What level of importance do you put on the source?

**Mike** · February 27, 2016, 11:45 AM

We talk a lot about speakers first, then amps, preamp, cables, etc.

But I'm wondering, how much emphasis do people put on their sources?

I'm one that believes if it's not right to begin with, you can't fix it downstream. You can't fix downstream what's broken upstream.

So if it came down to it, are you more likely to upgrade another component (speakers, amps, preamp) before buying a better DAC, turntable or even adding a source (R2R)?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**mep** · February 27, 2016, 12:12 PM

I guess it depends on what level your sources are at. If you think your speakers are higher quality than your sources, it's time to upgrade your sources. If you think your sources are better than your speakers, it's time to upgrade the speakers.

**Zero** · February 27, 2016, 12:15 PM

Answer: Extreme. For all of the reasons that you just listed.

**cmalak** · February 27, 2016, 12:16 PM

Mike...I'm in the camp that says that component selection has to be equally balanced across the chain. You are right that if source is week, noting in the chain downstream from it can fix the shortcomings in the source. But equally if source is far superior to any component downstream of it, then you have a chain that cannot reveal the strengths of the source (i.e., if amplification adds veiling or lacks dynamics or resolution that source is capable of delivering or similarly if speaker not up to the task). So in that scenario you end up leaving performance on the table or likely dollars on the table because you have probably paid too much on your source that the rest of your system cannot take advantage of because it is not at the same level of performance. So I always recommend trying to balance out the pieces in the chain so that they are at a relative performance to one another. One can always argue that if you get a source that is superior then you can upgrade over time the rest of the system and you will get better performance as you upgrade rest of the chain. I dislike that argument because arguably the changes in technology and performance for the $ spent especially in digital sources seems to improve more rapidly then in amplification and in speakers. So if you buy the most speaker you can afford for your budge first and then spend the most on amplification second, then those parts of your system can stay stable for a long while while you apply more frequent upgrade cycles in the front end in line with the faster technology cycle improvements in your source (this is again especially true in digital sources and perhaps not as much in analog sources).

**Mike** · February 27, 2016, 12:31 PM

When is good, good enough when it comes to source spending vs amp/preamp/cables, etc.?

For example, will someone be better off with a Rega RP3 and a Lyra Delos and a D'Agostino amp or a VPI Avenger and a killer cart and a pair of Bryston 28's?

**jdandy** · February 27, 2016, 12:44 PM

Mike.......In my opinion it all matters. The weakest link will always bottleneck a system's performance. System integration is like a recipe. Alter any one ingredient and the final presentation will not be the same. Each sound system on any level is essentially a work in progress that is rarely 100% complete.

**Alpinist** · February 27, 2016, 12:48 PM

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. The source, preamp, amps, speakers and cables all need to be strong. When it comes to where I tend to place the most money: 1) Speakers; 2) Source; 3) Amp; 4) Preamp; 5) Cables.

Ken

**Zero** · February 27, 2016, 12:55 PM

I think an interesting way to approach this subject is to place yourself in a fictional 'What if' scenario. In this case, let's pretend that you can have one component, but you can't have the other. To better illustrate what I'm talking about, here's a for-example:

Right now, I have an AMR CD-777 and a Karan Acoustic KA-i 180. It's a simple, yet effective little system.

So let's say that for whatever reason, I'm put in a situation where I can only keep one of those components. Whatever goes bye bye will be replaced by something decent, albeit significantly less capable. So the decision would look something like this... I could either:

A) Keep the AMR-CD777 and replace the Karan with a Heed Elixir integrated.

or

B) Keep the Karan and replace the CD-777 with a Rega Apollo (yea yea you turntable boys, I already know what you're going to say)

So the big question is - what would I chose if those were my only options? Well, for me... the choice is simple. I'd stick with the AMR. As much as I love that Karan integrated, I'd rather have a source that can bring out the best of the Heed.

Obviously this is a fictional scenario that most Sharkies will never have to fret over. Most of us are going to emphasize the importance of balance and synergy. And while all of that is true, that's not necessarily the point. I think this 'what if' exercise is a fun way to gauge what really matters to you. At least on a component by component basis.

**cmalak** · February 27, 2016, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by Double-D

Mike.......In my opinion it all matters. The weakest link will always bottleneck a system's performance. System integration is like a recipe. Alter any one ingredient and the final presentation will not be the same. Each sound system on any level is essentially a work in progress that is rarely 100% complete.

Exactly right

**CPP** · February 27, 2016, 01:31 PM

Dan is spot on as are all that have commented.

Originally Posted by Mike

When is good, good enough when it comes to source spending vs amp/preamp/cables, etc.?

When is good enough, in my opinion its when your wallet and your physical abilities tells you its good enough. I look at audio the same way I look at racing cars. In drag and IMSA racing which I was seriously involved with back in the 60, 70 and 80's to be competitive on the circuit it can cost you thousands if not ten's of thousands of dollars to gain a few tenths of a second or a few MPH.
Like in anything (hobbies) we do in life the sky is the limit as long as your wallet and your physical abilities can support your spend rate while trying to obtain that happy place. If your hearing is failing as you age you might have found your happy place in audio. So why spend huge sums of money if you cannot benefit from the advantages the newer or should I say refined gear.

