[nutgrass]

Hi Folks
Have heard over the years some fairly simple rules of thumb, so to speak. That follow the thinking that a system should compose of dollar approximate percentages ie.
25% Amplification 30% source 40% speakers, rest on interconnects (Hypotheticaly).
Any thoughts???
regards
Ian

[Marbles]

Go out shopping for speakers first.  set a budget, then get the really expensive ones that were more than you wanted to spend.

Then match the amp to the speakers, you know, the amp you always dreamed about but couldn't afford.

Then get the new killer DAC and an inexpensive transport and inexpensive cables.

Upgrade the transport and cables as money allows.

Oh yea, and buy used whenever possible.

[gonefishin]

I say the heck with them rules!  


     Perhaps it may give you a good idea...but to blow the whole thing right out of the water...almost all the audio equipment I have bought has been at a discounted rate...and has been used, demo or just a plain discount.  I may get 65% off on my speakers...but only 45% off on my amps...which would throw the ratio right out of the water.

   Further more...there is a lot of over-priced crap out there.  If I spend $5,000 on speakers that can be bested by a very good performing $1,500 speaker...where does that leave me?  Also...while there is some over-priced crap out there...there are also some very good deals...which just have a great price...these speakers also deserve a well matched amp...which I suppose is how I look at things.  You can have a great sounding speaker and an awesome amp...but if them two items aren't a good match...you may be disappointed...even tho you fell within the ratio.  A system should be built as just that...a system.

    I hear what your saying...and perhaps this can be something to give consideration...but I would rather go out...listen...do a little research...and build my system as I see fit without breaking out a calculator to see how much I should spend to get good sound.  Although...I DO think it's cool to look back after you have built your system to see where your ratio's are...and what percentage you have in your speakers...and what percentage in your amp...and so on.

[bob82274]

Wait here is one don't buy Monster cable or Bose.  I made that mistake as a newbie and am still paying for it.

[Ernest]

I don't think you can build a system using rules about how much percentage of your money goes for each part of the system.  The problem is that there is not a strong correlation between price and sound quality.

[nathanm]

I'd agree with Marbles, the speakers are the main thing.  They're the only component you actually listen to.  To me they affect the biggest audible character of the sound.  Sure, the amp matters too, but try 5 different amps with the same set of speakers and you will hear less difference than if you tried 5 pairs of speakers with one amp.  That doesn't necessarily mean you have to spend the biggest % of money on the speakers as much as it means you should really find ones with the tone you like.  That could mean a $200 pair or a $2000 pair.  It seems like after a certain point the price\performance balance goes completely non-linear.

[Tyson]

Only rule - buy what you "really" want, don't settle, because you'll just be upgrading in the future anyway.

[ehider]

The system that you assemble will only be limited by its weakest link. For instance, you could go out and buy $10,000 speakers, spend another $10,000 on great electronics and cables, but if you hooked up a cheap and dirty $100 CD player the system would have some serious issues. This is because cheap CD players are typically lacking in dynamics, have very little space re-creation and are pretty sterile sounding in the highs (some have highs that are so spitty and harsh that they will tear your ears off in a system such as this). A great resolving system would dramatically show your weakest link's errors.

I think a percentage value for each component/speaker is not particularly relevent here. It's all about matching quality and performance levels of everything combined. I remember when I first heard a pair of $500 Spicas (speakers) driven by $8,000 worth of electronics. For what those little speakers were capable of doing that system sounded was abslotuely magical. This is because the Spicas were near the top of the heap for what they could do right, they just diidn't play loud or deep bass. But in terms of imaging, freedom from coloration and a ability to sound very musically refined they blew me away (at limited volime mind you)l. Other times I've heard big full range systems with $4,000 speakers and $3,500 worth of electronics that were also magical. Again, it's all a matter of avoiding any weak links in the entire chain IMHO.

