Being able to find the weakest link when upgrading is really, really important. Otherwise a different new component may never really be able to show how it is better. Since the other ’weak’ component(s) is(are) masking the new components better sound.
This is a difficult problem.
My best example is not exactly about the least sound quality, but it may show something about it. I upgraded a good portion of my equipment all at once when I retired. And I still had in my system an old DAC I bought used. When I received most of the new components (including new preamp, new amp, new speakers and a new turntable and cartridge), I was comparing my old DAC with the new one. And found no sonic difference. I mean I tried every way I could and could not hear any difference between them/ So either I just wasted $25,000 for nothing or?? I was very frustrated. Anyway, after three weeks I got another new bit which had to be ordered and built . When I plugged in the phono box, an epiphany and a flood ot tears.. My $25,000 of new equipment really was better. Since the phono box sounded glorious, thus it made it clear all the rest of the system WAS NOT holding back the new DAC. That new DAC was actually just not any better than my old one. And I returned it.
And unless I just happened to acquire that new phono box a week later, I would have been stumped why the new DAC (which was praised to the skies by both Stereophile and TAS) was not doing better. I was seriously bummed and confused about wasting a ton of money... until I played the new phono box.
Now it was kind of odd that the two DACs, one, used for $250 )it’ original list price was $1,000) and the other $2,400 and 12 years newer) could sound so alike. But chance happened. (And toss in the official guru magazine praise with it all) ==================================================================
Anyway, how do we find the right part to upgrade? Since making the wrong choice can leave one in the same boat I was in back in my example? (at least until I got the phono box)
I do not have an answer. and I ask.. does anyone? For me it is just kind of a sixth sense, with little real science to it.
In general I have been kind of lucky. But how do I know I have managed well?
I do not know. It has been better more often than not. (Though I have made a few really terrible choices over many years now and then. Costly choices)
Anyway, my question is how do you make the choice of what to upgrade? How do you know or decide which is you weakest component?
And do you agree finding the weakest component is really important in the path of upgrading, or one might be making expensive mistakes buying gear, or trying gear? (which may really be great, yet you cannot hear it due to some other weak links in the chain? And though I hate to say so, this weak link may even be cables, or powercords or even the AC from the wall*.
*(but please do not get into a big theory arguments about interconnects and powercords and power conditioners.) Stick to the main topic of knowing how to find the weakest link.
Years ago I would have agreed speakers are the number one ’problem’ as far as what is the most difficult to get right. But once up in a ’better’ speaker zone, the electronics become a huge part of "where is the crap coming form?" The speakers already can let the bad noises pass right on through! So once you have high quality speakers, (or even just decent ones) then the electronics become a huge issue, since now, you can hear their faults! (back in the 1980’s I could scoff at folks touting huge $$$$ amplifiers, thinking are they nuts?. But NOW, I understand the reason for them.)
Previous to my Magnepan 3.6 speakers, the speakers covered most of the little faults of the electronics. (Or I did not have the skill to see them clearly?) With the 3.6 those faults in the electronics became more evident. So the quest to find and fix those faults in the electronics became the goal. (For myself I actually upgraded several items at that time, and bought some top notch power conditioning. But I read others buying 3.6 and wondering why they sound bad.. IMO It is the electronics crud they could not hear before!!!)
With my new 20.7 Magnepans much better midrange and overall tonal balance, I can now hear the electronics like never before, so can appreciate finding the right gear even more. Thus my ease at adding a $7000 digital bit of kit. It just does the right things via listening to it. I doubt I would be able to hear a lot of what the Marantz SA-10 does ’better’ without the speakers I now have.
And that brings up another point of upgrading. If I buy stuff which is way better one at a time, how can I know it will ’be there’ ie can do way better than I can currently hear from my system!
Like the Bryston BP-26 preamp I have. So far it really does clearly have what it takes to let the goodness through! And it just (after all these years) got mentioned in TAS as being worthy of buying. So in a way I 'lucked out’ buying it on faith? that it could cut the grade in the future.
These are the problems it is hard to ’know’ how to work around and solve when one cannot just throw money at it endlessly! So upgrading everything a little, vs going big one item at a time, the work to find that stuff which is going to 'last' or going to be able to show it is worthy when it gets combined with other better gear on down the road...
Might be an idea to ask how much measurable distortion there is in modern amplifiers, DAC's, CD players, or whether there is any difference between a coat hanger, one good strand of copper or solid silver cables?
