[ZLS]

I thought it would be an interesting topic conversation to ask the question of over the past year how has the character of your system changed (or not)  I am not asking about any new equipment purchased, but rather what goal you were trying to accomplish if you  changed your equipment.   Perhaps the type of music you listen to has changed, perhaps your listening room changed, perhaps you discovered that your expectations of your system changed. 
    What are you trying to have your system say; what story do you want it to tell. 
    I welcome any input to both frame the question and the experiences of the members of AC. 
    It is my hope that this can evolve into both an interesting and educational discussion.

[John151]

I am desperately trying to improve the sound of my system.  The characteristics that I am looking for include:  silky, light, and airy.  Ever since I got rid of the Magnepans, my system has sounded constipated, dark, and heavy. 

[Steve]

Love your description John. 

Seriously, good luck on your quest my friend.

[richidoo]

My system / room is great at low volumes. When I turn it up I have to use a lot more imagination to get the thrill. The room is 8,000 cu ft, and its acoustic response causes the music to sound stressed and hyper as the pressure goes up. I have exonerated every component by swapping in substitutes, concluding that the room is the trouble. Installing enough permanent acoustic treatment to fix it properly is impossible because it's the living room, and my wife doesn't like a "cluttered look." I did prove the room was the problem by laying down half dozen comforters all over the floor. Before I learned the importance of the room, I upgraded everything in my system, at a substantial cost, and even sent crossovers and drivers back to speaker mfg for characterization and checkup - all was well. With the upgrades the system sounds LOT better now, but the room is still there, just keeps laughing at me, "You can never win. HAHAHAHAHAHA" So I'm learning to enjoy quiet listening, and negotiating for a better location. I will have to re-engineer the system from scratch to achieve what I desire in this house.

We could have bought a house with a full basement when we moved 2 years ago. The property we have is very nice, and better than what a basement lot would have been like (hillside near woods) but a basement would have allowed construction of a dedicated room with full acoustic treatment, into which I could install mid-fi level equipment and have an equally positive experience to what I have now. Frustratingly, an audio friend bought a house by same builder, next town over, with full basement, built on flat ground. haha! It's a crazy world.

I have heard a system at my local dealer that I really love. Great high end equipment, in a dedicated room with decent room treatment. I aim to have a system like that, but this year I have come to understand that it would be foolish to spend big money on a such a system without a room specifically set aside to use it to its fullest potential. I will instead aim to create a smaller system of equal quality to what I have now (but maybe less bass) in a smaller room whose acoustics I can better control.
Rich

[Wayner]

I always try to improve the soundfield generated by my Dynaco A25XLs. I have not heard another set of speakers do what these can do. They creat a sound field that becomes "surround sound" with incredible depth and width when the toe-in angle is just right. It sounds as if there is a mystical connection between the 2 speakers and you can hear "stereo everywhere". They will also let you know when the turntable is set-up correctly as the imaging goes wild. The sound field is delicate however, and only one pre-amp/amp combination can really do the best job. I attribute this sound to the low cross-over of the tweeter as these speakers only have a 10" woofer and 1" dome tweeter. People that come over to hear the system in my studio are awe-struck by the sound from these 45 year old speakers.

Wayner

[BrianM]

richidoo, I think moving to a smaller room if one is available is potentially a great idea, as long as you aren't using huge speakers.  I think it gives a person more options with gear selection (speaker size and power are no longer issues) and also shouldn't require as much money to get awesome sound.  It could also mean a more intimate listening experience.  Soft volume listening should be even more inviting, and any smaller speaker is still going to be able to flatten your ears in a smaller room.  I recommend monitors with decent bass and no subwoofer for great real-world results in smaller rooms, that being my own system's character development over the past couple years (big room + big speakers to small room and "small" speakers).

[ajzepp]

LIke John, my experience with Maggies really had an impact. I give them a lot of credit for helping me to define what I want out of my system. I became completely entranced by the realism and transparency of the Magnepans, and I've focused on achieving that all-around ever since.

My only issue with the Maggies was when things (e.g soundtracks, really busy music) became a bit congested because the panels were trying to do too much at once. I dont know if that makes any sense, but it just felt as if sometimes they were really straining to get the job done. The problem was that I didn't like all the coloration that existed with box speakers, even many of the better ones. To this day, I'm still not sure how he does it, but John DeVore has created speakers that are absolutely perfect for me. They give me everything I could ever want...the realism, transparency, dynamics, a nice low end, superb build quality, classy styling, and great customer service. I've had them for nearly two years and haven't even considered changing out my Super 8s. I've found the Butler hybrid tube amps to be full of detail and transparency, while just adding a touch of warmth. They are a great match for the DeVores.

