2. tech-talk
  3. 1039431485

How do you determine your weakest link?

I still, after all these years in the audio game, do not get this: I started, last year, with a speaker upgrade; which I was very happy with. Then, new stands for my monitors. The rest is history. Everything went. I finally ended with upgrading my CDP to integrated, IC. That difference, too, is blowing my mind. The litany of audio lingo seems to be redundant when describing sounds of ICs,amps, preamps, speakers. You know the deal. Everything from soundstage (my personal favorite. just fooling ya) to upper end detail. When I changed my Thiels because I wasn't happy with the upper end harshness, I knew it was the speakers. Would I have known it was from the speakers if I hadn't read posts and reviews galore about Thiel upper end harshness? Maybe (if I hadn't read) I could have decided that I needed a new, softer sounding, laid back, integrated? Since I have changed everything else, since my speaker upgrade, my upper end (as well as a ton of other things) continues to change for the positive. Now, I love my system. Really do. Eventually, however, I know, I will feel I'm missing something. How will I know which component will get me that something? Sorry about the cirmlocution? Thanks in advance my fellow audiophools. warren
128x128warrenh
gs5556
769 posts
 
Warren, I hate to break it you but when you replaced your Thiels you put a painkiller on a fracture - what your Thiels were telling you with their "harshness" was that something somewhere in your system wasn't pulling its weight. The Thiels are notorious tattle tales - they let you hear exactly what kind of quality your system has. The harshness your were hearing was either from a solid state amp, DAC, SS preamp or transport. Check other threads for Thiel comments - they are far from negative. You'd be surprised how Thiels sound with the right equipment.
I would have kept the Thiels and auditioned other front end compnents first taking advantage of the Thiels transparency. But, in the real world we have cost and (ahem) wife constraints to deal with. But with that said, what works for one may not work two. By going with things that work for you, and the process continues to yield benefits to yourself, then who's to say otherwise?
paulwp
585 posts
 
My suggestion is for you to enjoy your music and stop coming to places like this. Spend your free time at places like Borders. If you have itchy fingers at the computer keyboard, go to Amazon.com and search for your favorite artists on a regular basis.

Give some more to charity or put more in the collection plate or poor box if you are a churchgoer so you dont have so much money burning a hole in your pocket.

You could always start a 12 step program in your local area for people suffering from audiophilia nervosa. "I am Warren, and I am an audioholic. It all started with. . . ."

In answer to your question, unless you have a poorly designed bad amp or cdp, and those are very rare and you would already know it, your speakers are always your "weakest link." You can always improve your system with better speakers.
warrenh's avatar
warrenh OP
2,286 posts
 
It was the Thiels. That's a fact. I loved them, but they didn't get the treble right, for me.. I don't want this to generate a whole rap about Thiels: pro and con. I do understand what you're saying, however, but the CS 1.5s were a little rough on top. Just a little, but it was too much for me. You guys are right about time and familiarity with my music system. Probably the level I'm at now, I will be able to descern, more easily, how, my future needs can be met with a change. Please don't let this cathartic revelation stop your posts. I love it...
judit
217 posts
 
Warrenh, I would like to relay an anecdote to support GS5556' and Twl's points:

I listened to the Avalon Opus on Saturday using two different SS front ends: with Linn pre + Music Fidelity Amp, then with all SPECTRAL gear (twice the price). The SPECTRAL was very analytical and detailed, the music fidelity was very musical. (I have come to view musicality vs. resolution as one of the high end's great paradoxes) If I had heard the Opus through SPECTRAL only, I might have blamed the speaker for what I heard. The OPUS is voiced using the spectral, so I was a bit surprised. The Music Fidelity+Linn gave a powerfully musical and involving presentation through the OPUS.

The two SS set-ups were then used to drive Martin Logan Prodigy speakers. The Prodigy's did not resolve any differences in these two front ends. I fidgeted through this part of the audition.

Here is what I confirmed: (1) If the speakers are transparent enough, differences among front end components, including cable can be dramatic and compelling. (2) There is no substitute for learning the hard way.
onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
4,163 posts
 
As your system positively evolves two factors become increasingly more important, the room and the recordings. Once your system is capable of high volumes and deep bass a whole slew of room related issues arise. When your system starts to demonstrate transparency, dynamics and nuetrality, then you'll begin to notice how poorly recorded some of your favorite records are. There's a vast body of readily available knowledge on how to properly address room related issues. The quality of recordings is not so easily dealt with and I think it is the root of alot of disatisfaction among audiophiles. We want deep and wide soundstages from recordings that were concocted in a small studio. We want silky smooth strings from close mic'd violins. We want tons of details at the same time we demand a warm, full-bodied sound. Red Book digital standards only makes these goals more difficult to attain. All those Audiogon threads asking for a warm sounding cable, an analog sounding CD player, or a tube-like solid state amp are actually attempts to correct recording related issues.
More to discover