advertisement


Component contribution to sound

Can we all nod at someone saying: "It depends..."?

For the character of the sound, the single biggest contributor must surely be the room and speakers in combination - with the precedence being decided by what room and what sort of speakers. For example, if they are truly dreadful £100 built-in speakers on your old laptop, then the room won't matter so much. However, if the room is a 3 metercube and walled in marble, it may not matter much which large floor-stander you try.

Of course, all 'character' is ideally missing, and the less (of whatever sort) is covering up the music the better. In addition, no amount of character can add back any data lost already. That combination is surely why a chap called Tiefenbrun made a name demonstrating that spending on the front end made for less impressive hifi - but a lot more music.

Or we could start the debate by suggesting that the biggest effect can come from whatever is worst. Thus, if you spend £200 on all cables and supports, whatever rthe room and boxes, then choosing between a £50K system and a £100K system may be tricky.

Also, @John Phillips - I was told that line with reference to bagpipes, but it was by a non-Scot who had been known in his youth to play a cornet...
 
Last edited:
What's the matter Colin, does someone have a different opinion to you? Does the existence of their value system upset you? Does it make the funny feelings you're having go away if you're mean to them?

Thing is, no one with an objective viewpoint really cares what some random on the Internet thinks. That's the joy of liberation from the tyranny of second hand opinions and self appointed knowledge fonts.
 
RoA said:
This is how I would assess the different main links in the chain to contribute to sound in my systems. Feel free to disagree ... which will almost certainly happen!

Source Digital/DAC - 15%

Amplifier - 25%

Speakers - 40%

Room - 15%

Cables - 5%

Ear syringing, grid condition, mental wellbeing etc etc not taken into account. Add/delete at your pleasure ...
Click to expand...


Seems reasonable. The room matters less if an accurate signal is produced by the hifi. It matters a lot with a poor signal e.g. most ported speakers.

e.g. a top class musician playing a decent instrument will sound good in almost any acoustic environment.
 
Having done this for over four decades, I have two ratings:

Analogue (i.e. vinyl, cassettes, radio etc.)
  • Source: Up to 50% but notionally 30%
  • Amplification: Up to 10%
  • Loudspeakers: Up to 50% but notionally 30%
  • Room: Up to 50% but notionally 30%
  • Ancillaries (cables, stands etc.): Up to 5%
In summary, a roughly a third each for source, loudspeakers and room.

Digital
  • Source: Up to 10%
  • Amplification: Up to 5%
  • Loudspeakers: Up to 50% but notionally 40%
  • Room: Up to 50% but notionally 40%
  • Ancillaries: Zero
In summary, it's mostly the loudspeakers and room.
 
James said:
Analogue (i.e. vinyl, cassettes, radio etc.)
  • Source: Up to 50% but notionally 30%
  • Amplification: Up to 10%
  • Loudspeakers: Up to 50% but notionally 30%
  • Room: Up to 50% but notionally 30%
  • Ancillaries (cables, stands etc.): Up to 5%
Click to expand...

You know how percentages are supposed to work?
 
What's with all these percentages? Percentage of what? Overall sound quality?

What exactly is the unit of 'sound quality"?

What's the point of the discussion? The split will differ by the individual and their preferences/situation. There are no absolutes.

This thread is a bit like reading a Russ Andrews advert about how much to spend on cables.
 
Neglecting the room, it seems reasonable that your proportionate spend on each component is indicative of your thoughts on the subject at hand.

That makes me an 85% speaker, 15% the rest. (I've a digital only system).
 
Whilst I'd agree that a 'good' room can make a difference and a 'bad' room can be difficult to deal with I've used the same pair of speakers in many different rooms of different sizes, furnishings and construction on the end of a variety of systems across a fairly wide price range and they've always sounded the 'same', not exactly the same but always have maintained their fundamental characteristics.
Though depending on how they're set up in the room can make a major difference and should not be overlooked.
So I think I'd vote speakers as the most important part though the better the room, setup and 'matching' of the rest of the system (to ones own personal taste of course) the better the 'performance' the speakers will deliver.
I'm not so sure what percentages of a budget should be allocated to what part of the system, my experiences leave me thinking that we'll chosen 'budget' sources and amps are adequate for a good quality, well set up pair of speakers (and a sub or two preferably) but I've also found that the better quality the sources and amps the more the speakers deliver.
Goes without saying that a crap recording or poor mastering is never really going to shine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RoA
Darren L said:
Whilst I'd agree that a 'good' room can make a difference and a 'bad' room can be difficult to deal with I've used the same pair of speakers in many different rooms of different sizes, furnishings and construction on the end of a variety of systems across a fairly wide price range and they've always sounded the 'same', not exactly the same but always have maintained their fundamental characteristics.
Though depending on how they're set up in the room can make a major difference and should not be overlooked.
So I think I'd vote speakers as the most important part though the better the room, setup and 'matching' of the rest of the system (to ones own personal taste of course) the better the 'performance' the speakers will deliver. ...
Click to expand...
I have similar experience. ISTM that humans have the ability to "hear through" a room and - to some extent - compensate for its problems. A familiar voice or instrument still sounds right.

However, I think there must be a limit. I have also heard sufficiently bad rooms where my ability to compensate has broken down and familiar things sound strange. I have parametric EQ available for my current room but for personal entertainment I can take it or leave it. For a professional doing mixing/mastering I am sure that would not do, though.

So, at the top of my priorities for what can damage sound most if not well selected there's still the loudspeaker and the room. But that's "not necessarily in the right order."
 
James said:
Having done this for over four decades, I have two ratings:

Analogue (i.e. vinyl, cassettes, radio etc.)
  • Source: Up to 50% but notionally 30%
  • Amplification: Up to 10%
  • Loudspeakers: Up to 50% but notionally 30%
  • Room: Up to 50% but notionally 30%
  • Ancillaries (cables, stands etc.): Up to 5%
In summary, a roughly a third each for source, loudspeakers and room.

Digital
  • Source: Up to 10%
  • Amplification: Up to 5%
  • Loudspeakers: Up to 50% but notionally 40%
  • Room: Up to 50% but notionally 40%
  • Ancillaries: Zero
In summary, it's mostly the loudspeakers and room.
Click to expand...

Unsure why these are split between the two. They're both analogue
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top