Which components produce a convincing 3-D image?


Hi. Like many of us I've been through entirely too many pieces of quality gear and I've managed to get close to what I think I should be hearing. However, I've read some comments on Audiogon by folks who claim they feel like they can "reach out and touch" the performer, their systems being so convincing. Keeping in mind that one's listening room can can make or break a system's ability to produce a convincing image I would like to know which components, whether they be amps, preamps, speakers, CDPs, cables, whatever, have contributed the most to your system's ability to provide that illusion of being there with the performers.

I'm currently running two sytems:

For two-channel A/V: PMC FB-1 speakers, Sim Audio Moon I-5 integrated, Sony DVP-S9000es, Silver Audio Bullet 4.0s, Analysis Plus Oval 12 shotgun bi-wired 8' speaker cables.

For two-channel stereo: Tyler Linbrook Monitors, McCormack DNA-125 amp, Marantz SA-14 SACD, Creek OBH-11 volume control, 2 pairs Homegrown Audio .5M Silver Lace interconnects, AudioQuest AQ-8 bi-wired 8' speaker cables.

Thank you.
beemerrider
I'm with Bomarc - speakers, room and source material have had the greatest impact for me. After that, tube electronics have consistently given me the greatest sense of dimensionality and palpability to instruments, vocalist and soundstaging.
I feel that excellent imaging is a combination of things, but is primarily dependent on maintaining phase coherence throughout the chain. Without good phase coherence, the result is a discombobulation that cannot give you a good image. The speakers are one of the main problems with maintaining good phase information. Unless great care is taken in the design the drivers, crossovers, and layout, there are more ways to lose imaging there(in the speakers) than just about anywhere else.

Generally, the best imaging layout is point-source, followed by line-source, and lastly, array. The more complex the system, the more likely that things will get messed-up.

I have opted for the single-driver concept in my system because of point-source imaging capability, and no crossovers. I traded-off some other characteristics to get these benefits, but the imaging and soundstage capability is tremendous.

Outside the speakers, the baffle diffraction and 1st reflection zone activity will detract from imaging quality. Reduce these as much as you can. Speaker placement will also play a role. In most cases, out into the room is better than near the walls.

Listening position is also critical. On-axis listening will yield better imaging. If you don't listen on-axis, you are reducing the imaging qualities of your system.

I know you asked about components. If you want to see the components of a system that images extremely well, then click on my "system" link next to my name below. This way I don't have to take up space here to describe it. Mine is not the only way to get great imaging, but it is one way. And I am an imaging freak.
beemerrider,
yeah, but those maggie owners need a nice large room so that the planars can be brought out into the room for maximum benefit, at least this is what i seem to remember from my thread trolling. thats something we linbrook owners are not subjected to as much.
can't wait for the full break in period to pass, boyo that will be fun
another 2 cents
if your speakers can handle them a good tube amp can make a huge difference in creating soundstage. they only down side is that like a beautiful woman they require more maintenance than the ordinary (ss) ones. not for the faint of heart or the picky picky's.
Speaker placement (including stands if you have monitors), room treatment, and power conditioning, in that order of importance. I'm still amazed sometimes at the differences resulting from tiny changes in toe-in. Diffraction and side wall absorbtion are also big players here. And certainly the lower noise floor resulting from good cords and/or AC conditioners adds a lot of depth to the soundstage.