Inverse Mullet

Bert Schurink posted:

Yes I could of course get even better results with the Lohengrin - but at a very high costs.

When I first got a job in hifi my system was pretty respectable, LP12/Grace 707 tonearm/Supex SD900 into a Naim NAC12/NAP120 with Spendor BC1s.

My boss played me some of the legendary Ring Cycle by Solti on Decca. The poor little Spendor BC1s were popping their little bass drivers to bits. Then the bastard played me the same passage on a pair of Isobariks.

Within two years I had active Isobariks with 250s, and joined the local Wagner society. Damn that Wagner!

I have two go-to tracks that really test a hifi. The immolation scene from Gotterdamrung and The Witches Chorus from Macbeth.

Wagner has cost me a fortune and Verdi really tested the marriage.

Ardbeg10y posted:

My Ovators were a very good source upgrade :-) . Suddenly I started to hear much more compared to my BW CM S2 series.

They are run Active, and I really think that 'Activating' a system does have the same benefits as having a good source. More details survive in the chain, transparent midrange, clean treble, tight bass and so forth and so on.

But Ovators are not really expensive speakers. There is no need to spend hideous amounts of money to have good speakers. Same counts for Dacs.

All good if you happen to like Ovators! For starters in this house they don't have wife appeal, and having given the s400s extensive listening tests they just don't float my boat I'm afraid. You're absolutely correct in that you don't have to spend large sums, but there again we could all be driving around in Ford Fiestas which more than adequately get one from A to B. Sometimes it's nice, if you can afford it, to splash out on the next rung up the ladder don't you think?

Having never thought about it, I think I must fit into this category - with nds/555 and lp12 into 52/250 and then SBLs (that I bought used ten years ago, from a fishy source). 

Some of my purchases on the way have been opportunistic so it has depended on what has become available when - and the nds is pretty recent. But my plans (subject to being beaten into shape by reality!) involve upgrading stand (to Fraim) and amplification (not sure about that) ahead of speakers. 

I would always have said I believe in balance ahead of source first - on the basis that it’s the weakest link that is the limiting factor. So I am a bit surprised to realise that I have ended up with a system so heavily front loaded. And likely to get more so before  the speakers receive attention!

living in lancs yearning for yorks posted:

Having never thought about it, I think I must fit into this category - with nds/555 and lp12 into 52/250 and then SBLs (that I bought used ten years ago, from a fishy source). 

Some of my purchases on the way have been opportunistic so it has depended on what has become available when - and the nds is pretty recent. But my plans (subject to being beaten into shape by reality!) involve upgrading stand (to Fraim) and amplification (not sure about that) ahead of speakers. 

I would always have said I believe in balance ahead of source first - on the basis that it’s the weakest link that is the limiting factor. So I am a bit surprised to realise that I have ended up with a system so heavily front loaded. And likely to get more so before  the speakers receive attention!

I love that phrase. I so know what you mean. Nothing like being whacked around the head with a dose of reality.

Monkfish of the world unite!

On other fora there are advocates for a competent source and amp and then spend on the best speakers that go in your room.   

And frankly even Naim have now given up on source first by demonstrating the 272 with a 300 and Sopra 2s, and even a Uniti with Sopra 1s.

Synergy.  

The Strat (Fender) posted:

 

Synergy.  

Nailed it !

I think the last couple of posts represent my approach to system building - synergy rather than the formulaic approach. I do wonder sometimes how many of the hardline source first adherents have tried a better quality, more expensive speaker in their systems as they progress along the upgrade ladder - do they actually know what they're missing?

Timmo1341 posted

 I do wonder sometimes how many of the hardline source first adherents have tried a better quality, more expensive speaker in their systems.

Trying a more expensive speaker ?   Remember that Synergy is a moving target.

Timmo1341 posted:

I think the last couple of posts represent my approach to system building - synergy rather than the formulaic approach. I do wonder sometimes how many of the hardline source first adherents have tried a better quality, more expensive speaker in their systems as they progress along the upgrade ladder - do they actually know what they're missing?

Plus One.

I have synergy guaranteed with my speakers, apparently Joe Akroyd specifically designed the RR1s’ to work with Naim amplifiers.

The frequency response isn’t flat, but who cares, Joe didn’t, but he’s a genius.

