How much to spend on each component?

[Gerrardasnails]

Tarquinh:
Gerrardasnails, my current systerm is v-dac or Marantz SACD 7001 into a NAD C320BEE with Sonus Faber Minima speakers. I'd certainly agree that the speakers could benefit from a much better amp, but it still sounds good to me.

Many moons ago I had a £1000 amp (Musical Fidelity) going into some £150 speakers, and while it sounded better than its predecessor, a cheap sony amp, it wasn't brilliantly so. The speakers were from the Tannoy M6xx series - can't remember which ones.

That's what I mean, a £1k amp into £150 speakers is a lot to ask of the speakers and too much of a gap in class. I think these days, speakers seem to be very good once you go past £500 and on the flip side, amps from £300 to £500 are just good.

 

[Anonymous]

chiefbrody:Would i not be right in thinking that the amplifier can only amplify the signal it receives from the source,therefore the source being the limiting factor there, and the same principal with the speakers and amplifier, with the amplifier being the limiting factor?

Seems logical to me! That's not saying much, mind you. But yes, that's how I think of it. Or put it this way - I feel most inclined to upgrade my t/table before anything else. Having said that, I did start out following the 33:33:33 rule, gainsaying the notion that source is paramount. And also making it potentially more problematic to upgrade, as someone pointed out above (the idea being that everything has to be upgraded rather one or two weaker links).

 

[8009514]

I recall in the early seventies that the recommended split ratio for hifi was 1/3 on deck, 1/3 on amp, 1/3 on speakers. Then along came companies like NAD and LINN and kind of re-wrote that rule. Then it became something like 60% on deck, 20% for amp, 20% on speakers.

Nowadays I don't think there can be any kind of 'rule' to follow. Now, there's things like CDPs, hard drives, DACs, power cable, speaker cable, stands and blocks of marble to take into account. Not easy to split the budget up with all that to take into account. Just have to buy what you like.

 

[JoelSim]

I would say split it equally, all parts of the chain are important.

The argument that rubbish in, rubbish out holds true, but likewise a great source with mediocre speakers is not a good idea either. And not forgetting a great source and great speakers with poor amplification!

I suspect, however, that for sheer initial impact the speakers would have the greatest change on sound, but whether this will be the case after a few hours listening is debateable.

 

[jaxwired]

chiefbrody:Would i not be right in thinking that the amplifier can only amplify the signal it receives from the source,therefore the source being the limiting factor there, and the same principal with the speakers and amplifier, with the amplifier being the limiting factor?

Yes, of course that is true, but you've over simplified the problem because if you graph sound quality against price it's not linear, it's asymptotic, meaning it approaches a constant value as price increases.

Additionally, the curved line of the quality vs. price of amplifiers, CDPs, and speakers are not similar.

So, what does this mean? Well, it depends on your budget, but spending double on a CDP will generally reap less improvement in sound quality than spending double on speakers. Amps are in between the 2. What you want is, given your budget to divide the money so that you hit the sweet spot of maximum sound quality in amp, CDP, and speakers. This division should reflect which components reap the most quality as price incrases.

So if you rank the 3 components according to how fast sound quality improves as price increases, as follows:

1. CDP (SQ improves quickly with price)

2. Amplifier (SQ improves at medium rate with price)

3. Speakers (SQ iimproves ast slow rate with price)

You should therefore split your budget with the largest ratio on speakers, then amp, then CDP. To maximize SQ you must consider this ranking. We can argue about the ranking, but that is another matter.

 

[Anonymous]

jaxwired:
chiefbrody:Would i not be right in thinking that the amplifier can only amplify the signal it receives from the source,therefore the source being the limiting factor there, and the same principal with the speakers and amplifier, with the amplifier being the limiting factor?

Yes, of course that is true, but you've over simplified the problem because if you graph sound quality against price it's not linear, it's asymptotic, meaning it approaches a constant value as price increases.

Additionally, the curved line of the quality vs. price of amplifiers, CDPs, and speakers are not similar.

So, what does this mean? Well, it depends on your budget, but spending double on a CDP will generally reap less improvement in sound quality than spending double on speakers. Amps are in between the 2. What you want is, given your budget to divide the money so that you hit the sweet spot of maximum sound quality in amp, CDP, and speakers. This division should reflect which components reap the most quality as price incrases.