As far as distortion goes the real culprits are loudspeakers and microphones. Unfortunately progress is slow in these areas so it's just a case of choosing speakers with distortion characteristics you can live with.
Of course not all distortion is unpleasant, I used to love the sound our old valve radio used to make. In fact nothing ever quite matched it harmonically.
It's nice to hear civil encouragement, understanding and real advice instead of groups either side of the street throwing stones, Some wonderful advice being given by those who have been there and done that.
Its not nice to hear the dollars being contemplated while the Aussie dollar slips downhill though.
We in Oz do not have the breadth of brands, in numbers that make it a viable product for the dealer. So many of the models noted, need to be "Googled" to see what they are. From personal experience it can take 10-12 weeks to get a component in. And we all know what happens next, the nest magazine or show (we do have too many of those) comes around and you question whether you should have waited for a couple of weeks more..... more hand wringing and mental chaos.
Any way I now have 3 US contacts who are building my speakers, my power conditioners, and I have just bought some M&K stands and small speakers that are unavailable in Oz, and lastly a Nakamichi OMS-7 CD player. Yum. I am also considering a Nakamichi Dragon just serviced by "THE" Willy Herrman from the same seller. He knows I am a genuine buyer so he is happy keeping it until I am out of hospital and well again.
However I have discarded all my old 100+ tapes in the last "declutter" so apart from looking good, It would be an expensive "look at me" component. I don't know where to purchase tapes (metal) in Oz any more, but is the Nak really useful to me anymore? Ir would be a "look at me" trinket, but It would match the OMS-7 though.
No. I have my health first, my wife second, my new house build third, my wife fourth, our overseas trip fifth, my wife sixth, the grandkids anywhere, and then the Nakamichi Dragon/ wife at some stage. Ho hummm.
I love these threads as long as I know I am not boring you or advising anyone wrongly.
Looking for the “weak link” in an audio system - if you’ll excuse the expression - is like not being able to see the forest for the trees. Finding the “weak link” in an audio system is like trying to solve N equations in N + x unknowns. Obviously you can achieve better sound quality by identifying one problem and correcting it. But there are many more problems waiting in line. When will it all end? 😮
A rich man or woman has about as much chance of entering audio Valhalla as a camel 🐪 has of passing through the eye 👁 of a needle.
Yes, the whole thing! $70K is not bad at all. I have a friend who says for him $100K is a good entry level. Darn rich boy! jajajaja.
I have my eyes on the $100K system that I auditioned and be done with it.
Are you going to drive your $70K MBL 101e speakers with you iPhone? jajajaaja.
What about that $12K phone box? This one asks for a $30K speakers at least.
PD Shhh, please don't tell anyone, but I want to get the Tesla P100D $135K 2.5 sec 0-60, or at least the 100D $94K which still does a respectable 4.1 sec 0-60 both with a range of 315 miles per charge.
Really is less than a 1/4 of million bucks for the 2 toys.
Upgrading the whole thing? For me that would cost $70,000. (and if I actually HAD $70K I would blow it on MBL 101e speakers!) So I have to say it is a totally impractical notion. Plus upgrading the whole thing would always be all around minor upgrades. Instead of worthwhile major ones. Took me eight years to upgrade my speakers. Almost twenty to upgrade from my old DAC. (though I had tried a new $2,300 one in 2010, only to return it, as my old DAC was just as good in my system) Now that I have a better digital sound than my analog.. I am daydreaming of buying a $12,000 phono box to even the score. I could go for a lateral move, but WHY? (it being what I think is my next needed upgrade. Though a better TT might.. I think the phono box would do more and THEN a new TT and cart.)
If I would have 'upgraded everything' I would have a pair of Magnepan 3.7i instead of the 20.7 I do own now. And a new amp I never really needed, as my old amp is just great. I would have Ygg from Schitt instead of the Marantz.
I think the best way to upgrade our audio is to upgrade the whole system, not jut one component. I guess it is almost impossible to notice big differences in sound just upgrading a speaker, a preamp, amp, DAC, etc. because there will be a big mismatch of components.
Another important factor is to have a sample of what you want your system to sound like. A $10K system will never sound like a $30K system, nor a $30K would never sound like a $50K system and so forth. About 2 weeks ago I auditioned 2 different setups; one was about $50K and the other one was about $100K. All components were matched to their qualities in price and there was not weak link in the whole system. What I listened to was a very impressive and amazing sound.
