System Synergy Equation

[SwedishChef]

I haven't posted for quite a while, but I felt the need to speak up about some censorship that I witnessed today, something that continues to deteriorate the fellowship in the Audiophile Community.

Recently somebody posted on social media yesterday about System Synergy, and wanted a very simple explanation to exactly what it was.

A gentleman named Joseph posted his equation for "Synergy" that I never seen before. I thought it was extremely accurate. If you're on AudioKarma Joseph Thompson, and you're reading this post, thank you!

The comment containing his formula, as well as all the information located under the comment has now disappeared from Audiophiles NA for whatever reason. Since I can no longer find it, I wanted to share some of this information with you.

Joseph's equation for Stereo System Synergy was the following:
The sum of all Stereo System Components + The sum of all Audio Room Acoustic Treatments = SYNERGY

Not sure if he used AI or came up with that on his own?

The conversation went absolutely sideways under his equation comment because he started to discuss how some Audiophiles will use different methods to calculate their sum in the equation. I'm going to speculate the reason that his comment was removed was because he was trying to level a playing field where Audiophiles have been bumping heads for decades. Joseph said that some Audiophiles take room measurements and he indicated that "Taking Measurements" can actually be a hobby itself within the Audio Hobby. Agreed!
Then he started talking about the group of audiophiles that do not take normal room measurements to make any of their upgrade decisions, so naturally some people started lashing out.

He said there are Audiophiles that measure by listening and feeling. Also True!
Then he said these same Audiophiles will often spend several weeks to even several months with a single stereo system component, just to discern if any improvements were made.
This is exactly what I do!
It was interesting to read through, because whenever he was attacked by someone, he diffused the attacker with logic peacefully.

I happen to be one of the people that do use prolonged discernment and deep contemplation as my main testing method. I'm going to speculate that somebody disagreed with this, so his comment was removed.

In my opinion one method is really not better than another. Something can look extremely well on paper, and sound phenomenal. But all of us know that something that tests extremely well can also be lacking. Everyone here knows that a system can be sterile, have no real life presence, have no separation of instruments, even though it tested well. So I can't argue with the logic behind not wanting to enjoy a system that you dislike the sound of.

This guy was trying to calmly explain to people exactly why some of us rely solely on our ears, our personal feelings, and why we strategically upgrade our system based on hearing and feelings.

Is it wrong to calculate the sum in his synergy equation with your hearing and personal feelings?

I don't think so.

Are we actually going to deny people use of the word "synergy" because of how they make upgrade decisions?

That would be asinine.

Joseph said the most fascinating part about the people that do not measure, is they are not fans of A/B testing!
Is this true?
He said these individuals will typically say that ABX testing doesn't allow the human brain enough time to reset.
That kind of makes sense.to me.
Sometimes I will spend several months to a year with a single component before I discern if it will stick around.

Which brings me to the last part of this guys method to upgrade his components that he called an "If-Then Statement Method"
( What a Computer Nerd )
He said and I quote "If he feels the component makes an improvement, then it stays." Then he added "If he feels that no improvements were made after careful discernment, then it goes."

It was an interesting comment thread to say the least. He was starting to talk about Synergy between different circuits. He was using examples like why some people will mix tube preamps with solid state amps for the sound they desire.
He said that synergy is exactly why Hybrid Tube Amplifiers are so popular today. Mixing tubes preamps with class D amps to make a hybrid integrated. It was interesting stuff.

Seems like as soon as somebody starts talking about common ground for audiophiles, and even gets people to start to agree on something, DELETE!
Why?
I always feel like people are trying to keep us divided in the hobby.

I started thinking about some of these things and I have to say that I mostly agree with him. Hybrid tube integrated amplifiers would not exist if synergy wasn't a real thing. He also said that synergy is why so many Audiophiles step into other areas like DIY building their own HI-FI gear.
That seems accurate!

 

[Natasha Bell]

I haven't posted for quite a while, but I felt the need to speak up about some censorship that I witnessed today, something that continues to deteriorate the fellowship in the Audiophile Community.

Recently somebody posted on social media yesterday about System Synergy, and wanted a very simple explanation to exactly what it was.

A gentleman named Joseph posted his equation for "Synergy" that I never seen before. I thought it was extremely accurate. If you're on AudioKarma Joseph Thompson, and you're reading this post, thank you!

The comment containing his formula, as well as all the information located under the comment has now disappeared from Audiophiles NA for whatever reason. Since I can no longer find it, I wanted to share some of this information with you.