[DVV]

Hi Folks
Have heard over the years some fairly simple rules of thumb, so to speak. That follow the thinking that a system should compose of dollar approximate percentages ie.
25% Amplification 30% source 40% speakers, rest on interconnects (Hypotheticaly).
Any thoughts???
regards
Ian

Just one rule, Ian - trust in your ears only.

The only general rule I think has a good chance of being more or less true is that your speakers should cost about twice the price of your amp if you want the most from both. I refer to market prices for ready made items, go down the DIY lane and even that goes to the dogs.

Cheers,
DVV

[Night Wolf]

I think 50% or more should be speakers, since they have the most effect on sound. but that is one of the very good things I like about the vintage gear, quality gear for cheap    

about cables, I like to believe they make a noticable differnce and all, but my experience proves otherwise, one thing I really get a kick outta high-performance power cables. but I think it should be 50% (or more) on spekaers, 30% amp, 15% cdp or whatever source and the remaining 5% for cables and stuff, IMO the whole system is just a guideline, and changes once you start comparing, finding deals or going vintage etc...

[2channelguy]

Here's one:

Decide whether you're more interested in surround sound or 2 channel stereo. I recently had to replace my entire system due to theft. I actually had a salesman tell me that a 500 dollar surround amp would sound just good as 500 dollar stereo amp. Another told me that DVD players do just as good a job as CD players for music. Both of these are fat, stinking lies!

I learned very early on that if price and sound quality are of concern, good old 2 channel is the only way to go. Hence the handle.

[DVV]

Here's one:

Decide whether you're more interested in surround sound or 2 channel stereo. I recently had to replace my entire system due to theft. I actually had a salesman tell me that a 500 dollar surround amp would sound just good as 500 dollar stereo amp. Another told me that DVD players do just as good a job as CD players for music. Both of these are fat, stinking lies!

I learned very early on that if price and sound quality are of concern, good old 2 channel is the only way to go. Hence the handle.

Amen to that! I tried many home theatre combinations, but in the end settled on a pair of JBL Ti600 (3 way floorstanders, never were sold in N. America, just Europe) powered by a humble Yamaha AX-592 stereo integrated amp (nominally 2x100W/8 ohms, but they actually delibver 450W into 2 ohms in bursts, and 490 W into 1 ohm!), all wiring by van den Hul (D102 Mk.3/Neutrik interconnects, CS122 speakers). Video courtesy of a Marantz 4100 DVD, music by Harman/Kardon 730 CD player. Everything on SoundCare spikes (Norwegian, DAMN good, outstanding bang for buck).

The JBLs are fairly efficient, 91 dB/1W/1, so I can have my window panes rattling if I wnat to, which I rarely do. But this sounds better than any home theatre I tried, causing my son to comment after going to a theatre with brand new Sony/JBL/DTS sound system and seeing "13. warrior" that we have a better sound stage at home.

Cheers,
DVV

[JackStraw]

The percentages only matter if you're actually going to plunk the whole wad down at once. In that case, I'd suggest that you need more budget than 5% for interconnects and speaker cables unless your budget is HUGE or you're going the DIY route. By the way, DIY, USED, and MODS are the three keys to value in high end audio.

I think that most people upgrade piecewise leading with the speakers, as several here have suggested. I think that it's wise to start there, since speakers define what frequencies the system is capable of reproducing and contribute so much to voicing. Besides, they're practically furniture -- get something that you like to look at too.

That being said, I think that the most surprising upgrade benefits come when people upgrade their front end. But, here's to having the rest of the system in place to appreciate a serious source.

[DVV]

Just read this, folks, please.

http://home.earthlink.net/~rogerr7/wire.htm#longerwires

Says as much about our hearing as about other things.

Cheers,
DVV

[ehider]

DVV,

Please tell me you didn't post that link to show that wire choices are not important! If you believe this then I have to take the complete other side of the argument. (Of course I'm assuming that is what you are trying to prove by posting this link).