All audio components work their best in concert with the rest of the system that are made about the same quality and price.
Don't expect to get a night and day differences of a $15K speaker cable out of a $200 CD player. You need a $15K turntable and a 180 gm brand new LP as a player device, $30K speakers, a $13K Preamp, $22K mono amps, $5K interconnects, etc. Just then, you will notice a real difference.
Now, a few weeks after getting the first pair of Magnepan 20.7 Which has a flaw and were replaced with another new pair.(minor issue but replaced, not going into the story here) Now that new pair are about three weeks of use breaking in.. Last week my dealer loaned me a Marantz SA-10 SACD player. I like it so much I am buying one from them. ($7000) Main thing it brings is better treble and cleaner sound to CD. Plus I can play my other CD players through te SA-10 DAC. I own very few SACD, but play a lot of CDs. My dealer had told me not to upgrade my amp as it would not much f a difference. I think he is right.
elizabeth Great thread I think or feel you need to identify what you are trying to do with the said upgrade. Listen to your system and identify what you feel is weak or needs to improve. Then relate that to the component or fix. Adding a new component may not fix or improve anything and may open up more questions. Judge the system for the sound not the new component. enjoy Pete
Best of luck, absolutely seems the best way to go.
Your current amplifier should be more than enough up to the task of driving the 20.7s. Magnepan are little known in the UK but everything we hear is good.
It will be interesting though to hear what you think of the setup. By any normal account your system must be up there in the top 1% of what's available right now.
I am waiting for my new speakers as I type this. Two weeks down, about two weeks before they are in my apartment, I expect. I could also upgrade my amp (Bryston 4B-SST²) to a pair of Bryston 7B3, but i decided to wait and break in the Magnepan 20.7 with my old amp. Get used to the speakers and see if I really think I need a pair of new amps...
I've read here that some believe speakers are the weakest link.
I had a nice complete setup that was well matched and made that decision. I decided to upgrade the speakers to a higher quality tier for a variety of reasons and knew what I was going to buy. As soon as I put them in with everything else the magic wasn't there. I sadly knew that the rest of the system couldn't keep up and exploit the quality of the speakers that I knew was there. I believe all the pieces need to be in a somewhat similar quality tier or they are either the weak link or wasted money that goes unexploited.
Elizabeth didn't want this thread to morph into a sequence of upgrades discussion but if you change your speakers you very likely need to address the amp next unless the amp was already good enough for the next tier speaker jump and it mates well on technical terms.
If you are confident that the speaker/amp combo is solid, I recommend using listening friends to hear your system and provide what they think is the weak link. They hear without owner bias. After I got my speaker/amp combo right I didn't even know I had a weak link, but I was still seeking that magic I knew the speakers could provide. Both local and online friends urged me to replace my preamp. They were right, that was the weakest link at that point. After I fixed that it was obvious a turntable upgrade could finally be exploited and not held back as the last step.
Others have said finding the weak link allows all the other pieces to shine. I agree that is possible, but it may also allow the next weak link to be more obvious. Use your friends who listen with you to help.
I’ve upgrade every component several times now, in headphones and speaker systems. The last round was a "whole system" upgrade in a few phases, so I got good information as I plugged new pieces in. DACs just sound more alike, over a broad range of prices, than any other component - even cables! I recently "downgraded" to an extremely smartly designed older DAC that cost me only $600 used (Wolfson WM 8471 chip, discrete buffer and CineMag output transformers), and I preferred it to my Schiit Yggdrasil (now sold). With all the hype on R2R DACs, the delta-sigma based DAC is more analog sounding, probably due to the output transformers (I’ve never been let down by a quality transformer in place of an active stage). Though I have found that if you want to get good sound from almost any DAC, a quality transport is a strict prerequisite, no matter how they hype their re-clocking, USB implementation, etc. Vinyl is by far my priority, so I haven’t gone down the road of super high-end digital transports.
Phono stages on the other hand - that is possibly THE most important piece in a quality vinyl-sourced rig. It's up there with the transducers on either end. It's the polar opposite of DACs. My experience was similar; phono stage was the LAST upgrade I did, I went in big with a VAC Renaissance SE, and all prior upgrades came pouring through the speakers as soon as it dropped in. Now the sound is so amazing that all the money I dropped doesn’t matter anymore.
