[elambo]

The more you spend on electronics the less you need to spend on speakers. The more you spend on speakers the more you need to spend on electronics.

Why?

Great speakers will reveal all the problems you have with your electronics and you'll be annoyed by this. It's easiest to blame the speakers, but they're really only telling it like it is - it's the cheaper electronics at fault. Buy better electronics and suddenly those same speakers will sound better.

On the other hand, if your average speakers are powered by superior electronics they may still sound very good. There's a clean, accurate, undistorted signal making it's way to the speaker cones and they won't need to waste energy attempting to reproduce those artifacts. You would be surprised at how good Polk audio or the equivalent could sound with great electronics.


Some examples:

$2000 budget-
spend $1k on speakers, the rest on components

$5000 budget-
spend $2k on speakers, the rest on components

$10,000 budget-
spend $3k on speakers, the rest on components

As the cost of speakers doubles the need for electronics raises almost exponentially, to a point - there isn't a specific ratio.

So, as the budget increases and the speakers get better the electronics become even more important (if you're willing to critique audio at this level). Spending more than about $2,500 on speakers won't improve the sound very much, and if you want to notice this small improvement you would need much more expensive components.

In my system I've spent $20k on components but only $2500 on speakers and I don't feel the need to spend any more on speakers. I could, but spending twice as much would only increase the overall sound a very small percentage overall.

I've spent years testing 'great speakers/average electronics' & 'average speakers/great electronics' and if I had to choose I'd take the better source/preamp/amp over better speakers. This is how I hear it, anyway.

 

[CRESCENDOPOWER]

elambo writes:
"The more you spend on electronics the less you need to spend on speakers."
Then, is it O.K. to hook up a pair of Bose 301s to Krell electronics? I bet that would sound swell!
elambo writes:
The more you spend on speakers the more you need to spend on electronics.
Now, that quote I can agree with.
I know one thing for sure. The speakers, the placement of those speakers, and the room acoustics have more to do with final sound that you hear than anything else.
I have heard the Thiel 3.6s with Rotel electronics simply destroy the Thiel 1.5s with Krell electronics. Oh yeah! The Thiel 3.6s with Rotel electronics costs less than 1/2 the Krell, and Thiel 1.5s.
These general statements that people are making are just ridiculous.
Quote:

Originally posted by elambo The more you spend on electronics the less you need to spend on speakers. The more you spend on speakers the more you need to spend on electronics. Why? Great speakers will reveal all the problems you have with your electronics and you'll be annoyed by this. It's easiest to blame the speakers, but they're really only telling it like it is - it's the cheaper electronics at fault. Buy better electronics and suddenly those same speakers will sound better. On the other hand, if your average speakers are powered by superior electronics they may still sound very good. There's a clean, accurate, undistorted signal making it's way to the speaker cones and they won't need to waste energy attempting to reproduce those artifacts. You would be surprised at how good Polk audio or the equivalent could sound with great electronics. Some examples: $2000 budget- spend $1k on speakers, the rest on components $5000 budget- spend $2k on speakers, the rest on components $10,000 budget- spend $3k on speakers, the rest on components As the cost of speakers doubles the need for electronics raises almost exponentially, to a point - there isn't a specific ratio. So, as the budget increases and the speakers get better the electronics become even more important (if you're willing to critique audio at this level). Spending more than about $2,500 on speakers won't improve the sound very much, and if you want to notice this small improvement you would need much more expensive components. In my system I've spent $20k on components but only $2500 on speakers and I don't feel the need to spend any more on speakers. I could, but spending twice as much would only increase the overall sound a very small percentage overall. I've spent years testing 'great speakers/average electronics' & 'average speakers/great electronics' and if I had to choose I'd take the better source/preamp/amp over better speakers. This is how I hear it, anyway.

 

[elambo]

crescendo - oh boy, where do I begin...

One thing I appreciate about head-fi forums is the open-mindedness of it's members and their resistance to confrontation. There's a very positive vibe and we all look here to give and take advice. Almost every other audio forum on the web is filled with members who love to start a fire. Your post is the first I've seen here that's out of character for the rest of the head-fi members. If your information was pertinent, or even accurate, I might understand why you wrote it, but since neither is true I have to think that you might be looking for attention. I'll give it to you.

I wrote "You would be surprised at how good Polk audio or the equivalent could sound with great electronics," and you replied "Then, is it O.K. to hook up a pair of Bose 301s to Krell electronics? I bet that would sound swell!"
No, I don't consider Bose to be an equivalent of Polk and therefore wouldn't expect them to sound good with Krell electronics. In fact it's rather obnoxious. If you think that was a good comparison I think you give Bose too much credit. I guess you really would be surprised at how good a pair of Polk RT-5s sound when powered by Krell electronics.