So a question, can a source be the music itself ? You can't make a bad recording sound pleasing no mater how much your audio gear cost, if that makes sense.

**The Sandman** · February 27, 2016, 01:39 PM

Originally Posted by Alpinist

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. The source, preamp, amps, speakers and cables all need to be strong. When it comes to where I tend to place the most money: 1) Speakers; 2) Source; 3) Amp; 4) Preamp; 5) Cables.

I'm not sure Mike was referring primarily to cost when he asked "What level of importance do you put on the source" but then again it is certainly involved in the calculus. That said, putting the source at number two in your list might be fine for analog but I think it's too much for digital, given the current state of the art and rate of development of DACs.

**jdandy** · February 27, 2016, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by CPP

So a question, can a source be the music itself ? You can't make a bad recording sound pleasing no mater how much your audio gear cost, if that makes sense.

Chris.......Source material is equally important. Even an oil sheikh's system will sound like crap with a few recordings I own.

**the professor** · February 27, 2016, 02:14 PM

Originally Posted by Mike

When is good, good enough when it comes to source spending vs amp/preamp/cables, etc.?

Good enough is when you are emotionally connected to the music when you listen to the system. Everything else is extra.

**Jim Smith** · February 27, 2016, 02:33 PM

I've heard countless systems with what I knew were excellent sources. But the system/room interface kept them from delivering anything close to their true potential.

I think the source is critical, but not until the system/room interface consistently delivers a musically involving experience.

Otherwise, the owner's resources are sadly wasted to a large degree.

**the professor** · February 27, 2016, 02:35 PM

My $.02

The most important thing is that your speaker works well in your room. Quality of the speaker is not important. A great speaker that does not interact in your room well, will be "A LOT" worse that a lessor speaker that works well in your room.

For the best system for a particular budget I believe a balanced approach is best.

For an unbalanced system - I find a "better sourced" system system is better than a "better speaker" system.

So I would say that the source is more important if the speaker works well in your room.

**Mate** · February 27, 2016, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by Mike

We talk a lot about speakers first, then amps, preamp, cables, etc.

But I'm wondering, how much emphasis do people put on their sources?

I'm one that believes if it's not right to begin with, you can't fix it downstream.

Common question among audiophiles... here's my view.
The "source" is very important... but I'm not talking about playback device, but the recording / media.
That CD (or Blu-ray, or vinyl, or tape...) with its recording and its mastering and/or remastering... is perhaps the most important. Followed by speakers, amplifier and the room, in that order - but with almost equal level of importance. Player has much much less impact on the overall sound... cables and power conditioners and the quality of electrical power network have less impact... spikes and other "enhancement accessories" even less...
In the end - EVERYTHING COUNTS - but with dramatically different levels of importance.

**skolis** · February 27, 2016, 02:48 PM

Originally Posted by Mike

... But I'm wondering, how much emphasis do people put on their sources?
So if it came down to it, are you more likely to upgrade another component (speakers, amps, preamp) before buying a better DAC, turntable or even adding a source (R2R)?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This may be reading something slightly different into the question of (or definition of) "source", but please allow me....
The "prior" question for me was "format", meaning is the source analogue (TT or RTR) or digital (via computer or dedicated server). For reasons of convenience and listening habits
I went digital - so I am interested in optimizing within that, and ignore other options.

Secondly, from CPP:

Originally Posted by CPP

... I look at audio the same way I look at racing cars. In drag and IMSA racing which I was seriously involved with back in the 60, 70 and 80's to be competitive on the circuit it can cost you thousands if not ten's of thousands of dollars to gain a few tenths of a second or a few MPH.
Like in anything (hobbies) we do in life the sky is the limit as long as your wallet and your physical abilities can support your spend rate while trying to obtain that happy place. .... .

Substitute sailboats - which I raced for many many years, and same situation - you can always spend more for some incremental gain.

Right now, I'm at "that happy place" and could stop.

But will I, probably not.... then I look for the "weakest link". And in this regard, I agree with
Alpinist:

Originally Posted by Alpinist

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

**Jim Smith** · February 27, 2016, 02:55 PM

If I may restate my point from below, the acoustic wave launch into the room, and how it is received at the listening seat is the fundamental building block for all else. IME/IMO, the world's best source will fall far short of its potential if this foundational aspect is not addressed fully.

**Deafone** · February 27, 2016, 03:40 PM

I have no where near the amount of experience with different components in my system that most have on this forum, so take what I say with a grain of salt. I personally think the source if quite important. I switched from a $1000 turntable/cart to a $22000 turntable/cart and experienced a big change in the enjoyment of my system. I used to be mostly digital, but now am almost exclusively vinyl. I am running this $22K turntable into an $800 phone pre-amp and entry-level cables connecting the different components. I think a lot of equipment these days is of such good quality that much of the sound comes through. I've had to switch out my somewhat reference level pre-amp and amp to an entry-level equipment due to equipment failure and still find I can enjoy much of the what the turntable/cart have to offer. I should switch out my speakers to see if I still say the same thing. I suspect I would.

