Component Priority: Speaker First, Source First, System Balance...?

[Mike Hanson]

Someone else listening to the exact same systems may prefer the Cornwall's.

There is much truth to this. We all have our expectations. For me it's overall musicality and rhythmic flow. I don't care so much about soundstage, tonal beauty, etc., although I still appreciate them.

When my friend and I were visiting a few audio stores one day, we were astonished that some high end shops were entirely focused on beautiful, tinkly sound, best applied as background dinner music. My friend and I thought everything they offered was terribly unengaging. We discussed it with the shop owner, and learned that they used to have gear that would be "better" in our books, but their customers supposedly kept exchanging it for stuff that was more demure. Why someone would paid $thousands for what we considered to be pablum astounded us.

I do understand that my expectations don't match everyone's. I desire extreme, involuntary engagement. When the system says "Boogie!" it's not an polite invitation, but rather a reflexive reaction. I like my system to shake me up like a dog shakes up a chew toy. Paradoxically, my wife despises that effect, so she can never be in the room when I'm truly enjoying my system.

 

[Mike Hanson]

I mentioned in another thread, with the Neat Petites I went from a Naim XS3 (good) to a Rega Aethos (great) to the Hegel H390 (fantastic). Each step up squeezed more out of the Neats. Maybe I could step up again and get even more performance but I don't really see the logic in spending £5-10k amp for £2k speakers. I'm confident spending that money on new speakers would yield far greater gains. So I guess my amp is more "good enough" than the petites "good enough". Confused? I am

Be careful with that. My friend was running an Avondale SE200 into his Vandersteen 2ce (probably comparable in price), and he was mostly happy. He didn't feel it was end game, though, and we both recognized that his speakers were the weak link.

He ended up jumping massively ahead and got the PMC MB2se, making the speakers worth more than 10x the amp. Suddenly his amp couldn't drive the speakers, sounding painfully anemic and unenjoyable. It was so bad that he couldn't bear to listen to it until we upgraded the amplifier, months later.

I took two amps, and one was borrowed from his local dealer:

• The SE400 was better than the SE200, but still couldn't drive the speakers.
• The Orchard managed it just fine.
• The Hegel H600 (their top integrated) couldn't manage them either.

The moral of the story is be careful about buying the best speakers you can get, because they may make your system sound like crap.

 

[Columbo]

Be careful with that. My friend was running an Avondale SE200 into his Vandersteen 2ce (probably comparable in price), and he was mostly happy. He didn't feel it was end game, though, and we both recognized that his speakers were the weak link.

He ended up jumping massively ahead and got the PMC MB2se, making the speakers worth more than 10x the amp. Suddenly his amp couldn't drive the speakers, sounding painfully anemic and unenjoyable. It was so bad that he couldn't bear to listen to it until we upgraded the amplifier, months later.

I took two amps, and one was borrowed from his local dealer:

• The SE400 was better than the SE200, but still couldn't drive the speakers.
• The Orchard managed it just fine.
• The Hegel H600 (their top integrated) couldn't manage them either.

The moral of the story is be careful about buying the best speakers you can get, because they may make your system sound like crap.

How about some sort of vague rule of thumb for relative spend on components?

 

[Phyztech]

For each particular system the most important component is the weakest one. If those are speakers then speakers, if a power supply then power supply. The trick is that you rarely know what is it. Easily it could be a provider router for example. If to start a system from scratch I would suggest to think of an amplification first. Not because they’re most distinguished in the a-b testing but rather because it creates a basic ‘structure’ of the system (passive or active, valve or solid state, heavy or not).

 

[Mike Hanson]

How about some sort of vague rule of thumb for relative spend on components?

One might attempt that, although the numbers are challenging, and what is part of what?

• My friend has an Oppo player, EverSolo streamer, and a Ferrum Wandla+Hypsos. Is all this together considered to be the "source"?
• Given you could have an integrated amp, do the pre and power amps get lumped together?
• If you have a subwoofer, does that get included in speaker cost?
• Some people are into DSP? Is that considered part of the amplifiers or speakers?

Let's consider three scenarios:

• In my friend's case, let's lump the EverSolo and DAC together, pre and power together, and he doesn't have a sub. His ratios are roughly 2/3/10. This almost logarithmic, but one could say the amp should cost about 1.5x the source, and the speakers not more than triple the amps. Note that he's considering improving the amplification, so that might change to make it less exponential.
• In my family room it's 3/4/5, so much less exponential, but still clearly weighted heavy towards the backend.
• Then there's my office, which is upside down as 6/5/4. Yet, my office system sounds "better" than the family room.