Then later you wrote "I have heard the Thiel 3.6s with Rotel electronics simply destroy the Thiel 1.5s with Krell electronics. Oh yeah! The Thiel 3.6s with Rotel electronics costs less than 1/2 the Krell, and Thiel 1.5s."
It's interesting that you pick Krell and Thiel since that's what I own. I have a very intimate knowledge of their sound with each other and with a spectrum of other components. I've auditioned Thiels with Krell, Theta, Lexicon, Marantz and even Rotel. I've auditioned Krell with Thiels, Polk, Klipsch, B&W and yes even Bose. All of these in a very controlled environment and for long periods of time in my house. I wouldn't hesitate to say that I know what works with what. In the end I decided that Krell and Thiel have the superior synergy.

You don't like generalization? Neither do I, and I'd be happy to be more specific, but it wasn't called for. "Percentages on components", the topic here, is a huge generalization, and I think it's a fair question that can be answered the way I did. Describing all the aspects of audio without generalizations would be a challenge. My generalizations are completely accurate with my experience of every brand of audio electronics I've used in the past. Before I plunged into such an expensive line of components I asked a few friends to listen and their findings were consistent with mine. The majority of these people were audio engineers or music producers, not casual listeners, and I trust all of their opinions. My generalizations are based on all of these factors.

And I'll strongly agree with you on the importance of proper listening room acoustics, but I fail to understand your comparison of the Rotel/Thiel & Krell/Thiel since I have witnessed this for myself. To say that Rotel/Thiel 3.6 would "simply destroy" the Krell/Thiel 1.5 makes me wonder about your credibility. That and the Bose comment.

I try to make it a habit to refrain from defense attacks like this - this occasion was necessary. I'm hoping that as much as I've learned from this forum I can contribute back to it, but your comment about my post was certainly an attempt to discredit my writing. I'd like to think that I can help others when they ask a question and I don't think they should view my info as "ridiculous". I've been an audio enthusiast for 25 years and a professional audio engineer for 10. I'm a member of the recording academy and have been involved in the selection of the Grammy winners for a couple years. I also expect to have at least one album I've recorded, mixed and played on nominated for a Grammy this year. This past week I took phone calls from the Goo Goo Dolls and ABC-TV's network office, both asking my opinion on audio solutions, and I've learned enough along the way to feel comfortable posting my opinions here as well. I don't like stating credentials but feel it's necessary after your earlier post in order to clarify my generalizations. If you really feel like these generalizations are ridiculous you should send me an email and we can discuss this issue that way. Outside of that please try to keep this forum informational.

 

[taoster]

i must say, when i first read that bose comment i thought, oh oh.. it wasnt a fair remark but im glad it was posted. This way i can learn more from people who are knowledgable and without resulting into flames.

elambo, i hope you enjoy head-fi as the rest of us and share your wealth of knowledge with us. i know i always appreciate a knowledgable persons opinion especially if controversial.

 

[elambo]

taoster - I had to go back and edit my last post because I misspelled Klipsch (an easy thing to do) and I just saw your post. Thanks, I do enjoy Head-fi. I've never journeyed very far into the world of headphones because there are a couple standard models in the studio realm and I've almost always stayed with them. But in the last month I've learned so much about headphones that it's become a new hobby. And a pretty expensive one, too.

 

[Blighty]

I am pretty much in agreement with andrzejpw's father concerning the percentages. The bulk of your budget should be spent on the speakers as they make the greatest difference(not including recording quality) in the audio chain. Even if you are heavy into amp and source, I would not spend less than 50% of the budget on speakers. Personally I would go 70% speakers, 20% amp and whatever that is left over for the rest of the components. I often find it baffling that people are spending $2000 on a source, $1000 on an amp and only $200 for headphones. These are the same people who usually balk at spending more than $1000 on a headphone which would seem more logical to me given the allocation of funds towards the rest of their components.

 

[MacDEF]

I don't think there's anything wrong with spending less thatn 50% on speakers, the reason being that it's much easier, in my experience, to find a very good set of inexpensive speakers than to find a very good but inexpensive amp and a very good but inexpensive CDP.

For example, if I had $2000 to spend on speakers and amp, knowing what's actually out there I'd rather spend $1400 on the amp and $600 on the speakers than $1000 on each or $600 on the amp and $1400 on the speakers.

Then again, as I sit here thinking, I can come up with some pretty great inexpensive CDPs, as well.

Hmmm... maybe the truth is that *gasp* what really matters is what deals you can find and how well the components work together

 

[CRESCENDOPOWER]

elambo writes:
"One thing I appreciate about head-fi forums is the open-mindedness of it's members and their resistance to confrontation."

