|
New member Username: 3putt747Sydney, NSW OZ Post Number: 1 Registered: May-06 | Here's the question... Given a fixed budget, say $x, how much of x should be apportioned to each of the three main areas of a dedicated 2 channel audio system? I'll start off... I reckon... 40:55:5 I used to think 40:50:10, but have changed my mind after a bit of research over the last couple of days. CAVEAT - Let's assume we're spending 'mere mortals' amount of money here. To give a bit of scope let's say.. US$5000 < x < US$20000 What do you think guys? I can't remember this being discussed lately in any articles / forums, so lets start the whole debate!!!! |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4076 Registered: Mar-05 | I wouldn't go only by fixed percentages, but also by usage patterns and personal taste. For example, somebody buying a system for 90% HT usage and loves megabuck action flicks: 30% components, 40% subwoofer, 30% speakers As compared to a 90% music system: 50% components, 50% speakers (2 mains, possibly a sub) |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2757 Registered: Dec-04 | Not far off, Ed, but: 35% source, 25 electrics, 30 speakers(2). For ht:10% source(cambridge 340), 40% speakers, 30% power and 20% sub |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2758 Registered: Dec-04 | And another 15% fir i/c's. Thats like a hundred and something, but everything runs over budget. |
|
New member Username: 3putt747Sydney, NSW OZ Post Number: 2 Registered: May-06 | Remember we're only talking 2-channel guys... |
|
New member Username: 3putt747Sydney, NSW OZ Post Number: 3 Registered: May-06 | I'm just after guys opinion on the following 3 aspects of a TWO CHANNEL system... COMPONENTS : SPEAKERS : CABLES I know componens can be broken down, but there are too many choices in config (seperates or not etc.) so I have left it as one.... |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2769 Registered: Dec-04 | https://www.ecoustics.com/cgi-bin/bbs/show.pl?tpc=1&post=716174#POST716174 |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4083 Registered: Mar-05 | > I'm just after guys opinion on the following 3 aspects of a TWO CHANNEL system... COMPONENTS : SPEAKERS : CABLES heh, that's too easy: 97% speakers + components, 3% cables or to be more precise: 40% speakers (viva Internet direct!!!) 47% components (viva Internet sales!!!) 3% cables (viva Home Depot!!!) Worth reading: http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm |
|
Silver Member Username: BvanCape Town, Copenhagen,... Post Number: 220 Registered: Jun-05 | i'm with you Ed. my sytem has 43% speakers ($2000) 32% integrated tube amp ($1500) 22% cd player ($1000) 2% speaker cable + interconnect ($50+$50) from years of reading and somewhat less experience this is what seems right to me. but i didnt approach my system buliding with any set %'s in mind. above figures are for MRRP. i think its always a good idea to look at used equpiment. i think you can afford to spend slightly less on s/s than tube power. i think you also need to think about the inevitable upgrade path. for example with bi-ampable speakers it might be best spend a bit less on amplification with a mind to buying more pwer at a later date and bi-amping speakers. b |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3327 Registered: Feb-05 | Having spent last weekend auditioning various interconnects, speaker cable and power cords I have to say that it can be worth it to pay more for good cabling as there is often a profound difference in performance. |
|
Silver Member Username: BvanCape Town, Copenhagen,... Post Number: 223 Registered: Jun-05 | art, if you found something that seems to work well with your prima luna please let me know. i'm keeping an open mind. i bought a consonance line conditioner/line protector last week for $80(new $200) and had a first critical listen to it tonight. i couldnt hear a difference but there well could have been. by the time i've powered down and up the tubes my memory is a bit foggy. still glad i bought it as i'm soon travelling to part of the world where lighning is a real risk. b |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3329 Registered: Feb-05 | I'm still trying to find a good balance with my system Bvan but will report as soon as I do. It may be awhile. |
|
New member Username: BvgArvada, CO Post Number: 9 Registered: May-06 | Hmmm. Well, some of you guys have been doing this forever, it seems, so I'll try to keep an open mind, but I remain fundamentally skeptical on the actual utility of fancy speaker cables above a pretty low base quality price point. I am prepared to spend more on interconnects, because the signal strength is so much weaker on those lines. Our dedicated 2-channel system looks like this: Speakers: 47% Components: 47% Cables:6%, but this is 98% interconnects. Keep in mind that our entire system is well below the price range stated (I guess we're not normal mortals...lol), so we just couldn't go lower on the components. Were we to inflate our budget a bit, a disproportionate share of the difference would go to speakers. I'd expect to break the above more like 55:40:5 if we had more headroom in the budget for a single room system. If we count the speakers that we purchased for our zone 2, we actually have more like 60:36:4 with our present setup. |
|