"What was striking about Elizabeth’s original post was that she invested big money in equipment she knew/thought to be quite good and yet she was dissatisfied with the system at the outset. That’s discouraging and luckily she got it sorted in a way that made her happy. But how was she to know what the ultimate solution was? The other interesting thing is that she seemed to base her decision at least in part on the recommendation of audio reviewers which we’ve all been cautioned about, but is still often a factor in buying decisions."
Agreed. But I think (cautiously) I might propose, for such intents and purposes, to take that reasoning a step further and say that, in the end, system building is for each of us our own act of creation...nothing more and nothing less, really...and that, whether we are fully aware of the fact from the outset or not, indeed None of us may know what the real destination will be when we start. We may Think we know, we may feel we have reason to be highly confident based on our own thinking, efforts and understanding...yet all of That is really nothing more than our best-informed supposition. But, what if, after our best efforts, we are left dissatisfied with something? What do we do then?
We can either stand down our urge to do something about it and say that this is just the nature of the beast, or we can dare to pull at the loose thread in the sweater...and risk unraveling the whole.
Given enough time to reach the decision, I’d say that many people may find themselves contemplating that there’s more work to be done than what they originally may have supposed. Although this prospect may not be for the feint of heart, it does also open the door ultimately to getting what one wants from the system...we just may not reliably know where it all will lead or how much (or even how little) it may finally cost, but, for those who have the heart for it, it is perhaps the only next, logical step. But, for each of us getting to that point, it may seem that a personal threshold must be crossed.
If what many of us believe is true - 1. That pretty much everything can make a difference in perceived sound, and 2. Components interact and need to be matched to a system
Then except in the rare case where one component is clearly inferior, how could you really know? It seems there are too many component combinations and permutations to really know precisely what might be the weak link. In some cases I suppose you could apply some math - looking for things like underpowered amplifiers, impedance mismatches, compliance and other things I am not qualified to speak on.
Ironically, if you published the list of components in your system and asked people to comment on what they thought the weakest link was I’m sure you would get many opinions. And many of them spoken with authority. This despite the fact that the majority of people would not be familiar with each piece of equipment in your list, and even less likely - in your room.
The net is that I think it’s trial error. And to me that means doing research and searching for good deals on Audiogon and elsewhere so that I can afford to bring the equipment into my home to try it, and if I don’t like it I hopefully sell it for nothing more than a small loss.
I think the ultimate standard is are you happy with the sound? At least on a temporary basis. You have the knowledge that it could be better, but that will take more time and money to pursue, but hopefully in the mean time you can enjoy both the music and the pursuit of your particular brand of audio perfection.
What was striking about Elizabeth’s original post was that she invested big money in equipment she knew/thought to be quite good and yet she was dissatisfied with the system at the outset. That’s discouraging and luckily she got it sorted in a way that made her happy. But how was she to know what the ultimate solution was? The other interesting thing is that she seemed to base her decision at least in part on the recommendation of audio reviewers which we've all been cautioned about, but is still often a factor in buying decisions.
In the end, I think the lack of certainty about how components add or subtract from the sound is just part and parcel to the hobby of audio. If you like experimenting and tweaking that’s a blessing, for others a curse.
You said it yourself, my lady, it is "sixth sense". But to give that sense a hand - one should have a very strong source and very good wall current. Personally, I also try to keep cables one or two steps ahead of the rest. And I jump when upgrading not moving in small steps.
The primary reason I went from a Class A all-tube headphone amp, Sennheiser 600 and Uber modded Oppo 102 to a much simpler, very low power, ultra lightweight system - a paradigm shift and a half - was to avoid as much as possible the pitfalls (I.e., distortion and noise) inherent in the components and cabling of any convention system. So my new paradigm shifter set-up completely avoids House AC and power cords, interconnects, speaker cables, big honking transformers, fuses, miles of wire (thus avoiding the whole wire directionality issue almost entirely), crossovers, capacitors, even AC ground. Also, the new set-up, since it’s a headphone system, completely avoids the multitude of distortions produced by room acoustic issues. If thy eye offend thee pluck it out. 👀
I don't think, (maybe its just hope) anyone is saying that a component is a bottleneck a 'la something in a computer -- but it is certainly true that every component degrades the sound, and one can degrade more than its share. I actually had this discussion with a potential investor who recoiled at the idea of being honest and saying "excellent components don't improve the sound, the best ones simply muck up the sound the least". He decided that was a lousy marketing message :-)
But its true. Now, one way that they *can* seem to be a bottleneck is that, once lost, detail, time coherence, low noise, whatever - are lost for good. And in thoery we can trace the signal to that point. If one component is dis proportionally contributing - it is therefore the weak link, the bottleneck, whatever. Pedantics don't matter.