Given this small batch of examples, one could say that any given component shouldn't cost more than 3 times the cost of the next component in the chain, but that could go either direction (up or down).

 

[Tony L]

Cost wise, the SE400 build is about 1.5x the SE200, although I did temporarily scale back the design of the SE400, so perhaps 1.4x. Both DIY, obviously.

Determining the cost differential between the speakers isn't so straightforward. The Ergo IX was DIY, and the parts were about CDN$1500, IIRC. I would estimate the retail price for speakers to be roughly 3x the parts cost, so let's say $4500. In comparison, the Cornwall's MSRP is $10K, so >2x.

Assuming my 3x multiplier for MSRP vs materials cost is valid:

• The SE400 is about 270% (almost triple) the value of the Ergo IX (based upon the build costs).
• The SE200 (at 3x build cost) is worth 90% of the Cornwall's MSRP.

Given the arbitrary pricing of hi-fi gear, I'm not sure how much we can rely on this metric. Even so, the vastly differing ratios is certainly intriguing.

I’m very skeptical of trying to assign monetary value to DIY or kit audio such as Avondale or James’ speaker designs. In the conventional market value would be assigned very differently and likely have little correlation with component cost. Audio very seldom does.

My guess here, speaking as someone who knows Klipsch pretty well, is the Cornwalls just don’t give their best with the very tightly damped solid state Avondale kit. It sounds like a synergy thing to me, not a financial mismatch (assuming that is even possible). I just do not like solid state amps into Klipsch, in fact Avondale-modded Naim driving Heresys is one of the worst sounds I’ve heard from a hi-fi system in my entire life! That isn’t a reflection on any component in that system, it can all sound good, but that was just a really unsympathetic match that to my ears sounded absolutely awful. Some kit just doesn’t work together. It is very easy to get very high efficiency speakers to sound wrong as they have such different amp needs. They genuinely play by different rules.

PS I’m even tempted to say try a Decware Zen! A tiny little budget SET may be an interesting spanner in the works. I had one for a while and liked it aside from my old LaScalas did find some hum somewhere. It certainly drove them louder than I’d ever want to listen myself, though I think they are more efficient again (104db). The Zen is about 2 Watts!

 

[Phyztech]

Price comparison is always compromised by retail/used/actually paid ratio. In the recent setup I actually paid a bit more for the speakers but interconnect cable is more expensive in retail and the biggest discount I’ve got for the amp - how to compare?

 

[adamdea]

Audiophiles often ponder/argue whether speakers are the most important component. I remember many debates on the Naim forum regarding whether "source first" was the best approach. Some insist the amplifier needs to be awesome to drive the speakers properly. Etc.

I have a Ferrum Wandla+Hypsos combo running in both my office and the family room. My Cary SLP-2002 is currently in the shop getting some maintenance and upgrades, so both Wandlas are being used as preamps. The Wandla is an exceptionally good DAC, but I would say its preamp section is merely "good enough" (definitely below the solid-state Benchmark HPA4 and the tubey Cary SLP-2002)

In my smallish office I have the Avondale SE400 and little Ergo IX. In my larger family room it's the lesser SE200 and Klipsch Cornwall.

The family room (with Cornwall) sounds bigger and faster, but my office system sounds better overall (overlooking obvious limitations like bass extension).

The moral of the story seems to be that as long as the speakers are "good enough" (including both sound quality and appropriate room size), then the amplifier is more important. More generally, I think we need to get to this elusive "good enough" level with all our components, at which point "Source First" probably makes more sense, then on down the stream.

Anyone care to add any thoughts and experience?

Total non sequitur. You are comparing two different rooms. Amd the fact that a speaker costs more doesn't make it better. I get it- you like spending money on electronics. But good enough for electronics is not a very high bar.

On the other hand speakers are a pain to replace and difficult to match to the room. So hobby-wise, swapping smallish boxes is easier.

 

[Heckyman]

I think all this just goes to show that "upgrading" just one part of a system can lead to fairly unpredictable results, that's been my experience too.

