Speaker quality

[acorn]

Hi all

Would the panel agree that the loudspeakers are a major factor in the sound quality we obtain and are often the weakest link in the chain regardless of what we spend on our other equipment.

Regards Acorn

[John T]

Rubbish in - Rubbish out !

[pre65]

Hi-well when i first got into hi-fi Linn were saying that the source was the most inportant part because you can only loose as the signal goes through the system,so no matter how good the speaker is it can only show whats there.
i think today its about "synergie" and having a well matched system,with each piece playing its part.how often have we heard reviewers say of a test system that the total quality was more than the sum of the individual parts ie SYNERGIE.
the trouble with having a system in synergie comes when you need (want ?) to upgrade,because changing one part can,and often does,upset the balance.
and then we struggle to find it again,but hopefully at a higher level (and financially poorer).
so Ivan whatsisname of Linn was not wrong all those years ago.

Philip

[Paul Barker]

Rubbish out, rubbish sound regardless of in quality. Rubbish in rubbish sound regardless of out quality. Quality out quality in rubbish sound if amplification rubbish.

It's all rubbish if anything is rubbish.

[Greg.]

Yes, but it's not as simple as that and certainly not as Ivor T would have us believe. Take a modest source and feed the signal to the rest of the system and you get what you hear. Follow the Linn approach and when you want to upgrade, you start looking at the source first. However, I and countless others have prooved to ourselves that if you take an alternative approach and say, upgrade your amplification, all of a sudden you get better sound with more detail. So the source has been doing a good job all along, but the standard of the previous amp was blocking and preventing the extracted information being revealed. The same effect can be found with speakers. That doesn't mean that there is no point in upgrading a source. The whole issue is relative and certainly, synergy is a major factor. We've had this discussion before on the old WAD forum and there are a variety of opinions. Some consider the speakers to be the most influencial component. In my experience, I've found changes in the amplification stage has always made the biggest difference, but YMMV. Every component in a system plays its part right down to your cables etc. To support my opinion, when James D demonstrates his excellent kit, he uses a cheap portable CD spinner

Best wishes,

Greg

PS I've just read Paul's post above. I think we're saying the same thing. His version just has more style ;-)

[Paul Barker]

Yes, basically we are, the main thrust I have experienced is that synergy is most important, but that certain items at any stage in the system are so much better that they take hold of the rest and make it all sound marvelous.

Now there will be some dissenting voices but I would propose as exmples,

Nick's front end, my 212 at it's best, Quad 63's. You can put them into any system and get massive improvements.

The most controvertial would be 63's, many people don't like them.

[James D]

It's not that I don't like 63s - its just that their limitations get in the way of my enjoying the music in a way that the Quasars limitations don't...

My little CD spinner cost me $30!!! How dare you call it cheap!!! It costs the right amount of money for what it is. It's just that almost all other CD spinners are grossly overpriced...

James

[petercom]

Originally Posted by acorn

Hi all

Would the panel agree that the loudspeakers are a major factor in the sound quality we obtain and are often the weakest link in the chain regardless of what we spend on our other equipment.

Regards Acorn

When you've got everything else right - the speakers are the weakest link!

Speakers have the worst frequency response and the poorest distortion figures of any part of the chain. However it is possible to design speakers that successfully balance tonal and distortion factors well enough that you can hear through them exceedingly well. At that point the source and amplification become incredibly important.

You can either design speakers to have enough 'character' that they make a nice noise on their own and are relatively independant of partnering equipment, or you can design for transparency and freedom from character (coloration) so that they are entirely dependant on the source equipment. Most commercial speakers are designed along the former concept as the manufacturer wants the speakers to be 'impressive' no matter what equipment they are being demonstrated with. The problem with designing a 'transparent' speaker is that you will get some people liking them - and a lot of people not liking them as their partnering equipment is poor.

We've gone through this exercise with the WD25 speakers many times, at the phono shoot out for example. On Tuesday I took them down to Hi-Fi World for review. Noel Keywood was astonished how accurate the measurements were - David Price was astonished how revealing they were, both of source equipment (they were using the new Quad KT88 amps) and of what was on the CDs. The good measurements and subjective transparency were achieved by months of listening and refinining until the speakers sounded like a window into the source. To do this we used a variety of amplifiers etc., both solid state and valve, and both CD and vinyl and FM as source material with choral, instrumental, classical, jazz and rock genres.

Having said that we can always 'improve' on speakers and turntables - relatively easily - by refining the concept and design approach. It is sometimes difficult to 'improve' on a really good CD player or amplifier in the same way.

[steve s]

I agree with most of the comments so far,

my view is that speakers and amplifiers go togther.. or should match. its no use having revealing speakers and using push pull amps... but thats my opinion... and many would not agree..
many want different things from a system , a thickened up bass, frequency extremes etc, nothing wrong in that..
I look for fine detail and realism in the music.frequency extremes are not that important to me...but i would like to have them..

the sources are important, but speakers are the least efficient part of the system and that is where most of the signal is lost.. some quotes are as low as 5% efficiency.. so how much of the signal is being lost?
and how can you hope to reproduce the fine detail with that loss of signal

at the phono meet Peters wd 25's showed quite well how speakers can show up the the differences in source equipment very well, and amplifeirs even more so..
but i went home feeling i had been listening the the equipment rather than the music... compared to what i'm used to... there was alot missing.. even if paul doesn't like the top end of my lowthers...i've lived with them for over 5 years now. and although i have doubts, i have not found any i would swap them for... yet

I had heard that things improved on the sunday

so my feeling is any really good system is wasted on normal low efficiency speakers.. i think thorstan wrote that same a few months ago

so speakers are the most important part of the kit in my books
but they need a good amp.. and like james any old cd player will do..
I'll now run for cover.....
steve

[The Shadow]

Let's look at the source first philosophy in its absolute fundamental state.




Buy turntable amp speakers - spend money

Improve turntable power supply - spend lots of money

Improve arm - spend lots of money

Improve cartridge - spend lots of money

Improve Phono Stage - spend lots of money

Improve turntable support structure - spend lots of money

Buy pre/power combo - spend lots of money

Improve preamp power supply - spend lots of money

Buy bigger power amp - spend lots of money

Improve speakers - spend lots of money

Biwire Speakers and rest of system with trick cables - spend lots of money

Buy another big power amp to bi amp speakers -spend lots of money

Buy electronic crossover with trick power supply to go active - spend lots of money

You are now showing up the cartridge you thought was the bees knees so upgrade the cartridge - spend lots of money

Put a CD spinner into your system. It needs to be really expensive with a seperate DAC. Anything less would not do now your system is so highly tuned - spend lots of money


Put CD into drawer, hit play. Run from room screaming with ears bleeding.

Buy huge valve amp to tame the CDs (Audio Research or similar) - spend lots of money.

Realise that the whole system now sounds like utter c**p

Import bass traps from the USA and start sticking egg boxes all over the living room. Nail your wife's best Persian rug to the wall, Oh Dear!

Desperately start changing bits of the system willy nilly - spend even more money.

Give up and sell the lot at a huge loss.

Start your monthly alimony payments

Meanwhile your local dealers send a postcard from Rio with a personal thankyou for paying for their holidays for the next ten years with the profit they have made out of mugs like you.

Believe it or not this is what you were expected to do to reach hi-fi nirvana. The mags pushed it for all they were worth

The fundamentalist version of the source first philosophy was IMO nothing more than a clever little ruse thought up by some sections of the industry to prise the maximum possible money from enthusiasts before they got rumbled... which of course they eventually did.

I'm now a fully paid up member of the balanced approach school of thought.