Prioritise Amp or Speakers?

[admin_exported]

I currently have a Sony all-in-one for audio and am about to move to a proper system because I am mad keen to get HD audio! I am happy with my Sony Blu Ray player and HD screen.

The plan is to buy an amp and speakers and then spend years upgrading them item by item until the system is completely over the top.

Assuming a total spend of, say, around 3000, would it be better to get a modest amp eg 2400ES and goodish speakers eg Tannoy Revolution, or to get a goodish amp eg Z7 and modest speakers eg Diamond 9.1?

My assumption is that the amps date a lot faster than the speakers, so the first option makes more sense because upgrading in a year or two would have a good amp with speakers that still rated, whereas in the second case the amp may well be obsolete by the time I get to upgrade the speakers.

But what would sound nicer now? I am not so concerned with the specific models/brands but with the underlying principle. 

 

[Anonymous]

It's really all about balance. I would not suggest spending too much money on one but then insufficiently on another.

However, good loudspeakers will last many years. Can't really say that for A/V Receivers, which get updated all the time.

If much more money has to be spent on either loudspeakers or an A/V Receiver, I would recommend spending more on loudspeakers.

However, there really is no point spending heaps of money on good loudspeakers, only for them to be powered by not-so-good amplification. The loudspeakers then would not be singing as well as they could. The same works the other way; get really good amplification, but if the loudspeakers are not good enough to reveal all the detail and nuances, then it's a waste.

I would say perhaps look at a lower Yamaha, say, the '863, add a multi-channel Power Amplifier, such as a Rotel RMB1077 7-channel Class D Power Amplifier, and perhaps something like the B&W 600-series loudspeakers. Perhaps start with the main pair and centre channel loudspeaker, then sub-woofer and surround loudspeakers, when funds allow.

 

[TheHomeCinemaCentre]

As above I would balance it out a bit more. An amp at £1000 and speakers at £2000 should do it. You could do a Yamaha RXV1900 and some Tannoys Revolution Signatures for your budget and it will sound very good indeed.

Nick

 

[Anonymous]

johna11:

My assumption is that the amps date a lot faster than the speakers, so the first option makes more sense because upgrading in a year or two would have a good amp with speakers that still rated, whereas in the second case the amp may well be obsolete by the time I get to upgrade the speakers.

But what would sound nicer now? I am not so concerned with the specific models/brands but with the underlying principle.

I've just been through the same crisis with a a slightly higher budget than yours. Narrowed the speakers down to MA RS series or Tannoy revolution signatures and finally, on the basis that the wife was never going to let me spend any more money to upgrade, went for the complete MA setup: RS6 silvers, centre, rsw12 and Radius rears along with the DSP-z7.

To be honest I can't see anything that would push me to justify upgrading the amp in any foreseeable timecale and if I'd had to make a constraint I'd be inclined to get the amp and stero speaker pair I wanted and build on that later rather than make a more substantial compromise...

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the comments. Excellent point about getting budgets for upgrades past the finance committee!

I think I might revisit the budget and see if I can avoid buying a deliberate compromise.