Is the source the most important aspect of a sound system?

[blackfly]

I would definitely agree the fact the SOURCE is the most important: you cannot hear what is not there and NO amount of tweaks, either by EQ or whatever, is going to make it better. RESOLUTION comes from the source.

Strictly speaking, the amp and preamp are not that important per se. Speakers are HUGELY important in that they are the most non-linear part of the equation and are the ONLY part of the system you actually hear and the ONLY part that DIRECTLY interacts with the room it is in.

I think something else to ponder is this: the parts of the chain can TAKE AWAY, too. Bad speakers may not be able to resolve clean highs, or deliver strong low bass, or the amp may make fuzzy sound.

It is a SYSTEM, where each part is a part of the whole but greater than the sum of its parts. I am not saying anything is less important, but for me definitely the SOURCE then the SPEAKERS are the most important. Next is the AMP as it is what makes the speakers work well or not.

Related to the above, I suggest the amp should not be considered alone but as a pair with the speaker. Some excellent amps paired with the wrong speaker are not going to be excellent, and vice versa.

I would put cables and interconnects (and its related ilk add-ons) WAYYYYY down the list. If I had $5000 extra to spend on a system it would be on a source or DAC, not cables.

 

[Rybeam]

I have heard bad equipment sound good through decent speakers, but it doesn't work the other way around. SPEAKERS FIRST !

 

[Sam Cogley]

I think it's a combination of everything. Any one component in the system can screw everything else up.

 

[JohnVF]

I have heard bad equipment sound good through decent speakers, but it doesn't work the other way around. SPEAKERS FIRST !

That has been my experience as well.

Maybe it's better to just say that I think the system is most important. The whole thing. It's not like any of us just buy speakers. Or just a source. So these questions of which is better don't really mean much in the long run. It all matters. (but I still think speakers have the most affect on final sound)

 

[goandy89]

even with the best speakers and amps if the souce is crappy the sound is crappy so in my book it is a major factor

 

[JohnVF]

even with the best speakers and amps if the souce is crappy the sound is crappy so in my book it is a major factor

So if I run a Sota Star TT into a Yorx all in one (though the Aux, of course, as it already has a TT), it still sounds good? I don't think any of us are talking about equipment that is so bad that it ruins the whole system. And I'm certainly not saying that the source isn't important. Of course it is, it's the beginning of a chain. But these threads about which is the best part of the chain is like asking what is the best part of the plane...the wings or the rudder or the engines? Well, it doesn't work as a plane without any of them, so what's the point in having a favorite?

But to me, there is much more variation in speakers than CD players. The difference going from a $100 CD player to a $5000 CD player is much less noticeable than going through that big of a money increase in speakers. Many sources looked down upon by audiophiles don't actually sound all that bad. They just sound bad when you're looking for that last 10% of fidelity.

 

[MadBrewer]

It's the oringinal signal that's most important.
All a GREAT, pre-amp, amp, processors, speakers is going to do is,
make a crap signal sound abit better, (it's what it has to deal with),....

If your signal is "5-by-5", even a semi-decent system will sound good.
You get into :drool: mode when you make that signal/recording sound like
you're there,...next to the person/in the studio.

COMM; communications, is about transmitting the best signal you can & receiving that signal the best you can.
All the other stuff on the receiving end, (your stereo), is to make that "oringinal signal/sound" the best that it can but,
you'll only amping/processing what ever feeds into it,
ie. crap in = louder/processed crap out,....

SAT COMM is way beyond this, (unless you want to pick up that FM x-miles away but),
SAT COMM was make to TRANS/input the best possible signal,
Receiver sations, (your stereo) is to make the best possible use of that signal,

1, the source is #1, (bad in = bad out),
2, speakers next, (good speakers will make an ave. amp sound good),
3, bad speakers on GREAT amp = bad-amped sound.

Avionic Tech
AT2 Copper
US Navy
VAK-1087
VAK-208
HM-19
VR-55

 

[mrt2]

The difference going from a $100 CD player to a $5000 CD player is much less noticeable than going through that big of a money increase in speakers. .

I was with you up to this point. I am still a believer in having balanced systems, trying to balance the quality level of components. My point was that the difference between similar quality cd players will be very close. I have heard $100 digital sources and $5,000 digital sources and there is a big difference in sound quality.

 

[mrt2]

I have heard bad equipment sound good through decent speakers, but it doesn't work the other way around. SPEAKERS FIRST !