So if you rank the 3 components according to how fast sound quality improves as price increases, as follows:

1. Speakers (large SQ improvement as price increases)

2. Amplifier (medium SQ improvment as price increases)

3. CDP (small SQ improvement as price inceases)

You should therefore split your budget with the largest ratio on speakers, then amp, then CDP. To maximize SQ you must consider this ranking. We can argue about the ranking, but that is another matter.

Spot on.

 

[idc]

Tarquinh:

Gerrardasnails, my current systerm is v-dac or Marantz SACD 7001 into a NAD C320BEE with Sonus Faber Minima speakers. I'd certainly agree that the speakers could benefit from a much better amp, but it still sounds good to me.

Many moons ago I had a £1000 amp (Musical Fidelity) going into some £150 speakers, and while it sounded better than its predecessor, a cheap sony amp, it wasn't brilliantly so. The speakers were from the Tannoy M6xx series - can't remember which ones.

In the same shop where we put my B&Ws on the Naim kit I also heard very expensive speakers and yes they sounded excellent. My point was more to do with speakers costing less to produce and there being more competition than amps and CDPs and amps, so you should be able to get a comparable set of speakers for less money. My other point was to do with auditioning and synergy being more important than thinking I need to spend x on amp, x on CDP and x-2 on speaker with whats left over on cable etc. My most expensive piece of kit was my amp, because with my CDP and speakers it sounded great. It was the Mira (What hifi 4 stars) as opposed to the Brio (What hifi 5 stars). But if you follow the must spend x on amp theory I should have bought the Brio.

 

[Anonymous]

I ended up spending less on the speakers than on the other components, because (a) I found that upgrading the CD player made a much more dramatically positive difference when compared with upgrading the speakers (while still keeping within my budget of ~£2500), and because (b) In a couple of years time I intend to flip my RS6's into the RS6 AV 5.1 system and spend £1500-£2000 on some new speaker, possibly also adding in the Cyrus 8power to the system.

Go with your ears! But it also helps to plan for the future.

 

[Anonymous]

It doesn't cost much to make a good CD player.

An amplifier requires expensive heat sinks, power supplies, etc, etc so will cost more to make.

Loudspeakers will cost the most the make, especially if you need a large pair.

 

[Anonymous]

Eddie Pound:
It doesn't cost much to make a good CD player.

An amplifier requires expensive heat sinks, power supplies, etc, etc so will cost more to make.

Loudspeakers will cost the most the make, especially if you need a large pair.

Ah, but how much they cost to make doesn't necessarily corrolate to how much they cost to buy

 

[JoelSim]

ffiish:Eddie Pound:

It doesn't cost much to make a good CD player.

An amplifier requires expensive heat sinks, power supplies, etc, etc so will cost more to make.

Loudspeakers will cost the most the make, especially if you need a large pair.

Ah, but how much they cost to make doesn't necessarily corrolate to how much they cost to buy

Remember there are plenty of other factors included in a price, ie R&D, Marketing etc etc etc

 

[Anonymous]

Speakers are the weakest link by far and a decent pair of 8 ohm speakers will be easy to drive so will work really well a nice 100 wpc Nad. Bigger amps always sound better and Nad is good.

The source is no longer the issue it used to be, a cheap laptop and M-Audio Transit will be up there with the best. A Netbook cheaper and better still. But speakers are the difficult ones. With care you should be able to find something so good a modest amp will give superb sound.

Spend lots of time listening to speakers and remember 8 Ohms is kinder to Amps and potentially better sounding because halving impedance doubles distortion.

Ash

PS. There's no R & D in any of this because the technology is very old and well understood. Some companies have been using the same amp circuit for decades!

 

[Don Guess]

Ashley James:Bigger amps always sound better

You should have been at the Scalford Hall Show. The best sound by far was a 6 watt single ended valve amp into some big Tannoys..

 

[Anonymous]

"1979 Amstrad Music Centre, Bell Wire, Ronco LP Cleaner, Readers Digest Record Club Subscription"

 

[JoelSim]

Ashley James:Speakers are the weakest link by far and a decent pair of 8 ohm speakers will be easy to drive so will work really well a nice 100 wpc Nad. Bigger amps always sound better and Nad is good.The source is no longer the issue it used to be, a cheap laptop and M-Audio Transit will be up there with the best. A Netbook cheaper and better still. But speakers are the difficult ones. With care you should be able to find something so good a modest amp will give superb sound.Spend lots of time listening to speakers and remember 8 Ohms is kinder to Amps and potentially better sounding because halving impedance doubles distortion.AshPS. There's no R & D in any of this because the technology is very old and well understood. Some companies have been using the same amp circuit for decades!

