Few years ago on a french forum (audioatrium) i did a survey among members, asking to distribute ''points'' on each and every components that produce the sound in a sound system (including the recording), just to see what people consider the most important...
Results were very interesting. Here is the average scores given by the (audiophile) members:
SPEAKERS : 22,28 %
SOURCE (RECORDING) : 21,83 %
ROOM (ACOUSTIC) : 15,68 %
SOURCE (PLAYER) : 9,68 %
AMPLIFICATION : 8,43 %
PRE-AMPLIFICATION : 8,35 %
SOURCE (MEDIA): 7,71 %
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM : 2,31 %
CABLES (SIGNAL/SPEAKERS) : 2,30 %
CABLES (POWER) : 1,46 %
-------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE: These % takes into consideration the potential impact amplitude for each. That is NOT applicable for defective or misused components (underpower amp, defective cable, damaged drivers, etc..).
So, please, don't say ''If you don't have cables your system won't turn on'' or anything like that...
That's strictly a question of potential amplitude: from an entry-level-barely-acceptable-solution to the highest quality possible. Anything defective or misused is discarted.
Feel free to copy-paste and to put your own %.
Just remember: it must give a total of 100% at the end, no more no less.
Results were very interesting. Here is the average scores given by the (audiophile) members:
SPEAKERS : 22,28 %
SOURCE (RECORDING) : 21,83 %
ROOM (ACOUSTIC) : 15,68 %
SOURCE (PLAYER) : 9,68 %
AMPLIFICATION : 8,43 %
PRE-AMPLIFICATION : 8,35 %
SOURCE (MEDIA): 7,71 %
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM : 2,31 %
CABLES (SIGNAL/SPEAKERS) : 2,30 %
CABLES (POWER) : 1,46 %
-------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE: These % takes into consideration the potential impact amplitude for each. That is NOT applicable for defective or misused components (underpower amp, defective cable, damaged drivers, etc..).
So, please, don't say ''If you don't have cables your system won't turn on'' or anything like that...
That's strictly a question of potential amplitude: from an entry-level-barely-acceptable-solution to the highest quality possible. Anything defective or misused is discarted.
Feel free to copy-paste and to put your own %.
Just remember: it must give a total of 100% at the end, no more no less.
Last edited:
As of today (it changed over the years!), my own evaluation would be:
SPEAKERS : 40 %
SOURCE (RECORDING) : 15 %
ROOM (ACOUSTIC) : 25 %
SOURCE (PLAYER) : 15 %
AMPLIFICATION : 0 %
PRE-AMPLIFICATION : 0 %
SOURCE (MEDIA)*: 5 %
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM : 0 %
CABLES (SIGNAL/SPEAKERS) : 0 %
CABLES (POWER) : 0 %
P.S. Source-Media is essentially the Digital v.s. Vinyl thing. I personnaly consider the Vinyl to get 0/5 and the Digital to get 5/5. Maybe reel-to-reel would get something in-between but i really don't know and i don't care much.
Every other media, i consider it as ''defective'' in my case ('80s tape cassette, wax cylinders, etc..).
SPEAKERS : 40 %
SOURCE (RECORDING) : 15 %
ROOM (ACOUSTIC) : 25 %
SOURCE (PLAYER) : 15 %
AMPLIFICATION : 0 %
PRE-AMPLIFICATION : 0 %
SOURCE (MEDIA)*: 5 %
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM : 0 %
CABLES (SIGNAL/SPEAKERS) : 0 %
CABLES (POWER) : 0 %
P.S. Source-Media is essentially the Digital v.s. Vinyl thing. I personnaly consider the Vinyl to get 0/5 and the Digital to get 5/5. Maybe reel-to-reel would get something in-between but i really don't know and i don't care much.
Every other media, i consider it as ''defective'' in my case ('80s tape cassette, wax cylinders, etc..).
Last edited:
I would go with:
Speakers (with suitable amplifiers) 50 %
Room (Acoustics) 50 %
There is now, no problem find accurate solutions for all the other categories.
**************************
It's hard for me to get a handle on 'Source (recording)'. Does that mean that one would select what they listen to based on technical quality rather than musical merit?
Speakers (with suitable amplifiers) 50 %
Room (Acoustics) 50 %
There is now, no problem find accurate solutions for all the other categories.
**************************
It's hard for me to get a handle on 'Source (recording)'. Does that mean that one would select what they listen to based on technical quality rather than musical merit?