Don't know about this either. Great speakers can be demanding of electronics. In my own case, my Dynaudio speakers haven't sounded their best since I moved my Arcam amp into my smaller system. I am currently driving the Dynaudios with an old Sansui receiver, and the Dynaudios just sound so so, not the great sounding speakers they had been with the Arcam integrated.

 

[JohnVF]

I was with you up to this point. I am still a believer in having balanced systems, trying to balance the quality level of components. My point was that the difference between similar quality cd players will be very close. I have heard $100 digital sources and $5,000 digital sources and there is a big difference in sound quality.

I totally agree with you on the $5000 CD player sounding much better, but are you saying that going from a $100 pair of Best Buy chip-board boxes to something like a Dali Helicon is not going to make a more noticeable improvement in sound?

All this talk of 'source' first...I mean, it's not like it takes three days for the sound to go from a CD player to the speakers. It all happens at the same time. The WHOLE system is the source of the sound.

 

[dogscanskate]

The foundation of a good system is its ability to extract the signal from the disc (cd/lp). You retrieve "music" from the disc and any error in extraction goes down the line amplified and feeding your speakers. If the source is veiled, the instruments muddied up and so on, wonderful speakers will sound simply awful because they are in fact reproducing these errors correctly. They can only be as good as what is feeding them and "them" means the source material, the source, phono preamplifier, preamplifier and amplifier. The source component is the "foundation" of a good system no matter if you think this is marketing gibberish. If you want to build a system that is musically involving, you start at the beginning and give yourself a better chance of attaining your goal.

As we all know there are many ways to build a system. It may just be a very personnal choice but mine is to go source first and that means the tt deck is more important than the arm which is more important than the cartridge and so on... But that's me!

 

[mrt2]

I totally agree with you on the $5000 CD player sounding much better, but are you saying that going from a $100 pair of Best Buy chip-board boxes to something like a Dali Helicon is not going to make a more noticeable improvement in sound?

I think we generally agree. Another argument for budgeting a little more on speakers and amp first is that this is extremely mature technology. People who care about good sound will still need good speakers and amps in the future. Who knows what people will use for digital sources in a few years. Digital server and DAC, Blu Ray player, programmable digital tuner that can store files for playback later?

If I were budgeting for a complete system build from scratch, would probably invest comparable amounts in amp and speakers, maybe a little more for speakers, and budget a little less for digital source to start. So hypothetically, if my budget were $2,000, look at spending $700 to $800 on speakers, about the same on amp/preamp, and $400 to $500 on a digital source. That should be good enough not to be embarrased or completely degrade the sound, but not so much that the buyer will be averse to upgrading the source in the future, probably with a combination of a digital server and a DAC.

 

[mrt2]

As we all know there are many ways to build a system. It may just be a very personnal choice but mine is to go source first and that means the tt deck is more important than the arm which is more important than the cartridge and so on... But that's me!

I think the answer to the question may also depend whether you are talking about an analog source or a digital source.

Turntables are very mature technology. Though small improvements are still possible, a high end table is a long term investment, and is not likely to become obsolete. Also, because of the nature of turntables, anything that goes wrong with a table is capable of being fixed.

By contrast, digital is still a moving target, and the ability to find replacement parts for old broken cd players is a question in my mind. I do not accept as a given that even very expensive cd players will be able to be repaired in 20 or 30 years. In fact, it is possible that the more expensive the player, the less likely it will be to repair it as there will be fewer models around to cannibalize parts from.

With this in mind, I could see an experienced audiophile building a system around a turntable first, buying a statement product on the theory that this will be the last turntable he or she ever needs to buy. On the other hand, that same person might prefer to build a digital based system on speakers, on the theory that the source will change in a few years, to either Blu Ray, Server/Dac, or even high quality streaming audio.

 

[dogscanskate]

Cartridges need to be replaced in turntable systems. They last so many hours and a top flight cartridge is getting past the 10K$ mark ! If your laser assembly dies, getting it fixed will be a bitch just as replacing an expensive cartridge is.

All these new technologies coming from the digital realm will not endanger a cdp's place in a kit if you own many cd's. Either you sell them or keep a cdp in your component rack. This kinda happened to vinyl in the 80's.

At least we still have more options for source and source material coming our way. I bet it won't be any cheaper either, the manufacturers will find ways of making it expensive I guess.

 

[Ron Pilgrim]

Source is the most important part of any system. If you play a decent source through mediocre speakers, the result will probably not be considered hi quality, but it'll definitely sound better than a lousy source played through good speakers.