Now for some FACTS.  These same EXACT arguments were used in the early 80's to why CD players all sound the same. Double blind listening comparisons, measurements and scientific validity to show us all that the sonic differences between cd players were all in our heads. Now that manufacturers have managed to create a bigger sonic gap between basic cd players and great sounding players there are very few in audio who think that all cd players sound the same (regardless of what sort of scientific study or measurements can show otherwise. The same exact thing goes for amplifiers too!).  

Now to say that wires really don't really sound different is to propose that an entire industry of almost a thousand different wire offerings which have sold almost a million different customers is completely based on hype, and everyone is hearing differences that just do not exist (and I'm NOT even including the sales numbers to mid-fi customers by Monster cable either, because frankly these customers are typically buying on hype).

To further support my view I was in double blind tests myself where I (and almost a dozen people) correctly identify the differences between two high end cables with an average success rate over 80%, with some people scoring 100%.  

Hopefully you were not trying to support the preposterous mid-fi argument:   "this high end cable stuff is all a bunch of baloney". I do want anyone reading the link you provided to come to this conclusion because frankly it holds as much water as the "cd players all sound the same" argument from the 80's (that was also "scientifically proven").

One more point in that link that is soooo wrong: It's a hell of alot more than just making the speaker cables thick enough to detect the differnces in sound, then after the gauge is correct it no longer matters...This "scientifically supported" argument (with measurements to prove that thickness/gauge is all that matters) is sooooo shortsided that I don't even know where to begin other than say wrong, wrong, wrong. The ears don't lie, this is where the science and measurements fall flat on their face again, just like the cd players all sound the same argument that is now considered completely false and incorrect  

[DVV]

The percentages only matter if you're actually going to plunk the whole wad down at once. In that case, I'd suggest that you need more budget than 5% for interconnects and speaker cables unless your budget is HUGE or you're going the DIY route. By the way, DIY, USED, and MODS are the three keys to value in high end audio.

No, I don't, Jack. Even if I totally disregarded my own experience, I cannot accept a sweeping statement saying it means diddly what your wire is made of. I know for a fact, because I have tried (listened and measured) it myself, and ultimately, I use silver plated copper with carbon fibre cable (van den Hul 352 Hybrid).

I will agree with the author that there is (too) much hype surrounding cables, though; I have been let down far too many times to even try to discuss it, and to me, this is just as wrong as saying they are all the same.

The reason why I provided the link was to show that the other camp is still around, just as are those ascribing magical powers to cords.

Cheers,
DVV

[jqp]

Glad you emphasized that important type of logical fallacy. I often see it as the  "Simple and inexpensive cables are not good enough, therefore you need the exotic cables that look very impressive. (And by the way you need this cable display device also, so everyone can enjoy being impressed.) Couldn't resist throwing that last part in, since it would be a shame if the expensive cables not prominantly displayed.

As we might put it using the word "diddly" as above, "It DOESN'T mean diddly what your wire is made of, therefore you need the very expensive type of cable or interconnect." It is the simple Fallacy of Exclusion. Another example: "Zip cord performs extremely poorly in my system, therefore my cables must be as different from zip cord as the day is long, because I am an audiophile!" Yet this proposition, "zip cord performs extremely poorly in my system" does not mean that you can't make excellent speaker cable USING zip cord and other non-glamorous parts.

A good inductive inference gives us a reason to believe that the
conclusion is probably true, and therefore we should spend all that money.

It seems to me that invariably, someone has cables that cost more than at least one of the components that generates or amplifies or outputs the signal! Yet no seems to buy cables that cost more than each component! And from what I have read, cable ownership decisions seem to always be influenced by free samples or wholesale cable purchases.

And post hoc ergo propter hoc , "after this therefore because of this" is another possible fallacy we should not fall into. For example, did you try those amazing cables on a piece of crap system to see if it made a difference!