Last edited:
Not easy to get a handle on the whole thing at first glance, i agree...
If you put ''0%'' (as you did for most of them) that means you consider it has no impact whatsoever, as long as it's in working state.
For the recording part, by exemple, it means you consider all recordings to be of equal quality. If you'd put 1% that means you consider the recording has extremely little to do with final audible result but still existant.
For the record (no pun intended) i had to put the Source-recording into the equation because it's a part of a whole music reproduction system, even though we have no control over it (besides the choices we can make).
Bottomline, it contains EVERYTHING a sound system needs in order to work. (ok, well, i didnt include the air needed for the acoustic impedence... but c'mon, who would listen to music in the space shuttle ??)
Bottomline, it contains EVERYTHING a sound system needs in order to work. (ok, well, i didnt include the air needed for the acoustic impedence... but c'mon, who would listen to music in the space shuttle ??)
More like the recording is what it is. You just have to deal with it.
For the other choices, they should have no impact, if you chose accurate quality components.
For the other choices, they should have no impact, if you chose accurate quality components.
Well, in the complete sound reproduction chain, the recording is fully a part of it. Whether or not we have control over it doesnt change that fact.
Let's take the pro sound guy case: he GOT control over that (recording), and still, he's using the reproduction system the same way we do.
or you could record your own voice and pass it through your system. See my point ?
#1-Recording, but for $5 you can download many great HD recordings, so this is a small problem. 10%
#2-Really #1 - Speakers, but you can build amazing speakers for $5,000, so this is an easy fix. 30%
#3-Really-Really #1 - Room. Expensive and often impossible to fix. Some speakers can significantly reduce room effects. 50%
#4-Amplification. Active crossover with amp/speaker required. Easy fix. 10%
SOURCE (PLAYER) : 0 %
PRE-AMPLIFICATION : 0 %
SOURCE (MEDIA)*: 0 %
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM : 0 %
CABLES (SIGNAL/SPEAKERS) : 0 %
CABLES (POWER) : 0 %
#2-Really #1 - Speakers, but you can build amazing speakers for $5,000, so this is an easy fix. 30%
#3-Really-Really #1 - Room. Expensive and often impossible to fix. Some speakers can significantly reduce room effects. 50%
#4-Amplification. Active crossover with amp/speaker required. Easy fix. 10%
SOURCE (PLAYER) : 0 %
PRE-AMPLIFICATION : 0 %
SOURCE (MEDIA)*: 0 %
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM : 0 %
CABLES (SIGNAL/SPEAKERS) : 0 %
CABLES (POWER) : 0 %
Well, I wouldn't diminish the impact of the other actual system components as much as Linesource, but wholehearted agree about the room.
Usually mostly beyond our control, and certainly troublesome and perhaps more costly than most "affordable" domestic systems to fully remedy. For many of us it's an "it is what it is, folks" situation - but I'll still take most rooms over the sometimes acclaimed "cure" of headphones. I've owned at least a dozen different pairs over the past 45 years, and as accurate and low in distortion as the better ones may measure, and as comfortable as they may be, just don't find them a natural experience.
Usually mostly beyond our control, and certainly troublesome and perhaps more costly than most "affordable" domestic systems to fully remedy. For many of us it's an "it is what it is, folks" situation - but I'll still take most rooms over the sometimes acclaimed "cure" of headphones. I've owned at least a dozen different pairs over the past 45 years, and as accurate and low in distortion as the better ones may measure, and as comfortable as they may be, just don't find them a natural experience.
My ranking would be something like:
Speakers - 51% * They make the sound.
Power amp - 19% * It has to get along well with the speakers.
Source (recording) - 12% * Where the sound originates.
Source (player) - 9% * To get the most of the recording.
Room - 8% * Could be in first place, but I'm limiting this to rooms in a typical residence.
All the rest - 1%
Speakers - 51% * They make the sound.
Power amp - 19% * It has to get along well with the speakers.
Source (recording) - 12% * Where the sound originates.
Source (player) - 9% * To get the most of the recording.
Room - 8% * Could be in first place, but I'm limiting this to rooms in a typical residence.
All the rest - 1%
I'd definately put a few percent on the amplification but with a few simple qualifiers...
Amps with issues are broken and don't count.
Amps that don't get along with speakers (but could) can be fixed either by conjugating the speaker impedance or by adjusting the response.
And amps that introduce distortion that complements the system are a story unto themselves and there is no category for this.