 

[mrt2]

Cartridges need to be replaced in turntable systems. They last so many hours and a top flight cartridge is getting past the 10K$ mark ! If your laser assembly dies, getting it fixed will be a bitch just as replacing an expensive cartridge is.

All these new technologies coming from the digital realm will not endanger a cdp's place in a kit if you own many cd's. Either you sell them or keep a cdp in your component rack. This kinda happened to vinyl in the 80's.

Cartridges are a fact of life for vinyl, for sure.

As for new digital technologies, I thought I read about server based systems where you basically rip all your cds to the server, and they actually sound better in that mode than using it as a cd player. I just recently made a committment to cds with a new cd player, as these servers are expensive, but I wouldn't rule out such a system in the future, one that may be capable of handling everything from cds to SACDs to Blu Ray and 24/96 downloads. If they can get the interface right, this may be the way to go.

 

[MadBrewer]

The foundation of a good system is its ability to extract the signal from the disc (cd/lp). You retrieve "music" from the disc and any error in extraction goes down the line amplified and feeding your speakers. If the source is veiled, the instruments muddied up and so on, wonderful speakers will sound simply awful because they are in fact reproducing these errors correctly. They can only be as good as what is feeding them and "them" means the source material, the source, phono preamplifier, preamplifier and amplifier. The source component is the "foundation" of a good system no matter if you think this is marketing gibberish. If you want to build a system that is musically involving, you start at the beginning and give yourself a better chance of attaining your goal.

Thank you Dog,...
The original question was;
Is the the orginal signal the most important source, answer is;

YES

The guy is only asking a simple question,.....

I'll spend "X-$" on to making that signal the best I can afford but,
I've got to have a good signal to play with,
let my $200-$20,000 amp set up deal with it,
if I've got a "bad recording", it will ony sound a "bit better" on GREAT SPEAKERS,....

your; receiver/amp/pre-amp, will only amp/process it the signal it receives,
if it's bad,.....what do expect to come out,....

 

[mrt2]

Source is the most important part of any system. If you play a decent source through mediocre speakers, the result will probably not be considered hi quality, but it'll definitely sound better than a lousy source played through good speakers.

But put some well matched speakers with a good amp and a budget source that punches above its weight and you have a system that will outperform either of your hypothetical systems.

 

[Benzlo]

I've been through at least 15 pairs of speakers, 5 preamps, 5 turntables, 4 CD players, and 4 preamps in the last three years through building various vintage and newer critical-listening systems.

Everything will make a difference. However, it has been my experience that nothing will make as big of a difference in over all sound quality as the speakers.

Finding one good component is not a challenge. Finding a group of components that truly complement eachother is. Put a high-quality "bright" amp on a high-quality pair of "bright" speakers and you will have spent a lot of money on a system that still sounds harsh and unenjoyable.

 

[mrt2]

The foundation of a good system is its ability to extract the signal from the disc (cd/lp). You retrieve "music" from the disc and any error in extraction goes down the line amplified and feeding your speakers. If the source is veiled, the instruments muddied up and so on, wonderful speakers will sound simply awful because they are in fact reproducing these errors correctly. They can only be as good as what is feeding them and "them" means the source material, the source, phono preamplifier, preamplifier and amplifier. The source component is the "foundation" of a good system no matter if you think this is marketing gibberish. If you want to build a system that is musically involving, you start at the beginning and give yourself a better chance of attaining your goal.

Thank you Dog,...
The original question was;
Is the the orginal signal the most important source, answer is;

YES

The guy is only asking a simple question,.....

I'll spend "X-$" on to making that signal the best I can afford but,
I've got to have a good signal to play with,
let my $200-$20,000 amp set up deal with it,
if I've got a "bad recording", it will ony sound a "bit better" on GREAT SPEAKERS,....

your; receiver/amp/pre-amp, will only amp/process it the signal it receives,
if it's bad,.....what do expect to come out,....

:sigh: Everybody seems to envision a cheap, $50 dvd player as a digital source, driving $20k worth of monoblocks and some Wilson Watt puppies.

We are not talking bad or cheap sources here, but what is most important. Once you get to a certain level of quality, differences in digital sources will be subtle, and the cost of small sonic upgrades will be large. All things being equal in a digital based system, the most important thing is to find speakers that match the room, amp/preamp that is a good match with the speakers, and a quality digital source. Past a certain price point, I will stick with a formula that would budget 3/4 of the budget to amplification and speakers (45% for speakers, 30% for amp) with the remaining 1/4 of the budget for source.