New member Username: BvgArvada, CO Post Number: 10 Registered: May-06 | Woops, I see that I swapped a couple of values. Make that 40:55:5, components:speakers:cables |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2776 Registered: Dec-04 | The source, Aragorn, the source. An iffy source signal will sound more iffy later down the line. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvgArvada, CO Post Number: 12 Registered: May-06 | Well sure, Nuck, but the best source out there will still sound iffy if the output "stage" (read speakers) can't reproduce it accurately. Hmmm. I'm not accustomed to thinking in terms of the budget Andrew gave us, so given that I'd have to revise my ratios a bit, it's true. He's got himself enough headroom to sweat the finer points. I'd probably go 35% source, 30% pre-amp/amp, 30% speakers and 5% cables/power filtration. But for smaller budgets, I still think you need more into the speakers than the components, which is exactly what we've done as noted above. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aLondonU.K. Post Number: 4213 Registered: Dec-03 | I recently bought a CD player which came with a simple stereo RCA interconnect which can be bought separately for 0.2 % of the cost of the player. I replaced it with one I had around, shorter (1 m), with thicker cables and gold plugs, which cost 1 % of the cost of the player. There was no obvious difference in sound quality. If there is anything in interconnects, I would have predicted a massive improvement - this is right down where a small increase in quality should have a large effect. The shop offered me a branded interconnect for 20% of the cost of the player. As regards the total cost of cables, a lot depends on how long you want them to be. Personally, I can't see any basis for a fixed formula. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BvgArvada, CO Post Number: 14 Registered: May-06 | I didn't take this to be a "fixed formula" question, more a general sense of proportions, to be used as a guideline. Clearly "balance" in some sense is important - there's no sense in driving cheap speakers out of a van with top of the line 5-figure components, or vice versa... When I said "more" on interconnects, I didn't mean anything near "20% of the player"! lol |
|
Silver Member Username: BvanCape Town, Copenhagen,... Post Number: 227 Registered: Jun-05 | "The source, Aragorn, the source. An iffy source signal will sound more iffy later down the line." if i may i'll say why i believe in the speaker first approach. the garbage-in-garbage-out argument leaves me a bit unconvinced because there doesnt seem to be much evidence of a reasonably well made source being garbage. i can hear differences between the 4 cd players i've had in my system(and blind tested), but i'm always amazed at how small the differences are. also, $1000 dacs like the benchmark apparently measure relitively perfect. then there is that old abx test argument that is often thrown up, about no blind tests ever having shown people can reliably tell well made players apart. dont want to drag that debate up again because i was just this week in reading a very lengthy argument between jan and gregory about this, amongst other things, and as usual there was little agreement reached. as i've said ,i know all players dont sound the same, but it does genuinely unsettle my sense of surety that the subjectivist camp always seems to skirt the abx evidence without ever confronting it head on. personally, i reconcile the test evidence with my own experience by beleiving that differences are so small that they cant be remembered between the time it takes to change cables. thats not to say that differences arent substantial by hifi standards, but in comparison to the less subtle differences in performance bewteen speaker brands and lines within a brand, it does say, to me anyway, that good sense is to put substantially more into speakers, to make a long story short. you got to go with your ears/brain at the end of the day i of course. (but i will also say i dont hold stock in non-blind auditions of cd player, amps, cables etc. because every person i have tried it on, myself included, have reported differences when the same component was played twice, which seems to tell me that subjective bias is strong, possibly strong enough to override the real differences that are there) b |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2816 Registered: Dec-04 | Bvan, I went with 'iffy' source for your reasoning. The source is not going to be changed(except for the Pledge), and the speaker response is going to be altered by bias, tonal controls, or both. You really must get a hold of the uncontrollable factors before modifying with the controllable ones. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1544 Registered: Feb-04 | speakers: $3500 (used) sub: $800 receiver: $700 (HT receiver, refurb) CD player: $350 (used) speaker cable: $35 (100' 12 AWG spool on clearance) CD interconnect: $15 Sub interconnect: $20 (or so) Totals: $4300,$1050,$70 = $5420 80% 19% 1% |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3338 Registered: Feb-05 | "Having spent last weekend auditioning various interconnects, speaker cable and power cords I have to say that it can be worth it to pay more for good cabling as there is often a profound difference in performance." I'm posting this again because I think that it is that important. Good interconnects, speaker, cables, power cords and good clean power supply has a VERY audible effect on the end result.........music. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1545 Registered: Feb-04 | Trying to balance out my extreme, Art? ;-) |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2822 Registered: Dec-04 | Well, I have included a fair amount for my new system to be dedicated to i/c's no percentage, as I do not know where I will end up. The cables will have to be there, no way to compare without listening. The AudioQuest spool cable and ends have made some nice i/c's in the past, though. |
|
Silver Member Username: BvanCape Town, Copenhagen,... Post Number: 228 Registered: Jun-05 | art, did you get to audition any of them blind? i'm not trying to be otherwise in any way, i'm really hoping to get to the truth of this and ask sincerely. if you did or are able to it would be of great help to me in this matter. i trust your word and your ears, as i do most of the regulars here, and i'd change my opinion happily if someone here could consistantly pick a cable blind. i want to beleive otherwise, its just that i'm so wary of biases creeping in as i've seen it happen so many times. cheers all b |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3339 Registered: Feb-05 | Blind testing or auditionning is silly in my opinion. I've proved on a number occasions that I can tell one cable from another to a level of statistical reliability....it means nothing. For me it's about music not science. Some time ago my wife and I did some blind testing (i believe it was so I didn't have to hear edster go on about it) and even she could reliably tell the difference. You may want to check our back log of posts. I listened to a whole lot of cables last weekend and not always did the most expensive win. However I could always tell one from another and could point out what to listen for to my wife. Folks who don't believe that there is a difference are robbing themselves of some of the music that's available on their software. Their choice, and that's ok. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1546 Registered: Feb-04 | We don't all hear the same anyway. To me, no two speakers sound even close, but I make only small distinctions between amplifiers and CD players. Go figure. |
