Fair enough, Noromance. Your well stated and carefully qualified last post is certainly a reasonable position.
As you appear to realize, my main reason for posting was that on many occasions over the years I have seen the fact that the source is located first in the signal path cited as rationale for its importance, and as a driver of optimal funding allocation. I believe that the first major proponent of that philosophy was Ivor Tiefenbrun of Linn, during the 1970s, who of course just happened to manufacture turntables.
My basic point is simply that regardless of how much importance one may attach to the source, and regardless of how much funding should be allocated to it in any given set of circumstances, that rationale in itself, while subscribed to by many audiophiles, is logically and technically flawed and therefore does not support whatever position may be advocated.
Best regards,
-- Al
As you appear to realize, my main reason for posting was that on many occasions over the years I have seen the fact that the source is located first in the signal path cited as rationale for its importance, and as a driver of optimal funding allocation. I believe that the first major proponent of that philosophy was Ivor Tiefenbrun of Linn, during the 1970s, who of course just happened to manufacture turntables.
My basic point is simply that regardless of how much importance one may attach to the source, and regardless of how much funding should be allocated to it in any given set of circumstances, that rationale in itself, while subscribed to by many audiophiles, is logically and technically flawed and therefore does not support whatever position may be advocated.
Best regards,
-- Al