Joseph's equation for Stereo System Synergy was the following:
The sum of all Stereo System Components + The sum of all Audio Room Acoustic Treatments = SYNERGY

Not sure if he used AI or came up with that on his own?

The conversation went absolutely sideways under his equation comment because he started to discuss how some Audiophiles will use different methods to calculate their sum in the equation. I'm going to speculate the reason that his comment was removed was because he was trying to level a playing field where Audiophiles have been bumping heads for decades. Joseph said that some Audiophiles take room measurements and he indicated that "Taking Measurements" can actually be a hobby itself within the Audio Hobby. Agreed!
Then he started talking about the group of audiophiles that do not take normal room measurements to make any of their upgrade decisions, so naturally some people started lashing out.

He said there are Audiophiles that measure by listening and feeling. Also True!
Then he said these same Audiophiles will often spend several weeks to even several months with a single stereo system component, just to discern if any improvements were made.
This is exactly what I do!
It was interesting to read through, because whenever he was attacked by someone, he diffused the attacker with logic peacefully.

I happen to be one of the people that do use prolonged discernment and deep contemplation as my main testing method. I'm going to speculate that somebody disagreed with this, so his comment was removed.

In my opinion one method is really not better than another. Something can look extremely well on paper, and sound phenomenal. But all of us know that something that tests extremely well can also be lacking. Everyone here knows that a system can be sterile, have no real life presence, have no separation of instruments, even though it tested well. So I can't argue with the logic behind not wanting to enjoy a system that you dislike the sound of.

This guy was trying to calmly explain to people exactly why some of us rely solely on our ears, our personal feelings, and why we strategically upgrade our system based on hearing and feelings.

Is it wrong to calculate the sum in his synergy equation with your hearing and personal feelings?

I don't think so.

Are we actually going to deny people use of the word "synergy" because of how they make upgrade decisions?

That would be asinine.

Joseph said the most fascinating part about the people that do not measure, is they are not fans of A/B testing!
Is this true?
He said these individuals will typically say that ABX testing doesn't allow the human brain enough time to reset.
That kind of makes sense.to me.
Sometimes I will spend several months to a year with a single component before I discern if it will stick around.

Which brings me to the last part of this guys method to upgrade his components that he called an "If-Then Statement Method"
( What a Computer Nerd )
He said and I quote "If he feels the component makes an improvement, then it stays." Then he added "If he feels that no improvements were made after careful discernment, then it goes."

It was an interesting comment thread to say the least. He was starting to talk about Synergy between different circuits. He was using examples like why some people will mix tube preamps with solid state amps for the sound they desire.
He said that synergy is exactly why Hybrid Tube Amplifiers are so popular today. Mixing tubes preamps with class D amps to make a hybrid integrated. It was interesting stuff.

Seems like as soon as somebody starts talking about common ground for audiophiles, and even gets people to start to agree on something, DELETE!
Why?
I always feel like people are trying to keep us divided in the hobby.

I started thinking about some of these things and I have to say that I mostly agree with him. Hybrid tube integrated amplifiers would not exist if synergy wasn't a real thing. He also said that synergy is why so many Audiophiles step into other areas like DIY building their own HI-FI gear.
That seems accurate!

It is not at all wrong to do those calculations. Personally, I really dislike the term "synergy", as it is not descriptive enough. "Harmony" or "Harmonious" I think is much better. Each individual has to come to his/her own conclusion as to what sounds good, or not. There are only a very few "testers" that I listen to; these will always say that things are subjective. They can spend weeks or months with a product, singing its praises, and I still may not enjoy it.

There is a rule-of-thumb when putting together a system with new components:
For any given budget:
25% - amplification (preamp / poweramp / integrated / receiver)
25% - speakers
25% - source components (CD player / turntable)
25% - cabling and surge suppression.

You can fudge the percentages a bit with the latter two, perhaps 35%/15%, but you should never fudge the percentage with the first two.

 

[SwedishChef]

It is not at all wrong to do those calculations. Personally, I really dislike the term "synergy", as it is not descriptive enough. "Harmony" or "Harmonious" I think is much better. Each individual has to come to his/her own conclusion as to what sounds good, or not. There are only a very few "testers" that I listen to; these will always say that things are subjective. They can spend weeks or months with a product, singing its praises, and I still may not enjoy it.

There is a rule-of-thumb when putting together a system with new components:
For any given budget:
25% - amplification (preamp / poweramp / integrated / receiver)
25% - speakers
25% - source components (CD player / turntable)
25% - cabling and surge suppression.

