Ok this will be a good thread.

The order of importance in the audio chain goes the same as the path of the signal.

Using that logic, Twl, that makes the room and the listener the least important! I don't think so.

Bob P.

Touche' Bob, but the room and the listener are not part of the signal chain. They are part of the acoustic environment, after the electrical signal has been transduced into air motion. Good try though. It had me going for a second.

OK, not aiming at anyone in particular here:

This thread has gotten so long that folks are no longer referring to (nor apparently reading) earlier responses, and, as from the beginning, many are still not reading the original question very carefully. As I pointed out early on, and as the original poster confirmed, the question posed is regarding the hierarchy of importance of components that exist WITHIN the two channel system... it is a question about hardware, plain and simple. NOT your ears nor your hearing, NOT the software, NOT the room, the room treatment, NOT the original recording studio, the mikes or other gear used to record the music, NOT the specific drugs the band was using when they made the recording, NOT your wildest dreams, your Freudian fantasies, nor what phase of the moon you were born under. Yes, we all KNOW there is more to listening to music than the chain of hardware that forms the 2-channel system, but this question just happens to be specifically about the hardware items IN THAT CHAIN. What part of this is not clear? In other words, PLEASE READ THE original query a few more times, then read it AGAIN...then maybe you might want to read a few of the now over 100 responses that have been posted already before you post an additional response that does not really respond to the very simple question being asked. Jeeeez! Sorry folks, it's HOT here in Seattle, and I'm a bit crabby today. I'm actually interested in what people have to say on this subject (I do agree with TWL as I've already said). But these multiple postings with one-word answers and clever diversions to point out that there is more to a 2-channel system than the hardware are really getting tiresome. If you're going to respond to the question, then respond TO THE QUESTION and let us know why you hold that opinion. It's actually an intersesting question that gets asked over and over in these forums and elsewhere - just search the FAQ, Jack. If you want to address a DIFFERENT question, talk about listening rooms, recording technology, philosophical rhetoric as it applies to high-end stereo enjoyment, what is the best EL34 tube, etc....just start another thread! Just use THIS LINK and title the thread with the appropriate subject, and or ask a specific question like the original poster of this thread did. You'll likely get far more direct responses to your specific query or topic of discussion ....It's a pretty good system!

Steam valve closed. Done venting. I ain't donning my flame-retardent suit as it's just too damn hot!

Marco

Jax2

Thanks,

You are right, the question I originally posed was regarding the hierarchy of importance of components that exist WITHIN the two channel system.
It was a question about hardware, plain and simple. NOT any of the other elements you illuminated so eloquently.

You were 100% correct. Still it was interesting to hear everyone's comments.