2. speakers
  3. 130797-89982

cost of speakers in relation to the rest of the system

I don't intend this to be a "How much should I spend for speakers" question.  Seems a number of folks generally recommend a third to two-thirds.  My question is, generally for discussion, whether folks found happiness and "success" in spending significantly less than that.  Or--by price, are you happy with speakers that might be considered by some folks outclassed by your other equipment and don't think the speakers are the "weak link?"

As a "favorite" professor might have said too often, "Discuss."

I would think there would be a number of Maggie MMG/1.7 folks, Tekton DI folks, probably some Omega folks, some vintage speaker folks.... others?
stfoth
mikelavigne
1,274 posts
 

at the top of the food chain %’s don’t mean much. chasing ultimate sound breaks all the rules. i don’t hold my system up as any sort of example on what to do.

but if asked what’s a good approach starting out or at modest levels, i would say that (1) getting the right speakers for your room and (2) stretching on the budget for speakers likely will result in the best sound. whether that is 50%, 75% or 90% of the budget for speakers......is ok.

these days perfectly competent amps and sources (even skip a preamp at the modest price points as they typically limit performance) can be found on the cheap. and entry level sources and amps with good speakers scaled to the room with bring the best bang for the buck.

the speaker<->room interface trumps all.

even more essential is having a sonic reference you are aiming for, otherwise it's a game of chance. if you don't have a good idea of the sound you want then find someone you trust and allow them to assist you. or don't buy until you hear something that satisfies.

soundsrealaudio's avatar
soundsrealaudio
642 posts
 
I could easily argue for spending more money on speakers then you might spend on the rest of your system. Or I could easily argue with spend very little money on speakers saving that money for amps preamps dad's cables. You kind of need a plan. A decent single ended integrated with a moderately priced speaker and dac has the potential to make you deliriously happy. 
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
4,908 posts
 

IMO, the problem with looking at the situation in terms of the cost of things is that there is no absolute correlation between price and sound quality, however one defines that. And then there is the fact that a group of similarly-priced loudspeakers will produce radically different sound. One or more of them may sound better than the others to any given listener, so there again price is not the determining factor in sound quality. That being the case, one must find a better way to determine system budgeting.

In the days when Linnies roamed the Earth, their philosophy was the further upstream the component, the more important it is. The reasoning was, once lost, information can not be recovered downstream. True, but that ignores the fact that loudspeakers, like phono cartridges, are transducers, and vary much more in their sonic characteristics than do electronics, and even mechanical turntables and tonearms. A loudspeaker has a far greater influence on what you hear from a system than does anything upstream. IMO, of course. And, as many have here said, the speaker and the room it is in are a system unto themselves, inseparable.

prof
1,741 posts
 
I had several formative experiences earlier in my audiophile career that enforced the importance of the speakers. Mostly this had to do with hearing great speakers with meagre electronics. The first experience with Quad ESL 63’s blew my mind, and they were hooked up to a tiny, cheap Dynaco ST-70, with cheap speaker cable/interconnects. I heard the Waveform Mach 17 speakers (at the time) blow away practically every audio system I’d ever heard (and I’d heard scary-priced systems by then, most of what was available), and those speakers were running on some cheap amps (Kenwood if I remember), and bought-from-home-depot level cabling (John Otvos demoed them, he did not buy into the idea of expensive cables/amps).

When I first got my Quad ESL 63s I had to use my girlfriend’s Harmon Kardon integrated amp and cheap CD player for quite a while and yet the sound was incredible. Yes I upgraded CD players, amps (to CJ tube gear) along the way, but those were incremental improvements relative to the huge difference made by the Quads over other modest speakers I’d heard and owned.

Over the years, especially when my high end audio fever was at it’s highest, I heard systems put together by audiophiles who ranged from "everything makes a difference" - huge expense for cabling, raising them off the floor, crazy amp prices, every component on isolation etc - to systems owned by more engineer-minded audiophiles who dismissed high end amps/cables/Dacs and concentrated on the speakers and acoustics. Both "sides" could produce incredible sound (though the more practical audiophile set ups costing much less, usually).

So for myself, I’m a speakers-first guy, amps second (I like tube amplification), everything else far below that (probably DAC next).
I’ll spend some good money on amps, like my CJ monoblocks, but with the recognition I’m chasing smaller sonic differences/improvements than I get with speakers.

I have various speakers, including Thiel 3.7s. I feel the Thiels are at a point where I start paying much more for incremental differences in speaker performance. They are powered by CJ premier 12 monoblock amps, music streamed to a benchmark DAC. Stock AC cables all around, 10-gauge Beldon speaker cable (large gauge due to 30 foot length from amp to speakers). Sounds incredible, and I think more impressive than many far more expensive systems I hear elsewhere (in fact I’ve been shopping to see if I can find a replacement for the big Thiels, and far more expensive systems I’ve auditioned have left me less impressed than my own set up. One friend is a high end audio reviewers and he has an unmentionable dollar amount worth of cables, usually high end amps, amazing sources, and superb monitors - but I think my system sounds significantly better.  Thiel 3.7s are far better speakers (and I have great room acoustics) and they make more of a difference even when used with much more modest gear leading to them.

That said, I have heard certain gear that seems to produce exceptional results when hooked up to many different speakers. My little classic Eico HF-81 has an absolutely magical tone and tends to make almost any speaker hooked up to it sound more ravishing. But it can go only so far in breaching the difference found between speakers.




m-db's avatar
m-db
313 posts
 
It's difficult to put into words. I wasted many years and dollars on affordable speakers that did the highs and lows yet felt uncomfortable with the music.

Not knowing how or what to listen for it was suggested I listen to Avalon's in stores and at shows but could never justify their price. As frustration increased a subjectively affordable pair popped up. 

At home the improvement was stunning even with the lesser electronics I hadn't yet sold.

My suggestion is not about the brand or the cost rather ones experience in listening. On the other hand I'd say buy used but go big. 
More to discover