You can fudge the percentages a bit with the latter two, perhaps 35%/15%, but you should never fudge the percentage with the first two.

Using "harmonious" is definitely a great alternative. In fact I might even replace synergy with harmonious from now on when I'm speaking to fellow enthusiasts just so people don't ask me "What the heck is synergy?"
You are not the only person that really dislikes certain words in our hobby. For example, I do know an enthusiast that hates the word "audiophile" because of certain other words that unfortunately end in "phile".

I like how your rule of thumb is evenly spread out. I almost always play catch-up after I spend entirely too much of the budget.
My main system was not put together that way at all for example. Almost 70% of my budget went towards the speakers, and I had to play catch-up with other components. I'm building an amplifier for my main system though, the build cost is nearly equivalent to the speaker cost now.

 

[Katalyst]

It was interesting to read through, because whenever he was attacked by someone, he diffused the attacker with logic peacefully.

This is the way civilized people should be. Sad it is the exception instead of the norm.

 

[Mike_S]

For me synergy does not have a price. Pieces either work with each other, or they do not. That should be everyone's goal, to find components that work well with each other. When this happens it can be magical. Even a low budget system can sound good if it's in synergy.

Like Klipsch Heritage speakers with SET amps, they just work. It's like PB&J, don't mess with it, just enjoy it.

On my system, 1/3rd on speakers, 1/3rd on pre & power amp, last 1/3rd on everything else.

 

[Mr Boochie]

Synergy means the whole is greater than the sum of the parts — a teamwork sort of thing.

1 + 1 > 2.

 

[twiiii]

Back when I started in the early 60's 33 to 50 % was devoted to speakers, 25 for the source and the remaining on amplification. Back then TT's were considered to be the source. We didn't have stereo FM yet, and tape machines were still not practical because of changes from staggered heads to 2 trk. 1/4 trk stereo was just starting. It wasn't until companies from the Orient started making affordable machines that tape was added to the mix. I still think Speakers deserve 50% of the investment even today. With everyone streaming if you don't include the phone or iPad which are mostly used for other applications I feel 50% for speakers 25 to 33% for amplification and the remaining for the DAC or an advanced Blu ray receiver.

Even with everything I know about LPs and and CD's I wouldn't start with them. I would be more concerned about training myself to know what great sound is as presented by acoustic instruments that aren't or very minimally amplified for each instrument such as bass violin. Acoustic Guitars should be known before getting involved with electric ones for example. Learning to recognized the sound of an acoustic space the concert is being given in is very important, too. So go to clubs and listen to Jazz groups, go to local colleges and listen to recitals and concerts given. If you have a Symphony in town attend concerts. Good symphonic wind bands can be a source for leaning as well as all brass groups. I was fortunate to live near a large metro area and attended as many events as practical. Buy recordings if available of the groups. But remember the recordings will always sound different because of the different acoustic spaces where the recordings were made. But that will help you to learn about spaces, too. After a time and you are serious in your efforts then you will be able to separate good recordings from less so ones and sound systems too.

 

[toddalin]

There is a rule-of-thumb when putting together a system with new components:
For any given budget:
25% - amplification (preamp / poweramp / integrated / receiver)
25% - speakers
25% - source components (CD player / turntable)
25% - cabling and surge suppression.

You can fudge the percentages a bit with the latter two, perhaps 35%/15%, but you should never fudge the percentage with the first two.

The problem here is that when it actually comes to the actual sound (ignoring room treatment), it is more like:
<3% - amplification
>90% - speakers
<5% - source components
<2% - cabling and surge suppression

 

[SwedishChef]

I bought the best possible speakers that I could afford for my main system, then I played catch up with every other area. We have four different 2CH systems here, so most people wouldn't agree with any of my methods.

The main reason that I DIY build gear, and the main reason that I use a ton of clone preamps and clone power amplifiers, is so I can go nuts and get carried away with purchases like the speakers. I even love AliExpress for cables. Not only can I find remarkable cables on AliExpress, but I can buy extraordinary materials to build my own cables there.

While some might have a serious melt down over this next part of my comment ... oh well, I'm the guy that will hook a $1600 DartZeel Clone amplifier to speakers that cost 10X more than the amplifier. I feel the need to quote Phil Collins "I don't care no more, I don't care what you say, We never played by the same rules anyway."
It's all about getting the best possible sound with the budget that I have.

I'm also the "I will just buy the room treatments later" guy. So literally not a single dime of the initial budget goes towards room treatments. Bad habit? Likely so, but I would rather have all the gear that I want first, and then piece the room treatments together over the next year with an entirely new budget lol.