|
Silver Member Username: BvanCape Town, Copenhagen,... Post Number: 231 Registered: Jun-05 | thanks art. not to argue the point, but whan you say "I've proved on a number occasions that I can tell one cable from another to a level of statistical reliability....it means nothing" you must have thought it worth proving this to youself no? and if you were unable to prove to yourself that you could consistantly pick a cable, wouldnt that have also proved something to you? i'm happy to admit that if i cant hear differences its because my ears, or more likely my level of listening experience, is lacking. and if i cant reliably pick the better cable, i would be silly to spend money on what i thought was the better cable(based on looks, price, other biases etc). wouldnt you agree?. (unless someone happened to have the eaxct same setup at me in which case i might buy a cable on their word) i dont think were in too much dissagreement here art. cheers b, |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3341 Registered: Feb-05 | "and if you were unable to prove to yourself that you could consistantly pick a cable, wouldnt that have also proved something to you?" Perhaps, but I only did it to satisfy someone else's curiosity as I already knew what the result would be. "if i cant reliably pick the better cable, i would be silly to spend money on what i thought was the better cable(based on looks, price, other biases etc). wouldnt you agree?." Completely. I would never put down someone who couldn't hear the difference and totally agree that if you can't hear the difference why throw away the money. Where I become concerned is when someone (not you Bvan) believes that because they can't hear the difference that the difference doesn't exist. Indeed I believe that we agree. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1548 Registered: Feb-04 | I can tell one cable from another to a level of statistical reliability Factoid: This implies a minimum of 30 independent samples. |
|
Silver Member Username: BvanCape Town, Copenhagen,... Post Number: 232 Registered: Jun-05 | you mean factoid as in "An invented fact that is taken to be true because of its appearance in print" ? |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2838 Registered: Dec-04 | Factoid,shmactoid, hear it or don't. Art hears it, Bvan doesn't and I am at the bottom of the audible gene pool. That's what the big black knob is for. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1556 Registered: Feb-04 | No, as in "brief fact". Sorry, it's something we used to say in grad school. I just found it interesting that Art used the term "statistical reliability". When you do a regression to declare a relationship between two variable, it turns out that you need 30 independent samples to get a statistically reliable answer, repeatable 19 times out of 20. My statement about stats should not be interpreted to mean that I don't believe Art when he says he can hear differences. |
|
Silver Member Username: BvanCape Town, Copenhagen,... Post Number: 235 Registered: Jun-05 | 5/5, 9/10, that would do for me i think. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2846 Registered: Dec-04 | I remember that Peter, isn't it annoying to be accurate within +-3%points, 19 times out of 20. And when the newscaster has to say it every time they quote an Angus Reid survey, it really is a bit much. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1557 Registered: Feb-04 | Bvan, I'm sorry but I don't understand. 5/5 = 100% 9/10 = 90% |
|
Silver Member Username: BvanCape Town, Copenhagen,... Post Number: 236 Registered: Jun-05 | i meant that if i could pick something 5 out of 5 times, or 9 out of 10 times i would be happy to call that 'statistically significant' or whatever the term is. i dont know anything about statistics, but i imagine the bigger the sample size the more latitude you have. so if you tested a 1000 times and got a 800 correct guesses, i would also imagine that could be called significant? what you think? b |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3349 Registered: Feb-05 | Sorry guys, I obviously used a loaded term for which I know the meaning but was still using colloquilly. I simply meant to imply that I could reliably tell the difference between the cables and even select brands after I became familiar with a signature sound. Anyway it doesn't really matter. For me good cables are worth some extra dough. I ain't talkin' Nordost Valhalla money...lol! |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2857 Registered: Dec-04 | Art,I am going to need one pair and quite short, I think. Do you find a synergy between i/c's and speakers leads between makers, or are they generally seperate choices? Kimber speaker leads in particular, how do you find the brand? Nuck |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3352 Registered: Feb-05 | Cables really need to be matched to each individual system usually through empirical research. Though I like Kimber I prefer Analysis Plus and Tara Labs. |
|
Gold Member Username: Rick_bOrlando, FL Post Number: 1369 Registered: Dec-03 | "Cables really need to be matched to each individual system.........." I couldn't agree with you more! I switch between Kimber and Transparent Audio Lab interconnects. I like my Kimber (silver) interconnects with my Jolida, but prefer the Kimber (copper) with my Sophia. As you change components (amps-CD players), you may have to go back and rethink/evaluate your cables. |