I am by far one of the most open-minded people on this forum, and I did not try to start a fight with you.

elambo writes:
You would be surprised at how good Polk audio or the equivalent could sound with great electronics.

I don't care what electronics you throw at Polk Audio they are still gonna suck, and in my opinon, they ain't much better than Bose. At least you could of said a good speaker in that price range like: PSB, Paradigm, NHT, B&W, Phase Technology, Monitor Audio, or Magnepan.

elambo writes:
"The more you spend on electronics the less you need to spend on speakers."

I think you need to re-read that statement, and think about it a while. If you really believe that statement, it is your credibility that is in question.

I have owned both the Thiel 1.5s, and 3.6s, and I still stand by my opinion.

As for your credentials, they mean absolutely nothing to me. There are editors of audiophile magazines that don't know what they are talking about.

 

[taoster]

heres an analogy in headphone terms..

which would sound better:

1. PCDP($30) -> HD600($250)

OR

2. CDP($100) -> TA/PC/META42(portable amp)($150) -> KSC35($30)

My bet is option 2 is by far the better sounding!

it's not so black or white but elambo brings up a very valid point. headphones, speakers often highlight the bad/good of the electronics which may not always be ideal.

 

[elambo]

______________

crescendopower wrote:
"The more you spend on electronics the less you need to spend on speakers."

I think you need to re-read that statement, and think about it a while. If you really believe that statement, it is your credibility that is in question.
______________


There must be some explainatin why you insist on making farcical comparisons (Polk RT5s at $300 to speakers that cost at 4 times as much and more like PSB, Paradigm, NHT, B&W, Phase Technology, Monitor Audio and Magnepan). I don't think you understand my statements. Maybe you're looking at them out of context. I'm not refering to scale-weighted figures where spending more $$$ on electronics means spending less $$$ on speakers. Perhaps too cryptically, I'm saying that at a higher budget a smaller 'percentage' is needed for speakers, not less money. In other words, doubling your budget doesn't mean that you should spend less money on speakers, rather that a smaller 'percentage' of that budget would be necessary for the best overall results.

I can't think of any reason why you would continue with the bad analogies UNLESS you think I'm refering to dollars instead of percentages. For the love of all that's holy please tell me that you understand this because I don't have the ability to continue an otherwise pointless tennis match with you while everyone else gets bored and the thread gets far off topic.

We seem to share an appreciation for the farcical situation at St*r*ophile and some other audio magazines, where almost every product review contains the phrase "the best I've heard to date." It's not so much that they don't know what they're talking about but that they aren't at liberty to talk about what they really know. When your income is based on the revenue generated by your advertisers and you're purpose is to review those same advertisers you have to wonder how genuine those reviews will be when the products are sub-par. For them a bad review can result in a loss of advertising from that client and what for-profit business would want to risk that. I rarely look at reviews in these types of magazines either, but I've found a few audiophile-level music reviews useful.

 

[elambo]

taoster - that might be an example of components that fall outside the thresholds of our reference. I would be fearful of listening to a Walgreens-brand PCDP with HD600's. It would be a rare example of a better scenario for the standard HD600 cable instead of the Cardas.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by CRESCENDOPOWER I don't care what electronics you throw at Polk Audio they are still gonna suck, and in my opinon, they ain't much better than Bose. At least you could of said a good speaker in that price range like: PSB, Paradigm, NHT, B&W, Phase Technology, Monitor Audio, or Magnepan.

Crescendo, I generally agree with you, but I would soften the above quote a bit

While Polk is generally at about the level of Infinity, etc., they do make a few stellar models, such as the RT25i:

http://www.stereophile.com/showarchives.cgi?417
http://www.stereophile.com/showarchives.cgi?464:7

 

[CRESCENDOPOWER]

Quote:

Originally posted by MacDEF Crescendo, I generally agree with you, but I would soften the above quote a bit While Polk is generally at about the level of Infinity, etc., they do make a few stellar models, such as the RT25i: http://www.stereophile.com/showarchives.cgi?417 http://www.stereophile.com/showarchives.cgi?464:7

I'm still pissed off at Polk for getting rid of the original LS series. Now, those were speakers! But, right now there isn't a speaker from Polk at any price range that can't be beat. At least that's my opinon.

