[Armaegis]

Guys guys guys, this here is the proper way to build your system...


The right way = stuff I can comfortably afford

[Letitroll98]

Ha ha, yes, that's the way my system is built.  Targets of opportunity rather than parsing out certain percentages of disposable.

Actually I don't think any one component class is superior as the whole thing is a system, each component relying on the other.  However the most improvement (not most important) can be had from the transducers and mechanical components (speakers, phono cartridges, turntables) because that's where the greatest distortion is.

[JohnR]

However the most improvement (not most important) can be had from the transducers and mechanical components (speakers, phono cartridges, turntables) because that's where the greatest distortion is.

And that's why I say:

1. Digital crossover

[macrojack]

I'm beginning to suspect that digital sound implementation has risen to a level where the best sounding systems will be in the hands of those least bound by nostalgia and most able to adapt to measured results.
It also appears that there is a time coming where audio enthusiasts will finally accept well-engineered, co-ordinated systems (like Devialet) rather than insisting upon their ability to assemble a mish-mash of only categorically compatible components on a trial and error basis. Just imagine assembling your own car that way.

[THROWBACK]

Now if we could only agree on which are the right things to measure, how to measure them properly, what the measurements tell us, and what to do about them.

[JohnR]

Hey, c'mon Throwback, that's really much too obvious of a troll.

[Bob2]

I'm beginning to suspect that digital sound implementation has risen to a level where the best sounding systems will be in the hands of those least bound by nostalgia

I agree with you for the most part. A recent "nostalgic" addition to my setup gives me pause in regards to agreeing with you entirely though.

[roscoe65]

I'm beginning to suspect that digital sound implementation has risen to a level where the best sounding systems will be in the hands of those least bound by nostalgia and most able to adapt to measured results.
It also appears that there is a time coming where audio enthusiasts will finally accept well-engineered, co-ordinated systems (like Devialet) rather than insisting upon their ability to assemble a mish-mash of only categorically compatible components on a trial and error basis. Just imagine assembling your own car that way.

Devialet is not the only manufacturer doing that, nor is that approach new.  Shindo uses a whole system approach, from analog source up to and including speakers, including wire.  There are other manufacturers who voice with specific components and make their own recommendations.

For years their was a systems approach in effect in the higher-end British systems.  An end user was expected to buy a Linn Sondek and couple it with a Naim NAC and NAP combo.  Wiring was all Naim and speakers were generally Naim or Linn.  Upgrades to this "system" were not so much replacement of components but their upgrades.  The Linn Sondek was upgraded (Cirkus, Trampoline, Lingo, etc.), the arm was upgraded to top of the line, and the cartridge was upgraded.  Next outboard power supplies (HICAP or SuperCAP) were added to the Naim combo, and finally maybe the speakers were replaced with something higher up in the line.

[macrojack]

Now if we could only agree on which are the right things to measure, how to measure them properly, what the measurements tell us, and what to do about them.

If it is our intent to make those determinations, they will be made. As for now it seems clear that we lack the singularity of purpose to see that evolution through. However, we do have parameters and methods that have served us adequately, if not perfectly. Perhaps, the advisers had you in mind when they cautioned not to let the "perfect" be the enemy of the good.
I used Devialet as an example in my last post --- perhaps I should have cited Vinnie Rossi's LIO. Either way, these companies are guiding us in the right direction. If, as nearly everyone on here claims, we are music lovers rather than equipment lovers, then this would appear to be the path most likely to finally fulfill the "perfect sound forever" pledge. Too much of audio still insists on using the equivalent of a carburetor, despite their obvious obsolescence. Soon enough we won't even be using wires.

[werd]

And that's why I say:

1. Digital crossover

What is it about the digital crossover that puts it as the most important piece?
 

[JohnR]

What is it about the digital crossover that puts it as the most important piece?

Um... you could read the posts I'm responding to. (?)

[jimdgoulding]

The front end is what the rest is amplifying.  Therefore, tis our front ends, imo.  Our speakers should be faithful windows to the event.

[JohnR]

So I'm streaming from a Tidal server, through my DSL router, into a streamer, then a USB convertor, then a DAC... which bit exactly is the "front end"?

Or maybe the Wifi signal goes straight into an oddly shaped spherical thing that just... plays music?

The more I think about it, the more I think the concept of "source" or "front end" is out-moded and old school. It's fine to talk about it, but... you know, try to recognize that it's a dying paradigm or at least, not the only one any more.