Also we can't forget the JOINT EFFECT part of post hoc ergo propter hoc



disclaimer: This is not a full argument against outrageously priced cables.  Cable testing has to be as hard as any a-b(-c) testing. This does not mean that cable Y doesn't sound best to someone in a system with components a,b,c,d,e,and f. But such tests don't tell us WHY cable Y is sounding good, or if it will sound good with a system with components p,q,r, and z. Notice my avatar - a flame suit.

[jqp]

2channelguy -

"if price and sound quality are of concern, good old 2 channel is the only way to
"
I agree with that basic rule too. I guess my last post was more about how and how not to make your basic rules.

[DVV]

Glad you emphasized that important type of logical fallacy. I often see it as the  "Simple and inexpensive cables are not good enough, therefore you need the exotic cables that look very impressive. (And by the way you need this cable display device also, so everyone can enjoy being impressed.) Couldn't resist throwing that last part in, since it would be a shame if the expensive cables not prominantly displayed.

As we might put it using the word "diddly" as above, "It DOESN'T mean diddly what your wire is made of, therefore you need the very expensive type of cable or interconnect." It is the simple Fallacy of Exclusion. Another example: "Zip cord performs extremely poorly in my system, therefore my cables must be as different from zip cord as the day is long, because I am an audiophile!" Yet this proposition, "zip cord performs extremely poorly in my system" does not mean that you can't make excellent speaker cable USING zip cord and other non-glamorous parts.

A good inductive inference gives us a reason to believe that the
conclusion is probably true, and therefore we should spend all that money.

It seems to me that invariably, someone has cables that cost more than at least one of the components that generates or amplifies or outputs the signal! Yet no seems to buy cables that cost more than each component! And from what I have read, cable ownership decisions seem to always be influenced by free samples or wholesale cable purchases.

And post hoc ergo propter hoc , "after this therefore because of this" is another possible fallacy we should not fall into. For example, did you try those amazing cables on a piece of crap system to see if it made a difference!

Also we can't forget the JOINT EFFECT part of post hoc ergo propter hoc

Hi JQP,

Sorry, I'm fresh out of napalm, so no flames today.

It's a fact that cables enter into a very complex relationship with output and input impedances, and are therefore influenced on both sides, in addition to possibly modifying at least one, or both.

I agree there's no sense in using a poor component to evaluate a high resolution cable, but I must point out that while you won't learn all there is to learn about that cable, you should be able to hear at least some difference even with poor quality components.

I also agree with what I have experienced for myself first hand - it's not so much what you use for cable, assuming a minimum of reason, as it's how you make that cable. Surely there will be differences betwee (to take the extremes) commercial quality stranded cable and superior quality pure silver cable, but they won't be as large as some ads would have us believe.

Superior insulation will make more of an impact, I feel, and in conjuction with the geomtery used, one could end up having a better commercial copper quality cable than a wild pure silver one.

Just my 2 cents' worth.

Cheers,
DVV

[Val]

Let's try to swim in shark-infested waters. I agree 100% that speakers are the main thing (Linn's Vereker nothwithstanding) and my *belief* (I'm trying to give myself a slack here ) is based on the fact that the speaker is the only almost fully mechanical component and therefore has more inbuilt distortion, so to speak (electrostatics in general and Quads in particular being perhaps an exception but with other problems of their own).

Instead of listing arbitrary percentages, I would recommend (especially if you are a newbie) that you spend as much as you can on a very high quality small speaker whose basic sound you like (neutral, warm, cool, whatever). There are several good brands/models out there and the second-hand market is a good place to start. The second step should be an amplifier that complements the speaker sound in every way (tube or ss, power vs speaker sensitivity, complementary type of sound), because I strongly believe the speaker-amplifier combination should be seen as a system. This will allow for a natural upgrade path that builds upon a base system you won't easily outgrow: first upgrade high-quality stands, second a high quality powered subwoofer, then a second subwoofer, and so on. My two cents in this very difficult hobby of ours.

Val