 

[Natasha Bell]

The problem here is that when it actually comes to the actual sound (ignoring room treatment), it is more like:
<3% - amplification
>90% - speakers
<5% - source components
<2% - cabling and surge suppression

Well, that is an opinion... an opinion that in a roundabout way I used to share. I was convinced of it, until I was proven utterly wrong... in fact, considering the ratios, I find it rather short sighted. Yet, to each their own, and I am sure you will have plenty of folks here that will laud your formula. I certainly won't because I know better.

 

[toddalin]

Well, that is an opinion... an opinion that in a roundabout way I used to share. I was convinced of it, until I was proven utterly wrong... in fact, considering the ratios, I find it rather short sighted. Yet, to each their own, and I am sure you will have plenty of folks here that will laud your formula. I certainly won't because I know better.

Have you ever looked at the frequency response of a piece of electronic gear as compared to that of a speaker? While quality electronics remain relatively smooth regardless of maker or model (<+-1 dB across the audio range), speakers are all over the place and price seems to have little bearing.

And knowing better, your formula would be???

 

[melofelo]

Best Source you can afford, 30-50 clean watts and speakers that sound balanced in your room. That might be a reasonable starting point...and sometimes the most cost effective in the long run. Think of each component beyond the actual media itself as a sheet of glass..the cleaner each pane of glass ,the clearer your perception of the recorded material. Speakers are a fussy compromise however, as their inherent frequency curve, their physical size, their design, how many drivers they use and how they interact with your listening space tends to be very subjective.

 

[bluesky]

For me ...

Synergy is the entire 'stereo system', ALL the components, TT rack, speaker stands, cables - EVERYTHING, complementing each other, perfectly in unison, and working together as one, producing an outstanding, ' real, honest, & lifelike ' presentation. The system has the ' MAGIC!! '.

When you hear it ~ you will know it immediately. You think: " Wow!! That's it!!!! "
You've found the ' Magic ', it's happened, & you 'got it' right. That's the way it sounds. As Right as rain.

And it doesn't have to be expensive gear - it just has to be 'the right gear working in concert together' to produce outstanding lifelike results. You'll 'feel it & hear it'. It's a WoW 'That's It' moment. Nothing to think about.

Like all of us, I've had a lot of CD players over the years. My last one was a NAD which I had for 10 years. I really did like it, liked the way it sounded, but it crashed out hard. So I just bought a super quiet running, not a fingerprint on it, like new, regular (I guess) Sony DVD/CD player from the GW for $7 just to hear my CDs, no remote. I plugged it in and I was 'absolutely astonished' by the sound coming out of my speakers!! It sounds wonderful, real, & lifelike ~ Synergy.
The M- remote cost me $17 on eBay.

Also, the same exact 'feeling' came over me the first time I ever used a pair of 1980 Sansui 'High Efficiency' PS-107C speaker cables for the first time. It was another 'Immediate WoW moment'. Are there better speaker cables out there?, of course there are... but not for me - these 107Cs are PERFECT PERFECT right!
I like them so much that I found and bought another NOS pair as a backup. My speaker cable search is over - forever.

IF 'room treatments' make everything sound even better - Synergy with the room - Perfect!!
I personally just set up my gear and that's it, done with it, works for me just fine.
But I'm sure it would even be better to set the room up right.

Synergy - when you 'hear it & feel it', you'll know it - immediately. It's got the magic!!

 

[Thunderbox]

It is not at all wrong to do those calculations. Personally, I really dislike the term "synergy", as it is not descriptive enough. "Harmony" or "Harmonious" I think is much better. Each individual has to come to his/her own conclusion as to what sounds good, or not. There are only a very few "testers" that I listen to; these will always say that things are subjective. They can spend weeks or months with a product, singing its praises, and I still may not enjoy it.

There is a rule-of-thumb when putting together a system with new components:
For any given budget:
25% - amplification (preamp / poweramp / integrated / receiver)
25% - speakers
25% - source components (CD player / turntable)
25% - cabling and surge suppression.

You can fudge the percentages a bit with the latter two, perhaps 35%/15%, but you should never fudge the percentage with the first two.

Spending lots of money on cables does nothing for your sound. Before anyone jumps in and says, it does make a difference, please supply me with a scientific measurement proving such.

 

[toddalin]

Just a CD played on an Oppo-95 ($300 used) through a Yamaha RX-Z9 RECEIVER ($4,050 new in 2003 now with >35,000 hours) through the two Merman speakers that I designed and assembled, including crossovers (~$1,600).