Amps with issues are broken and don't count.
Amps that don't get along with speakers (but could) can be fixed either by conjugating the speaker impedance or by adjusting the response.
And amps that introduce distortion that complements the system are a story unto themselves and there is no category for this.
AllenB - "complementary distortion" - could that definition include equalization that is often touted as a cure for room / speaker shortcomings?
I was going to discuss this somewhere else today.
I assume we all agree that speaker distortions can be layered like an onion (metaphorically translucent even, one being less/not obvious before the one above it is removed), proportional to the magnitude of the 'issue', and some more sensitive with frequency, some with level.
To define a question... 'Can one distortion adequately cover another?'. I'm not sure but I can think of a number of 'probably not' reasons.
Non-linear distortion as produced by an amp can surely override the harmonic spectrum of previous HD, probably making it less objectionable although it would have to build evenly with level or it's a waste of time. I feel OK with this based on my experiences.
On the other hand diffraction has both frequency and level dependence WRT sensitivity, so there is no reasonable conjugate. There might be brute force distraction but something tells me even HD is not capable of achieving that.
I used to dismiss diffraction and try to eliminate non-linear distortion. Now, all absolute HD levels mean to me is where my amp will clip and my cone will crash.
HD is something I might complement, diffraction I strive to get rid of.
I assume we all agree that speaker distortions can be layered like an onion (metaphorically translucent even, one being less/not obvious before the one above it is removed), proportional to the magnitude of the 'issue', and some more sensitive with frequency, some with level.
To define a question... 'Can one distortion adequately cover another?'. I'm not sure but I can think of a number of 'probably not' reasons.
Non-linear distortion as produced by an amp can surely override the harmonic spectrum of previous HD, probably making it less objectionable although it would have to build evenly with level or it's a waste of time. I feel OK with this based on my experiences.
On the other hand diffraction has both frequency and level dependence WRT sensitivity, so there is no reasonable conjugate. There might be brute force distraction but something tells me even HD is not capable of achieving that.
I used to dismiss diffraction and try to eliminate non-linear distortion. Now, all absolute HD levels mean to me is where my amp will clip and my cone will crash.
HD is something I might complement, diffraction I strive to get rid of.
No wonder the world of audio is so messed up.
The responses are illuminating, with regard to how people wire their minds. How closely the aspect of intelligence and hearing coincide and correlate. Not bookish/recall intelligence, mind you, but real intelligence. Cognitive function, which is not considered (for the most part) in what people perceive as academia.
That people fall into what they know and thrust into the world from that realm... and seldom consider a more open world; with responses and musing that goes beyond the rote and repeat.
The responses are illuminating, with regard to how people wire their minds. How closely the aspect of intelligence and hearing coincide and correlate. Not bookish/recall intelligence, mind you, but real intelligence. Cognitive function, which is not considered (for the most part) in what people perceive as academia.
That people fall into what they know and thrust into the world from that realm... and seldom consider a more open world; with responses and musing that goes beyond the rote and repeat.
Very much so, they should be included. No two minds and no two set of ears are built the same, nor wired the same.
The level of hearing skill and qualities varies on a bell curve that is as explicit and as varied as the bell curve of intelligence.
In some fundamental ways, it has nothing to do with the thread and in others it is the very heart of the thread and it's noted results.
Some think that intelligence needs to be curbed, taken to task,and cut down if it does not fit what they know and project.
If you can see the insanity of that argument, you can then hopefully see the argument against thinking, for example, that cables make no difference.
But this is not an argument thread, this is apparently abut the simple observation of how people weigh their thoughts on the various audio system components.
Last edited:
Hi Ken,
The ears cancel out of the equation.
If you hear the real thing - that is your reference
If you hear a reproduction of the event and it is indistinguishable from the "real thing", the reproduction is therefore 100% accurate. Defects in the reproduction subtract from the quality from your own internal reference, so if the highs are less, everyone who can hear those frequencies might describe the exact same thing.
See? A straw man, now you've seen one.
-Chris 🙂
The ears cancel out of the equation.
If you hear the real thing - that is your reference
If you hear a reproduction of the event and it is indistinguishable from the "real thing", the reproduction is therefore 100% accurate. Defects in the reproduction subtract from the quality from your own internal reference, so if the highs are less, everyone who can hear those frequencies might describe the exact same thing.
See? A straw man, now you've seen one.
-Chris 🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.