Don't get me wrong, everything is important.

**bzr** · February 27, 2016, 05:27 PM

It's at the front for a reason. Hit it with the best you have. As Jim said the room & environment is very important, but without the best front end in any room, you will never realise just how much potential is locked away in that recording to bring forward & listen to. Unfortunately it also highlights the bad side of the mastering as well.

**Tbadder** · February 28, 2016, 01:54 AM

It's really late for me after doing seven consecutive days of double shifts so I'm not thinking very clearly, but as soon as I saw the topic I thought-- SOURCE. The starting point. And that of course Is the cd or lp or stream. That seems to me to be the ultimate achievable quality. No equipment can exceed the source except maybe to cover up sins which lead to more sins. So I would say the source might be the most important link in the chain. Geez...I feel lousy and I'm totally okay if some says this is a stupid idea.

**kiwi_1282001** · February 29, 2016, 04:09 PM

In my experience it is rarely the source that's been the system bottleneck, assuming its not an Oppo or a Playstation 3 or a snotty laptop with a virus...

Two often overlooked bottleneck areas are the power supply [which is a source] and the room / loudspeaker interface. I once visited an audiophile who was adamant that he needed to spend loads of money to upgrade his source. It turned out that his listening chair was poorly sited and after we moved that the problems which he was hoping to address by upgrading his source were gone. The bottom line was the guy wasn't getting the best out of what he already had and Stereophile reckons thats true for 95% of all audiophiles.

**still-one** · February 29, 2016, 05:20 PM

Removing "the room" as a variable from this discussion makes the choice easy for me, speakers/amps are far more important then a source component. If you were to take a $200 CD player and connect it to any quality system you will get good sound. If you take one of the uber expensive CD stacks available and play it through some Big Box stores speakers you will not get good sound.

This whole "the source" narrative was promulgated by Linn's Ivor Tiefenbrun when that company ironically only produced a source product.

**Zero** · February 29, 2016, 05:46 PM

I dunno.. I think you can get good sound by going in any particular direction.

For example, I heard a set of Wilson Watt pups being fronted by a $300 NAD CD-player, and that system sounded just fine. On the flip side, I recently heard a $4,500 AMR CD-player fronting a Polk Audio T50 system that also sounded very good.

**mep** · February 29, 2016, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by still-one

If you were to take a $200 CD player and connect it to any quality system you will get good sound.

The problem is, this hobby isn't about "good" sound. The foundation for this hobby is great sound. "Good" sound is comparatively cheap compared to great sound.

Originally Posted by still-one

f you take one of the uber expensive CD stacks available and play it through some Big Box stores speakers you will not get good sound.

True, but that's no surprise.

Originally Posted by still-one

This whole "the source" narrative was promulgated by Linn's Ivor Tiefenbrun when that company ironically only produced a source product.

That doesn't mean he was wrong in this case though. Ideally you have great source components so you capture as much information as you can at the front end and the rest of your system is up to task of reproducing it correctly. You can argue that if you only have "X" amount of money to spend on your system that it makes sense to you to scrimp on the source component(s) and go big on the amp and speakers so you can still get "good" sound. The goal for me is to have everything in your system on equal footing in terms of quality.

**rbbert** · February 29, 2016, 06:36 PM

Originally Posted by mep

...Ideally you have great source components so you capture as much information as you can at the front end and the rest of your system is up to task of reproducing it correctly. You can argue that if you only have "X" amount of money to spend on your system that it makes sense to you to scrimp on the source component(s) and go big on the amp and speakers so you can still get "good" sound. The goal for me is to have everything in your system on equal footing in terms of quality.

JMO, of course, but I think your system is far over-balanced toward the source

**mep** · February 29, 2016, 06:41 PM

Originally Posted by rbbert

JMO, of course, but I think your system is far over-balanced toward the source

You don't like my speakers?

**rbbert** · February 29, 2016, 08:36 PM

Originally Posted by mep

You don't like my speakers?

I very much like your speakers, but it would be easy to argue that with your sources they should be Baby Grands

**mep** · February 29, 2016, 08:42 PM

Originally Posted by rbbert

I very much like your speakers, but it would be easy to argue that with your sources they should be Baby Grands

Baby Grands are $55k last I knew which equals the value of my entire system approximately. One thing I know, the NOLA KOs are resolving enough to let me hear the differences between source components and I think represent the sweet spot in their lineup. I would love to compare the Baby Grands with my NOLA KOs, but I'm not spending my retirement money yet since I'm not retired. In the meantime, I'm real happy with my KOs.

**rbbert** · February 29, 2016, 09:07 PM

FWIW, remember that Carl typically demos the Baby Grands with your current amp and an ARC CD player. The current Baby Grands run closer to $70k I think.

**Jack** · February 29, 2016, 09:17 PM

Just so happens there is a hell of a deal currently on a pair of Baby Grand Ref's for less than half price. Look at the location of the seller. I suspect there is more to that story than it appears. Some of the photos give clues.

http://www.usaudiomart.com/details/6...rrent-version/

Thread: What level of importance do you put on the source?

What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Re: What level of importance do you put on the source?

Posting Permissions