 

[JohnActon]

Jeez, I'm not sure that I want to wade back into the middle of all this, but here are two more of my cents. First, I feel that it is apples-and-oranges to be comparing headphones and speakers (someone had posted above regarding the prices of electronics vs headphones). Due to the relative simplicity of design and the manner in which they are utilized (all pros and cons included) headphones possess a MUCH greater bang for the buck than speakers. This brings up what I like to call the Paradox of Headphones. Because great (world-class) headphones can be had so cheaply (in comparison to speakers of comparable sound quality), inevitably, many people choose to pair them with amps and source components that are not in the same class, sonically. A good example of this is the venerable Sennheiser HD 600. They can be had for comparatively little money, and thus, open the door for people to pair them with components of commensurate monetary value. Yes, they sound good driven by a portable CD player and a nice budget amp (Creek, Headroom Little, etc). But, because their resolution is so much higher than their price dictates, they are not out of place being partnered with much more expensive sources and amps. Also, they really spotlight the differences that are apparent amongst good interconnects. To provide a frame of reference, I pair a $350
pair of HD 600s with a $2500 Cary CD player, a $1000 Kimber Select interconnect and a $1200 (with mods) McCormack Micro Integrated. It sounds great. Do I think that the HD 600s are outclassed by the mucho-expensivo ancillary components? Not for a second. I use this same setup with my Stax Omega II rig. It also sounds great, but I think the Stax would benefit from even better components (dCS, Levinson), etc. The biggest mistake people can make is to underestimate the sonic abilities of headphones based upon their lower prices.

As for speakers, well, like I said, that is a different issue. While I agree that good middle range (in price) speakers like the Polks, lower-level PSB, Paradigm and B&W, etc. can sound very good when driven by top-notch electronics, I strongly believe that the sonic differences that exist between speakers are exponentialy greater than those that exist between electronic components (and cables). Furthermore, differences between components are less pronounced at the lower price ranges than at higher levels. If one is assembling a decent but lower-priced system ($1000-$2000), then I feel speakers are THE component that will most directly influence the overall sound of the system, and it behooves one to spend more (within reason) on them. If a person has $2000 to spend on a system, spending $1000 on a nice pair of speakers and $500 each on a decent integrated amp and CD player will, all else being equal (and I know it's not) have the potential to sound better than $500 speakers paired with a $750 amp and $750 CD player. Of course, one has to also consider differences amongst speaker designs; a well-designed $500 bookshelf may outperform a $1000 floor-stander if one is able to forego ultimate bass extension and dyanamic capability.

At the higher-end, however, electronic components become much more critical. The greater (in general) transparency of speakers at higher price points will readily show off differences between components. But, the law of diminishing returns really kick in here. A $30,000 speaker will not be even twice as revealing as a $5000 one (I'm REALLY generalizing, here - sorry). At that point, I agree that spending more on source components and amplification is viable. A $5000 pair of speakers driven by $15,000 worth of electronics is totally warranted. But at lower price points, where the quality of speakers is (generally) not as good, one should spend more on the speakers. Just my opinion, though!

 

[TaffyGuy]

wow, i should really learn to stay away from these kinds of threads, but when the CS1.5 and CS3.6's started getting thrown around, i couldnt resist!

at this point i'm bothered by the fact that we're supposed to be giving poor andrzejpw some advice, and we're not really working with him or getting any feedback!

the percentage thing is really easy to twist around, because when you're on a budget you can do a lot of things to not pay full price, and when you're on a budget the budget changes the percentages a lot themselves, as people have been pointing out!

I did this whole thing last summer, started out looking at $650 bookshelf speakers which would easily be powered by a $350 yamaha amp, and those systems sound really great.

I went to another store and listened to some big paradigm bookshelf speakers and ran into some Thiel CS1.5s, which blew them away (of course this was behind $20k of electronics, but still) and I was lucky enough to take the floor model away from them for $900 (40% off), they knew us because my parents bought their CS3.6's with Classe power amp<-marantz preamp from them. I realized i was interested in home theater capability as well, so I bought a marantz av receiver, the brand new SR7200, which was probably a little pricey at $800 because it was brand new.

So essentially I spent 55/45 on speaker/amp but really in a few months i imagine the amp went down to $700 or so and the speakers were really $1500, so its all about listening to combos yourself.

I recommend trying to pull off a "floor model" deal like I did, then you'd less the dealer markup on the speakers, which will help the budget a lot. then i'd recommend looking for used analog preamps, becuase they're completely out of fashion, and people are basically throwing them away. My dad is pissed and wants to upgrade to digital because his $1200 marantz preamp is going for $350 on ebay, and he has to use a separate technics preamp for digital (that sucks). You should probably go for new power amp, and hopefully listen to it at the place where you can haggle a good deal on some speakers. I think that they'd be willing to help you out. They're often VERY eliteist and uppity with young people, but if you go in there and tell them you've got an $800 budget, they'll enjoy pushing you up to $1500-$2000

But you havn't told us how much you want to spend. Listen to these other guys who obviously have a lot more experience than i do, but don't forget to get the most for your money either!

If its long and light on the info, you know its a TaffyGuy post

oh christ i almost lost the whole long winded thing previewing it. whew, what would you guys have done? my my