Are you saying that there is no R&D in your Neutron V or ADM9?

ÿ

 

[jaxwired]

Ashley James:Speakers are the weakest link by far and a decent pair of 8 ohm speakers will be easy to drive so will work really well a nice 100 wpc Nad. Bigger amps always sound better and Nad is good. The source is no longer the issue it used to be, a cheap laptop and M-Audio Transit will be up there with the best. A Netbook cheaper and better still. But speakers are the difficult ones. With care you should be able to find something so good a modest amp will give superb sound. Spend lots of time listening to speakers and remember 8 Ohms is kinder to Amps and potentially better sounding because halving impedance doubles distortion. Ash PS. There's no R & D in any of this because the technology is very old and well understood. Some companies have been using the same amp circuit for decades!

Ashley, I find this fascinating. Please give me your opinion. Do you think that there is any significant difference between a £500 NAD amp and a £3000 Plinius amp? When do diminishing returns kick in with Hi Fi amps?

 

[jaxwired]

Ashley James:Speakers are the weakest link by far and a decent pair of 8 ohm speakers will be easy to drive so will work really well a nice 100 wpc Nad. Bigger amps always sound better and Nad is good. The source is no longer the issue it used to be, a cheap laptop and M-Audio Transit will be up there with the best. A Netbook cheaper and better still. But speakers are the difficult ones. With care you should be able to find something so good a modest amp will give superb sound. Spend lots of time listening to speakers and remember 8 Ohms is kinder to Amps and potentially better sounding because halving impedance doubles distortion. Ash PS. There's no R & D in any of this because the technology is very old and well understood. Some companies have been using the same amp circuit for decades!

Ashley, I find this fascinating. Please give me your opinion. Do you think that there is any significant difference between a £500 NAD amp and a £3000 Plinius amp? When do diminishing returns kick in with Hi Fi amps?

 

[SHAXOS]

Id blow most of my money on the speakers and the amp. I have spent alot on my cd player and to be honest its not THAT much better than my last player. Im of the opinion that there is not that much different between two good cd players. For example there was no WOW factor when i plugged my new cd player in in it sounded great but it no way justified the outlay over my last one. When i changed my amp and speakers though...

So my budget would go mostly to speakers then amp then get a decent cd player.

 

[Anonymous]

jaxwired:

Ashley, I find this fascinating. Please give me your opinion. Do you think that there is any significant difference between a £500 NAD amp and a £3000 Plinius amp? When do diminishing returns kick in with Hi Fi amps?

There is no reason other than power output, the cost of the metalwork, where something is made, in what quantities and the amount spent on Marketing, that an expensive hi end amplifier should sound any better than NAD or Cambridge Audio and many others.

Electronic components are cheap and cheaper if you're a big company making larger quantities, so if you are totally objective you should make damn sure a Plinius sounds better than the NAD or any other that's been suggested before deciding. However we're all snobs and tend to buy Audis rather than Fords even if there isn't much difference between them.

Someone asked about R & D and our Neutron 5s. This comprised of agreeing a specification for the drive units and a suitable box volume with the drive unit manufacturer, receiving samples, 5 minutes to design a crossover, making 10 pairs, having them assessed by various professionals and enthusiasts who we trust to spot things we miss and then once we're sure they are good, going to production.

ADM9 and now 9.1s were very different because there was a great deal of work in assessing current Active speakers, re-assessing crossover design because there is much more flexibility and getting used to how much more detail could be heard through the silence of good damping and inaudible crossovers. We didn't get it completely right first time although 9s were a big advance, so we introduced the 9.1s which were another jump. But they are really a new use for known technology and treading new ground, so there is a great deal more involved. Passive speakers are very simple and can be designed in a spare half hour of any competent engineer's time even if you do we do the maths long hand as we do.

Ash

PS. The trade margins will be much higher on hi end both for the distributor and the retailer to make up for the far smaller quantities sold. Shipping costs will be high too because NAD will probably take a container load, Plinius will probably come in very small quantities.