So my goal now is to add a preamp and source that will contribute to the synergy I have between my amp and mains. But I love hearing a recording the way it was meant to be heard, with as little sonic character imparted onto it by the gear as possible. With the help of a really great dealer here in Atlanta, so far I'm making good decisions in achieving that.

[TerryO]

richidoo, I think moving to a smaller room if one is available is potentially a great idea, as long as you aren't using huge speakers.  I think it gives a person more options with gear selection (speaker size and power are no longer issues) and also shouldn't require as much money to get awesome sound.  It could also mean a more intimate listening experience.  Soft volume listening should be even more inviting, and any smaller speaker is still going to be able to flatten your ears in a smaller room.  I recommend monitors with decent bass and no subwoofer for great real-world results in smaller rooms, that being my own system's character development over the past couple years (big room + big speakers to small room and "small" speakers).

One of the best sounding systems I've heard (and I've heard a couple of acknowledged World-class systems) was in the home office of a member of our audio club. He used Harbeth speakers and EAR electronics. Wonderful sound from a very simple system.

All of my rooms are small, and they have to be, to fit in my small house! I have a set of diy fullrange speakers that use Radio Shack 4inch drivers (40-1197) that have been fully modified. Used nearfield, they are just splendid for Acoustic and Classical music as long as the level is kept within reason. I use tube, Chip and SS amps, passive and active preamps, etc., and it all does fine. I change gear around all the time so I really don't have "a" system. I currently have 14 pairs of speakers, but not all of them work in my listening environment. In fact I've come to believe that in a small room, highly directional speakers may sound better and usually image better as well.
Of course, YMMV.
Best Regards,
TerryO

[*Scotty*]

I have assembled a system with a neutral character and hope to hear as much unaltered information from the recording as possible. I inadvertently gained an improvement in midrange realism when I replaced a Tripath amp after it failed due to operator error with an analogue amp late last year. I would say that I am very satisfied with the sound I have now but I am not averse to dumb lucking into unanticipated improvements when they present themselves. 
richidoo, What kind of amplifier have you substituted into your system in place of your 70watt Cary SLI-80 and what was it's power rating.
Maybe you are running out of current to drive your loudspeakers at high SPL's in a room of 8,000 cu ft. Quoting the Stereophile review

...its plot of impedance (fig.1) reveals that it needs to be used with an amplifier that can deliver high current into low impedances. Not only are there two minima in the bass of less than 2 ohms, and another of less than 3 ohms in the mid-treble, but there is an amplifier-crushing combination of 3.3 ohms magnitude and 60 degrees capacitive phase angle at 20Hz.

 
Scotty

[JLM]

Hopefully the character of our systems match-up with our audio philosophies, likes, and beliefs.

My current system follows the KISS principle: 30 - 20,000 Hz single driver speakers driven by chip based monoblocks with the signal coming from a CDP.

The room is an essential element of the system and mine is a 2,000 cu. ft. dedicated room of proper proportion, lots of insulation, and six 2 ft x 4 ft absorption panels in a LEDE nearfield setup.

System cost is roughly middle of the road by audiophile standards, with fairly high quality of components and good value.

The system is ideal for small ensembles including baroque, jazz, blues, or folk.  Not highly dynamic, not capable of ear bleeding spls, and beaming high frequencies.  OTOH it is very musical, nicely detailed, images like a champ, quite accurate, and thanks to relatively large single drivers and transmission line cabinets interacts well with the room.

[anthony a.]

i used to own martin logan ascent i electrostatic speakers which were one of the best speakers i have ever owned and heard.  they were so transparent and life-like that many times i would give guests (and myself) goosebumps.  they were even better for home theater use, imo.  i got rid of them for space constraints and an overall "smaller/less obtrusive" look for my family room.  in any case, my system used to be very detailed (never bright or etched) and extremely transparent/airy.  i went on to a total system change about a year ago and how have a system consisiting of speakers with dual 7" ceramic accuton mid drivers (same used as kharma speakers) and a ribbon tweeter, which i find to be fairly close in performance to the logans but with a bit better midrange weight.  the transparency is definitely not the same, neither is the details and airiness, however i have moved my tastes to a system that focuses more on the midrange with a more weight, as opposed to light and airy as before.  all in all, i am much happier now with my setup, although i do miss the electrostatic panel magic.