As discussed somewhere here recently, there's also the issue of matching - especially important things like amp output characteristics to the startlingly variant impedance characteristics of many speakers. Some speakers maintain a fairly constant (say over 4 ohms and below 10 ohms) load. Vandy 2C whatevers for example. Easy. Drive them with a 20 watt integrated. Others are nightmares that, at some frequencies and at some part of the woofer travel, are reverse EMF machines. Some chape speakers used to be very hard to drive, but normally were bought with cheap amps. Bad combo.
Another classic is cartridge compliance to tonearm mass, or cartridge frequency response (flat, unlikely) to speaker frequency response (ditto). It might be best to plot and add them. Then throw in the room (double ditto) to make the headache worse.
On my Smartphone I keep a pile of different cites time. For example it is 3:04 PM here .. but 5:04 AM in Singapore, 10:04 PM in Paris 2:34 AM in New Delhi, 11:04 AM in Honolulu
Actually there *used* to be an issue with speed for computers. Not any more. Smart phones are faster now than computers were 10 years ago. Computer speed, even for PCs, is a non issue, so say I. Besides, it’s like TVs. You want more resolution? You buy it. Ditto speed. I guess I didn’t realize just how many people were hanging on my every word.
Huh?! Whoa! The main problem with power cords is speed? Isn’t near light speed fast enough for you? What’s a few kilometers per second between friends?
The idea that your system can have a bottleneck or weak link in the same way that a PC can is one that only a disreputable dealer could hope to profit by.
Hi-Fi performance is measured mainly in terms of distortion, whereas PC performance is measured mainly in terms of speed. Until all PCs processes become instant there will always be room for improvement, processor speed, RAM, hard drive, internet speed etc. Any one of them could be a weak link. Hi-Fi design is over a century old and many components now have distortion levels no human can discern by hearing alone.
With digital components having vanishingly low levels of distortion, amplifiers since the 1970s, you should be able to get great results with any budget CD player/ amp paired with loudspeakers of your own preference.
Even the best loudspeaker has hundreds of times more distortion than any amplifier you could buy.
Of course system matching (amplifier power/loudspeaker impedance) and component isolation/setup remain crucial. This is where a good dealer may be of assistance.
1. I really like the headphone idea - if one has good headphones and a good headphone amp, which can a) be modest in cost and b) have no room interactions.
2. While this will spark more debate, i do believe that speakers are the biggest contributors to distortion, and that amps, in the last 20 years, have progressed a TON. I hear what was said above and still think sources - whether a DAC or a TT/tonearm/cart/setup/prayers - is next. Don't take offense at the prayers part, getting a TT set up is HARD. I would suspect most are not. If a DAC properly re-clocks i don't buy the importance of a CD transport, and never heard it (once re-clocked, without - its a form of analog time-base distortion and very, very real).
3. Putting aside strange interactions, swapping one item at a time is the only way to really tell. This demands that you truly patronize, loyally, a good retailer who will let you do this. You will pay more. It will be worth it. (unless the journey and the pain are the point of the effort...)
One thing that hasn’t yet been mentioned which I’ve found to often be helpful in identifying a weak link, or at least in narrowing down the possibilities, is the use of a good quality pair of headphones. Despite the fact that headphone listening is of course inherently a very different experience than listening via speakers, I have nevertheless found that comparing results between what I hear from the various speakers I’ve had over the years and what I have heard from my very revealing Stax electrostatic headphones can be very helpful in determining whether a perceived issue is being introduced by some combination of the amp, speaker, and room, or by something further upstream.
Beyond that, in addition to doing listening comparisons to the extent possible I do a lot of research of relevant experiences that are reported by others, such as the audiophiles who post here and in other forums as well as reviewers. In doing so I apply grains of salt in each case to the extent I feel is appropriate based on my knowledge of the particular commentator. And I also rely on my technically-based instincts to the extent I consider appropriate in each particular case.
mikexxyz I love the cognitive dissonance routinely expressed here.