No fancy wires are used. I think the cable between the CD and Yamaha is an old low end Cardas purchased from eBay and the speakers are connected with differing lengths of 14 gauge "speaker wire." No eq or room correction, either electronic or physical, is used. And yes, you certainly hear the room.

Synergy??? Right! Speakers are almost EVERYTHING! Bring on those six figure systems!

 

[twiiii]

Consider my Stereo system if I had payed list price with maybe a 15 % discount that is pretty common now days.

2 Mcintosh XRT 28's $20,500
2 Mcintosh Mc 830's $ 7,750
1 Mcintosh C-34 V $ 2.450 pre-owned
1 Thorens TD 125 with Rabco arm $ 495 employee discount
1 Dynavector xx-2 MK II $ 1,850 show special
1 Mcintosh MQ 107 $ 395 pre-owned
Shipping over the years $ 1200
1 Mcintosh MP 100 1650
1 Mcintosh MB 25 300 with trade in
1 Mcintosh MR 80 $ 1250 engineering 50% discount from Mcintosh.


Total $ 36,840.


What did I actually pay with trade in of a pre-amp and waiting 10 years to buy the speakers. . $21,540. give or take a few dollars. So if you do your research you can save as much as I did. But I pretty much followed the 50/25/25 rules from the 60's. I thought about buying a new SL 1300 G but with considerable effort was able to return my Rabco and TD 125 to like new condition so I didn't have spend additional monies . I didn't includer all the tape machines as they are now gone. There is a CD player recorder I should have included that I picked up for under $75.00, A 3bx for $100, and a SAE Equalizer I bought from a friend for nothing as I refoamed all of is ML-1's and set up his TD 121 for playing 78's and his TD 125 for 33's and 45's both using SME arms and SC 35 for the 78's and a Ortofon SL15 MK II with external passive SUT for his 33's and 45's. I traded a bunch of Condenser mics and a collectors item tube Ampex Mixer for my pre-owned MCD 550 including a trade in of my MVP 861. So I didn't include that cost either in the list.

 

[Akustic]

He sounds like a Perceptive man .. and thanks for the post ..

Some of us us will forever use and trust our ear ... It is the point of the exercise after all.
I started messing with audio gear when I was 11 and was moving into scraping my pennies to enjoy higher end separates by age 18 ..
50 years ago .. Read every audio publication I could get my hands on .. and went into every audio store daily...
Built the pieces and improved what I had ..

Was just thinking just the other day that most of the contentious subjects in this hobby were brought up 50 years ago..
We're still arguing ..And nobody is more right today than they were then .. some of the explanations and reasons why are bit more fleshed out ...
There is no I'm right, You're wrong .. This is better, That's worse

Just "Hey that sounds better.."
It is a system and within that system Synergy can be created ..

Enjoy the Music.

 

[motorstereo]

Spending lots of money on cables does nothing for your sound. Before anyone jumps in and says, it does make a difference, please supply me with a scientific measurement proving such.

There's several videos of measurements on shunyata cables showing noise reduction. I'm not going to derail the thread topic so you can google it and see for yourself. One particular one that comes to mind done in a recording studio......."a 10 db reduction in the noise floor across all frequencies".

 

[jayvis]

Consider my Stereo system if I had payed list price with maybe a 15 % discount that is pretty common now days.

That's not common now days on new McIntosh equipment unless it's a demo unit or discontinued model. 10% might be possible on a multiple component purchase.

 

[Gigantic]

It is not at all wrong to do those calculations. Personally, I really dislike the term "synergy", as it is not descriptive enough. "Harmony" or "Harmonious" I think is much better. Each individual has to come to his/her own conclusion as to what sounds good, or not. There are only a very few "testers" that I listen to; these will always say that things are subjective. They can spend weeks or months with a product, singing its praises, and I still may not enjoy it.

There is a rule-of-thumb when putting together a system with new components:
For any given budget:
25% - amplification (preamp / poweramp / integrated / receiver)
25% - speakers
25% - source components (CD player / turntable)
25% - cabling and surge suppression.

You can fudge the percentages a bit with the latter two, perhaps 35%/15%, but you should never fudge the percentage with the first two.

The problem here is that when it actually comes to the actual sound (ignoring room treatment), it is more like:
<3% - amplification
>90% - speakers
<5% - source components
<2% - cabling and surge suppression

I think for me, it's closer to 65% speakers, 15% amps 14% sources, 3% room, 2% accessories and 1% cables. That said, I've DIY-ed a lot of my setup, so there's a gap between cost and value in some instances.