 

[les24preludes]

In my case it's amplification first, every time. Spend the time and money on the best possible amplification - preamp and amp or just amp, whatever you use. For me that's always tubes and as good as it's possible to get.

- No vinyl in my case, so no money spent there
- DACs are not all the same, but a good quality one won't break the bank.
- All my sources both ripped CDs and Internet are on my computer, so that's already done.

That leaves the speakers. If what's going into them is as good as possible then that job is done. I can't comment on speakers, it's so personal and room dependent. In a big room I'd want panels and that wouldn't be cheap. In a smaller room probably a good stand mount. Choosing the right amplification and speakers is the main challenge.

 

[Tony L]

Price comparison is always compromised by retail/used/actually paid ratio.

Indeed. When discussing the TD-124 do I go with the £40 or so it cost in 1965 or the £8-10k the current DD version not everyone thinks is as good costs? How do I price the Lockwood Tannoys? Canturburys are the only 15” alnico/pepperpot drivers this side of Westminsters, and they are LOLprice. Even the Quad 303 (which are ten a penny comparatively as they made so many)? And that’s before finding I far preferred it driving the Tannoys to a Stereophile class A rated Pass Aleph 3. Money makes no sense as a metric to me. What works works. What doesn’t doesn’t. Price doesn’t come into it IMHO. There is no simple hierarchy no matter how some dealers or magazines would like there to be.

 

[SteveG]

Price comparison is always compromised by retail/used/actually paid ratio. In the recent setup I actually paid a bit more for the speakers but interconnect cable is more expensive in retail and the biggest discount I’ve got for the amp - how to compare?

I was thinking the same as I buy a lot of kit 2nd hand. The most expensive source component in the system I'm listening to currently is the WiiM Pro, however while I paid more for it than I did individually for the turntable, DAC or CD/SACD player they'd all be much more expensive on a new like for like basis.

On a price basis that system is very much a mullet one, as I reckon I paid 4x more for the amps (also all 2nd hand) & speakers (along with the WiiM Pro they're the only component in the system I've owned from new - and even they were bought maybe 20 years ago) than I did for all the sources combined.

 

[Bronzeage]

As someone who has recently changed speakers, and is currently demoing dacs/streamers, the answer is everything is important, but having speakers that suit your room is key, irrespective of how much they cost.

Then you can lash out on the best of whatever gives you the best sound to your ears, according to your budget.

Though I guess you could start with any component and work your way around it to suit.

 

[Mike Hanson]

I’m very skeptical of trying to assign monetary value to DIY or kit audio such as Avondale or James’ speaker designs. In the conventional market value would be assigned very differently and likely have little correlation with component cost. Audio very seldom does.

My guess here, speaking as someone who knows Klipsch pretty well, is the Cornwalls just don’t give their best with the very tightly damped solid state Avondale kit. It sounds like a synergy thing to me, not a financial mismatch (assuming that is even possible). I just do not like solid state amps into Klipsch, in fact Avondale-modded Naim driving Heresys is one of the worst sounds I’ve heard from a hi-fi system in my entire life! That isn’t a reflection on any component in that system, it can all sound good, but that was just a really unsympathetic match that to my ears sounded absolutely awful. Some kit just doesn’t work together. It is very easy to get very high efficiency speakers to sound wrong as they have such different amp needs. They genuinely play by different rules.

PS I’m even tempted to say try a Decware Zen! A tiny little budget SET may be an interesting spanner in the works. I had one for a while and liked it aside from my old LaScalas did find some hum somewhere. It certainly drove them louder than I’d ever want to listen myself, though I think they are more efficient again (104db). The Zen is about 2 Watts!

Have you heard the Cornwall and Heresy IV? I'm assuming that they've been tweaking the design as they go, with the understanding that amplifiers are changing.

I bought the Cary SLI-100 integrated, because of the insistence that it was the power amp that needed to use tubes, if the Cornwall was going to sound its best. There were a few dissenting voices saying that was wrong, and that the tubes should be in the preamp. I've done it both ways, and the preamp solution wins (at least with my Cornwall IV).

As for damping factor, I believe the Orchard Starkrimson Ultra GaN amp has even higher damping the Avondale gear, yet pairing it with the tube preamp gave the best results by far.

So much of this hobby is a game of "Suck it and see". There's only so much you can learn from others' recommendations. At some point you have to just try it and see if it works for you.