 

[Anonymous]

Don Guess:Ashley James:Bigger amps always sound better

You should have been at the Scalford Hall Show. The best sound by far was a 6 watt single ended valve amp into some big Tannoys..

I'm sorry but that cannot be for a million engineering reasons, however you may have liked that particular sound.

Subjective evaluation is dangerous IMO in that it removes the yardsticks that we need to assess good hi fi.

By the time the average male reaches 35 his hearing will have lost a considerable amount of sensitivity at 3kHz, which is the most important bit if we are to be able to understand what is said to us and to hear clarity in music. Therefore our enjoyment can be hampered by poor hi fi because it is distorted and less clear. You may enjoy something that is in this category, but you need to bear in mind the benefits of a really accurate system, which will be smoother, clearer and much better to listen to at modest volumes as well as flat out for a party.

If you cannot measure hi fi and predict how it will sound as we do before we start listening, you should use speech and pianos and other acoustic sounds to hear how near your preferred system is getting. Stereo images are vital too because they seem real and this makes us feel more comfortable with what we're listening to and enjoy it more.

Ash

 

[john dolan]

Those big tannoys have a sensitivity of 99db and will go as loud as the small inefficient avi speakers with just a few whats were the avi speakers need hundreds.They also have a full range and produce real bass with power.They go down to 18hz.The best sound i ever heard was with a 4 watt SET into kevin scots air partners which are 114 db.It was also the most dynamic.Lots of power doesn't mean better sound and often those big juggernauts sound like sludge pumps.

 

[Anonymous]

John

I'm afraid that you are mistaken because Bass extension is a function of sensitivity and diaphragm diameter, so a 15" with 99dB/W/M will not have any more bass extension than a 6.5" drive unit of 87 dB/W/M.

Larger drive units become very directional at higher frequencies, which means they put less energy into the room in the middle and upper registers and so sound dull, which is why they appear to have more bass. This is why the vast majority of loudspeakers are either 5" or 6" two way or variants thereof. It is the best compromise.

Those lovely old Tannoys have their origins in the nineteen thirties when that type of speaker was used on stage for filming Musicals. In America they were made by Altec Lansing and Germany by Telefunken and they were used for dance routines and practice to save the Orchestra from having to keep playing the same bits over and over again.

Tannoys are now valuable collectors items and an important piece of history, but I'm afraid they are not as accurate as the best modern monitors.

To get an increase of 3dB in SPL you need to double amplifier power so a speaker of 99dB/W/M sensitivity driven by a 4 Watt amp will produce a maximum of 105 dB, not 114 dB. A Concert Grand Piano produces 110 dB at a Metre so more power is needed. ADM9.1s produce peaks of 118 dB.

 

[john dolan]

Those lovely old tannoys are still current models and generally regarded to be amongst the finest speakers made.Are you trying to say your active avi can play as loud and go as deep as these huge speakers with 15 inch driver.99 db bass down to 18hz and can take continuous 135 watts. http://www.tannoy.com/ResidentialDetail.aspx?pid=138&sid=27 active avi speakers start to roll at 65 hz and even your active sub only goes down to 30 hz.If you have insensitive small speakers then yes you will need a few hundred watts to play loud.If you have sensitive speakers like the air partners i heard that are 114db then they do play at 114 db for just one watt.There's more than one way to build a hi fi system and they all offer different advantages.

 

[john dolan]

The speakers i use atm are 90 db and 8 ohm load.I have 3 amps ranging from 20 watts class A also 60 watt and a 125 watt mono blocks.The loudest i listen to my music is 70 db thats on dynamic peaks measured with a sound meter.I use the 20 watt amp because it sounds better than the higher powered amps.It sounds better because its a better amp power has nothing to do with it as long and the amp is used within its power limits.The volume i listen at my amps never use 1 watt and it would sound no better if it was 100 or 1000 watts.

 

[Anonymous]

LOL, not a fan of valve amps then Ashley?

Budget is less important than synergy. You could spend £50k on an Ongaku, but with a pair of 82dB, 4 ohm speakers a £250 solid state integrated might give a better sound.

Buy speakers that work well in your room, with the kind of music you like, at the volume level you like to listen.

Buy amplifiers that will drive the speakers properly at this level, with a bit of headroom for when you want to go louder. If you enjoy the sound of valve amplification, bear this in mind when choosing the speakers!

Spend the rest on the best source you can afford, remembering to leave about £20 for cables.