>>>>>Well, I’ll be a monkey’s uncle! You usually don’t see pseudo skeptics accusing the other side of cognitive dissonance. Wow!
mikexxyz When you read the recommendation to “trust you ears” what they really mean is trust your eyes. Once you see the 0.25” thick CNC milled front panel and silky smooth control knobs, you’ll know which component sounds better. And if you ask the “trust your ears” crowd to do a blind test to pick out the component that so obviously sounds better, you’ll get a litany of excuses as to why listening tests are not a valid way to judge audio - LOL.
>>>>>Yeah, right. Maybe if you just fell off the turnip truck yesterday. Again, you don’t see pseudo skeptics accusing audiophiles of using listening tests.
mikexxyz We were debating the merits of DACs on another forum, one that is more engineering focused. The most strident proponents of DACs sounding different have a commercial interest in designing and selling them. I’m sure that doesn’t happen here.
>>>>I see what you mean - the ones who should know more about them?
mikexxyz I read recently that in today’s world opinion carries as much weight as facts. So, as long as you don’t work for Boeing, GE (jet engine or medical divisions), United Technologies, etc, you can believe that fuses have a direction, wire needs to be “burned in”, and that the USB spec for Bit Error Rate is inadequate for audio. No real harm done. Audio is a hobby after all and all you are wasting is money.
>>>>>Oopsy, daisy! There’s that cognitive dissonance beamin’ down at ya. Thanks for the heads up!
@mikexxyz Mike, you hit send to post your response right before my last response, thank you, well said.
So, @Elizabeth .... I contend that the only way to really know the weak link in your system is to know you.... your taste, what is warm, what is airy, what is dry, what is smooth, what is detailed etc.... Then learning each component and the merits or short comings in your system, Only at that point can you make truly "Educated Guesses" at what the week link in your system is. I think all of us have made costly choice or maybe have kicked ourselves for selling a component. Nature of the beast with this hobby. You've been at this along time yourself. I wish there was a formula to follow, wouldn't that be nice. I'd love to hear anyone has that formula.
Well Elizabeth, I owe you a big apology, I've got your thread Hi Jacked and off on another tangent. I'll respond once and then ask others to open another thread if you'd like to take it further.... This whole thing that there aren't performance differences between DAC's.... Where did that come from? Seems like my words were really twisted. So, what I said was "on well designed Dacs" that the differences are less than that of different designs of amps/preamps etc.... I still stand by that. Take a EE Dac Mini, A Holo Spring, A Soekris, An Ares, Denafrips and I'm sure others that I haven't thought of.... Great Dacs in their own right. All Affordable Dacs that would not be embarrassed in any system. Can you hear a difference, OF COURSE! I have myself sat in front of many systems with other people... On person says, "The Difference is Hugh" another says, "I can hear it" I feel like that when someone wants to hear things that they do and as our ears become more refined over the years that yes, one person is capable of picking nuances that another may not. @douglas_schroeder Doug, I read your reviews, you've earned my respect, but I have also been in or around audio for 39 years and have rubbed shoulders with granted old timers, but none the less with some of the industry greats. I've heard many many systems and have come to KNOW that I don't have tin ears and have not needed to question my own judgement for many years. As I stated here, I think that its easy to over state what HUGE is. @bar81 No one said that All DAC's sound the same... Again, On Well Designed Equipment............ My own current DAC is a DIY ES9018 DAC... It was ok, I was a bit disappointed and took it to my old friend Ed Martin from Marcof. He built a filter network and regulation for the power supply and absolutely transformed this DAC. I would have no fear putting it in any system and being embarrassed, but I'm not delusional that many top notch DACs would outperform it to some degree.... So, not being embarrassed???? are the differences Huge? To one person yes, maybe, but to another, "I can hear a difference".
I love the cognitive dissonance routinely expressed here. When you read the recommendation to “trust you ears” what they really mean is trust your eyes. Once you see the 0.25” thick CNC milled front panel and silky smooth control knobs, you’ll know which component sounds better. And if you ask the “trust your ears” crowd to do a blind test to pick out the component that so obviously sounds better, you’ll get a litany of excuses as to why listening tests are not a valid way to judge audio - LOL.
We were debating the merits of DACs on another forum, one that is more engineering focused. The most strident proponents of DACs sounding different have a commercial interest in designing and selling them. I’m sure that doesn’t happen here.