BTW, I'm going to build a Nelson Pass Amp Camp Amp at some point, just to see what it sounds like with the Cornwalls. Who knows? Maybe it will be the magic I've dreamed of all these years.

 

[Woodface]

I was very source first & actually had a mid spec LP12 into a Rega Brio & Castle Trent 2s back in the day. The LP12 was leagues above the P2 it replaced.

I now think that we can get to ‘more than good enough’ in the digital sphere pretty quickly so would spend the most money on active speakers as they are just better.

 

[Tony L]

Have you heard the Cornwall and Heresy IV? I'm assuming that they've been tweaking the design as they go, with the understanding that amplifiers are changing.

I’ve not heard them, my direct experience of Klipsch is I’ve owned Heresys (Mk 1.5) and La Scalas (late Mk1s). That said this is the Klipsch Heritage Range, their vintage reissues, they are mostly used in a traditional valve context from what I can tell. That is where high efficiency speakers end up. Occasionally one sees them partnered with huge McIntosh solid state amps, but I can’t imagine it would be synergistic.

PS It isn’t just damping factor, though that is a huge part of it. The high efficiency means most of the activity is right in the millivolts-range where class AB or class B solid state is the least happy as it is right in the crossover distortion area. Stuff like Naim and Avondale sounds at its best when it is working a bit IME. They are mainly used with the far less efficient and more reactive loads of 1980s speakers and later. It is no surprise it sounds good with James little mini-monitors. I tried a pair briefly when I had a Prima Luna valve amp and didn’t like them as it was bad synergy in the opposite direction. They just sounded small, lumpen and dead, which I’m sure isn’t their character. Just another system mismatch. Synergy is everything!

 

[marshanp]

...speakers are a pain to replace and difficult to match to the room. So hobby-wise, swapping smallish boxes is easier.

I did that for years (20+ pairs) and made little progress... until I discovered that the sources' signals could be tuned with DSP to compensate for the speaker/room interaction.

Bliss followed shortly afterwards

 

[Mike Hanson]

I’ve not heard them, my direct experience of Klipsch is I’ve owned Heresys (Mk 1.5) and La Scalas (late Mk1s). That said this is the Klipsch Heritage Range, their vintage reissues, they are mostly used in a traditional valve context from what I can tell. That is where high efficiency speakers end up. Occasionally one sees them partnered with huge McIntosh solid state amps, but I can’t imagine it would be synergistic.

PS It isn’t just damping factor, though that is a huge part of it. The high efficiency means most of the activity is right in the millivolts-range where class AB or class B solid state is the least happy as it is right in the crossover distortion area. Stuff like Naim and Avondale sounds at its best when it is working a bit IME. They are mainly used with the far less efficient and more reactive loads of 1980s speakers and later. It is no surprise it sounds good with James little mini-monitors. I tried a pair briefly when I had a Prima Luna valve amp and didn’t like them as it was bad synergy in the opposite direction. They just sounded small, lumpen and dead, which I’m sure isn’t their character. Just another system mismatch. Synergy is everything!

Interesting. I expect that the "Heritage" designation relates more to the aesthetic, and not necessarily the driver selection, crossover, etc., although I would have to research that to be certain. I can say, though, that the Cornwall IV sounds better with tubes in the preamp and solid-state on the power side.

As for class AB, the whole point of that is to be "class A" for the first while, then to move into "class B" when the going gets tough.

Avondale's SE range sounds almost tube like when I play them at lower volumes into easy loads. When pushed, however, I think the NCC amps do a better job of maintaining their composure and really shining.

 

[Mick P]

Reading this thread confirms my belief that once you have a system that you are happy with, stop faffing about and stick with it. So if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Nirvana is elusive and you will never find it.

My main system is a Naim 52/300 / Garrard 401 & Aro / CDS3 / NAT01 / Shahinian Arcs and I am happy with it all. Why should I consider changing a single thing in what I like.

 

[zeon]

Reading this thread confirms my belief that once you have a system that you are happy with, stop faffing about and stick with it. So if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Nirvana is elusive and you will never find it.

My main system is a Naim 52/300 / Garrard 401 & Aro / CDS3 / NAT01 / Shahinian Arcs and I am happy with it all. Why should I consider changing a single thing in what I like.

Great , but maybe a tad boring for some. Its the journey not the arrival sort of thing !