basically a wheeze to sell LP12s. We were astonished by the number of people who bought into the concept - encouraged by segments of the UK hi-fi press who sold it with missionary zeal. Even today, 30 years later, some people still treat this marketing doctrine as Gospel truth (mostly in the UK it must be said).

The way to buy a hi-fi is to choose a balanced system where the components compliment one another. You can choose the source first, the amplifiers or the speakers. I suspect that most people would start with the speakers. Components working together is the key to good hi-fi, including sound quality, musicality and enjoyment. (I can't help feeling that the word 'musicality' in this context is generally used in sentences like: "Yes, your system may sound better than mine but mine is more 'musical' ").

For you, to spend £900 on a cdp, £600 on an amp and £300 on speakers is balanced and would result in a system that you'd enjoy. That's fine, for you, but not for everyone.

 

Not at all.

The two systems I propose are not owned by either of us.

Firstly my CDX is too humble for the task, and secondly a Levinson player isn't sufficiently lowly.

 

I'm not advocating source first in the extreme along the lines of CDS3/XPS2 into Nait 5i as the amplification would seriously bottleneck the performance envelope of the player.

My proposed system would comprise of a CDS3/XPS2 or Accuphase 65 player or a Wadia-Miester modded Wadia, into one of any number of decent amplifier combinations under 3k and into speakers of choice under a limit of 3k. Care would be taken with choice of cables, interconnects, mains conditioning/optimisation and stands. Every choice made would be with the ears only, and access to measured specifications would be denied.

I would then invite Andrew (Dat19) to choose hs speakers using his ears and/or any measured characteristics he would deem appropriate as heard on the end of my chosen system that would be unseen to him, although the manufacturers of the kit I'd chosen with help fom like-minded subjectivists would provide him with any of the measurements he asked for to ensure that on paper his speakers of choice could be driven effectively. There woud be no budget limitation on his choice of speakers - the sky would really be the limit within an overall budget of, say 20k applicable to both systems.

He would then have to assemble a system to drive those speakers without auditioning any of his chosen components. He would not have access to any fancy interconnects costing more than 30 quid, any speaker cables costing more than two 5m runs of Naim Naca5, any mains tweaks, nor stands costing more than the cost of an Ikea table.

Who, hypothetically, has the greater chance of assembling a killer system? That is my question to all forum members here.

 

How exactly does one know that a badgers arse is rough??? Personal experience perhaps?

 

Shaving brush hair is taken from the arses of badgers, it's soft. And yes it is definitely taken from the arse.

 

The hair may be soft, but have you ever tried a brush made out of the arse rather than the hair? Rough as... a badger's arse, oddly enough.

I don't know where I first heard the expression, but it's one of my favourites.

-- Ian

 

LOL. Bet that's from Viz, that's probably where I first picked it up.

Edit:

http://www.odps.org/glossword/index.php?a=term&u=5ba9a65c5f5baea9a4

-- Ian