@werd, sorry for the curt response, I will try to elaborate tomorrow.

[werd]

So I'm streaming from a Tidal server, through my DSL router, into a streamer, then a USB convertor, then a DAC... which bit exactly is the "front end"?

Or maybe the Wifi signal goes straight into an oddly shaped spherical thing that just... plays music?

The more I think about it, the more I think the concept of "source" or "front end" is out-moded and old school. It's fine to talk about it, but... you know, try to recognize that it's a dying paradigm or at least, not the only one any more.

@werd, sorry for the curt response, I will try to elaborate tomorrow.

I am not disagreeing with your answer. I never of the thought of a digital crossover.  The thing is, if we abandon the classical answer as the source. Then it opens up the possibility of answers that make up other components.
 

Instead of speakers we might say 'tweeters'.  Or for power, we might say, our house fuse box or if the grid is solar/wind fed.

None of those answers are wrong, only how complicated the answer becomes to the OP's question. What is the most important piece?

Unless you were joking and trying to combine parts of the source and speakers into one answer. Which is something i would do. (how's that for projecting)?   

[JohnR]

I am not disagreeing with your answer. I never of the thought of a digital crossover.  The thing is, if we abandon the classical answer as the source. Then it opens up the possibility of answers that make up other components.

I suppose I'm saying that I'm increasingly thinking that things are "up in the air" as far as the "normal" stereo system goes. Perhaps it will settle again, or perhaps not. I used to have a vintage piece that had a stereo preamp but a mono power amp in it. I guess they were still figuring things out in the dawn of stereo. I feel like we're there again. Currently, there are so many ways to slice and dice the "boxes." It's not that the traditional hifi stereo is going to go away any time soon, but I think change is happening and we'll start seeing more "disruptive" products....

For example, at the highly-integrated end of the scale there's the Devialet Phantom. Never mind that you can't swap out your amp or add a tube buffer or whatever, for many people this type of solution makes total sense. I've been having a conversation with a friend for over a year now about how he can get better sound while meeting some "rigorous" domestic constraints and I think more and more that would be perfect for him.

Another example, there's the JBL M2 that jtwrace has written about recently. You always need an amp with speakers, right? In that case, you buy a four channel amp and you just... load up the DSP configuration file for the specific speaker into the actual amplifier. Bingo! I think that approach is just brilliant.

So, when I say "1. Digital crossover" I suppose you can think of it as a "box" or as a "concept." That thing (the digital crossover) basically determines the fundamental architecture of the system: the type of speaker (2, 3, 4, etc way), the level of driver correction you can do, the type of crossover you can do, and if we are talking in terms of boxes, the level of integration and/or convenience of the system.

[AJinFLA]

I heard the KEF LS50 active wireless speakers a couple weeks ago and they sounded very good. Multiple digital ins and a subwoofer out too! EQ via phone app. Stream from phone or other device. Gent had a HSU sub and a Amazon (iirc) device streaming attached. Sounded great. $2k 

[macrojack]

I see separate components like the ones we cut our teeth on as being the equivalent of a land line phone. Tube people have a dial on theirs. The system of the future which is becoming more and more available today is the counterpart of the cell phone in that it is multi-purpose, multi-functional, self-contained, and expandable.

There is no need today for every function to require its own metal box. With the Devialet Phantom speakers, one can operate a reasonably complete music system utilizing a tiny $329 box from Devialet, a cell phone and a subscription music service. No wires at all.

[THROWBACK]

Gosh, John R. "Obvious troll?" Certainly not meant that way.  I (and experienced audiophiles - - even pros) have measured my system response with REW, Stereophile CD warble tones, an HP third-octave professional unit based on pink noise, and a professional Sonipulse based on "tick" sounds and they all give different results. Similar but not identical. All useful to some degree, but not enough to rely on completely. And, no, I don't believe you should rely on your ear alone - - certainly not MY poor old battered ears.

troll Definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary: "someone who leaves an intentionally annoying message on the internet, in order to get attention or cause trouble." I thought I was just joining the discussion, not causing trouble. Maybe I need sensitivity training.

[earwig]

I imagine like a stream that flows from the mountains to the ocean or lake without bottlenecks distorting the music flow.The wires (still a mystery to me). The right speaker for the right type of music (more woofer fer rock?)you typically like to listen to in a usually lousy room acoustic environment (a living room?).Nice clean source with fabulously nice amplification and preamplification.Simple I like it too .