I read recently that in today’s world opinion carries as much weight as facts. So, as long as you don’t work for Boeing, GE (jet engine or medical divisions), United Technologies, etc, you can believe that fuses have a direction, wire needs to be “burned in”, and that the USB spec for Bit Error Rate is inadequate for audio. No real harm done. Audio is a hobby after all and all you are wasting is money.
On-line readers in any forum have to parse the legitimate and practical from the unfounded and absurd. Caveat emptor applies. You should be skeptical of any on-line advice including this one. For those that don’t have a lot of resources and are trying to get the biggest bang for the buck in their system, even more care is required.
I continue to suggest (as others have) that you spend most of your budget on the best speakers you can afford and skip the amp and DAC upgrades. The distortion in electronics is extremely low compared to the speaker/ room interaction. Once you hit a certain level of design competency and build quality, there is little to no difference in this equipment - none that can be heard anyway.
.... there are no measurment data that suggest
there are differences above human hearing acuity, and no controlled
listening tests ...
Instead of repeated ad nauseum that there is no data, why not collect some of your own? Why not design some controlled listening tests and see where they lead? Of course, that requires a lot more work than just repeating "... there is no data ..."
The belief that good components make everything ancillary (cables, power, teacups, fuses, magic paste) affect the sound is total hogwash. Only lousy crap components do that. A well designed and well built component should be resolving to the source material and minimize noise and contamination from everything else. Pretty obvious really. Why anyone would want components that are affected by everything other than the source music is beyond me.
This is, of course, the recurring response when someone says some components make little or no sonic contribution: 'your system is not good enough'. The counter argument is that there are no measurment data that suggest there are differences above human hearing acuity, and no controlled listening tests. And in my case, I think Quad 2805 electrostats (plus sub) are revealing enough.
People who think all DACs sound the same either haven't heard the top tier of today's digital or their system is simply not resolving enough to show the difference.
Power is also critical, you can read up on my system page about my recent experience with placing a Shunyata Denali 6000/S on different materials.
Ultimately, everything matters as your system gets more resolving. However, it's also a blessing to have a less resolving system since it saves money in that no difference will be heard (but that's a far cry from their actually being no difference in performance).
Elizabeth, are wrong about DACs. Big performance variance between them, as much as any component. Digital cabling also important. DACs are very sensitive to CD or file playback. You would be unnecessarily choking future performance to neglect. Power supply and PC important, too.
There's some great discussion here -- really glad I signed up for this forum!
I do agree that it would be great to "determine what you're looking for" or find out "what one really wants to have 'more of'..or 'less of'.'" But how do I know what my system could be with a change or two? I've always been very happy with whatever system I had -- and amazed when I upgraded something and heard/felt the difference!!
I totally agree with the consensus here that speakers are the first bottleneck. I'd say the cartridge and preamp (if you have a vinyl system) are next. Then the amp. Interconnects , speaker cables... maybe. I'll upgrade from the generic plain-vanilla ones, but haven't heard a real difference -- maybe my system is just not sensitive enough.
And I can't agree at all with Willenj about the superiority of digital sources; they're convenient, but still inferior even to my mid-fi vinyl system.
I do look forward to other and different opinions!
Thanks timlub, glad to be back. Yes I still enjoy my Adcom DA700 I think DACs are constrained by the original specs of The CD format, and the different implementations of chips and oversampling and filters cannot change that limitation by much.
Hi Elizabeth, Sorry, yep, I took you a bit off subject. I was thinking that that was the order that could make the biggest difference in your system, so when you asked about the weakest link, I was thinking what might make the biggest change, sorry, my bad. As far as the Adcom, I knew that you had switched to the Bryston, I was actually thinking that you had an old Adcom GDA600 or GDA700 DAC. Then I mentioned the differences in Dac's being smaller to accent why you might have found little or no difference between Dac's. I missed you posting for quite some time, glad to see you back!
Others have covered most of my thoughts. It mostly comes down to the three E’s... Experience, experience, experience. This comes in several ways. Early on, there’s a temptation to just trade equipment if something is not pleasing you. Big mistake. Room acoustics, clean electricity, component decoupling/isolation are the basics. More importantly, one’s time spent with their system evaluating/learning the differences and the logical way to go about it all.This means one needs to become intimately familiar with their system in every aspect.Then comes component synergy. This ain’t for the meek. It can be highly rewarding.
If I could only go back 30 years? to experience the level of realism I’m now enjoying in my system, I may look/feel a lot younger?
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