Well, I'm stuck with my 'inverse mullet'.  Speakers only about 3% of cost of the current system (not including extra components such as Arcam AVR850).  The nSats have always easily shown the benefit of moving to better source amplification, and I can't think of any other speaker which would work as well tight against a wall and in corners. Nowhere else to put them.   The Royd Edens weren't bad, as long as I placed them with their ports facing away from the nearest side wall, though.

I did consider getting the 500DR rather than the 300DR, but couldn't see how I was going to fit it into the room.

TOBYJUG posted:

Timmo1341 posted

 I do wonder sometimes how many of the hardline source first adherents have tried a better quality, more expensive speaker in their systems.

Trying a more expensive speaker ?   Remember that Synergy is a moving target.

I guessed at least one would seize upon my use of 'more expensive'! Unfortunately quality is, in my experience, more often than not, proportionate to cost in the world of loudspeakers. I do recognise your assertion that profit margins may be lower when it comes to sources and amps (but definitely not in the world of cables), but the rule is still the same - quality doesn't come cheap. Synergy may, if you're very lucky, let your wallet off lightly. Be that as it may, you still failed to answer the question posed - how many better quality speakers have you actually tried on your journey (hifi shows and dealer demonstrations don't count!).

Timmo1341 posted:

TOBYJUG posted:

Timmo1341 posted

 I do wonder sometimes how many of the hardline source first adherents have tried a better quality, more expensive speaker in their systems.

Trying a more expensive speaker ?   Remember that Synergy is a moving target.

I guessed at least one would seize upon my use of 'more expensive'! Unfortunately quality is, in my experience, more often than not, proportionate to cost in the world of loudspeakers. I do recognise your assertion that profit margins may be lower when it comes to sources and amps (but definitely not in the world of cables), but the rule is still the same - quality doesn't come cheap. Synergy may, if you're very lucky, let your wallet off lightly. Be that as it may, you still failed to answer the question posed - how many better quality speakers have you actually tried on your journey (hifi shows and dealer demonstrations don't count!).

Yes your right, of course. Going through better speakers on my hifi journey has been enlightening.   First " serious" hifi system included the Kef coda standmounts.  I remember the nice chap at the once BADA registered hifi shop saying that they could easily see me through many upgrades.  Although my vinyl sourced system often had them bottoming out at relatively low volumes. I took to them with a hack saw to shorten the port tubes which really made them so much better. Going further up with other speakers there was less inclination to fiddle with them.

my only concern at present is to maybe get some speakers that are so damm heavy that they won't have shifted from their optimal position by the missus hoovering whilst I am away at work.  

Dungassin posted:

Well, I'm stuck with my 'inverse mullet'.  Speakers only about 3% of cost of the current system (not including extra components such as Arcam AVR850).  The nSats have always easily shown the benefit of moving to better source amplification, and I can't think of any other speaker which would work as well tight against a wall and in corners. Nowhere else to put them.   The Royd Edens weren't bad, as long as I placed them with their ports facing away from the nearest side wall, though.

I did consider getting the 500DR rather than the 300DR, but couldn't see how I was going to fit it into the room.

No one is saying that the N Sats won’t benefit from better amplification but have you tried say Kudos S10s which work very well in small spaces?

Don't the S10s need 40-50cm clearance at both side and rear? Not huge distances, but in a very small listening room might be crucial? 

My S20s are 10” from the rear wall.   Downward ported so very flexible. 

The Strat (Fender) posted:

My S20s are 10” from the rear wall.   Downward ported so very flexible. 

I'm confused Lindsay! You own these so obviously know what you're talking about, but every article or comment I've seen on the 'net says the S10s are rear ported?

Aren't you talking about two different speakers - the S10 (stand mount) and S20 (floor stander) ?

The S10 is rear ported and the S20 is bottom ported. 

I think another factor between source first vs balanced approach depends on the type of buyer you are.

If you are buying a one off high quality system and have no desire to dabble and upgrade, a balanced approach makes sense. You want the best result for your money and then forget about hi fi.

As a source first man myself it gave me a logical approach to system building over time. The end result is a balanced system, but over the years the front end was addressed first. It still is.

I would also argue that using Naim ‘speakers provides an ultimate version of synergy. Regardless, the value in the argument is that you can choose a rationale to system building that suits your budget and philosophy. The only correct approach is the one you choose. After all, it’s your money!

Stu

james n posted:

Aren't you talking about two different speakers - the S10 (stand mount) and S20 (floor stander) ?

Yes! Just noticed that Strat switched from S10 to S20. I'm easily confused!!

The Strat (Fender) posted:

Dungassin posted:

Well, I'm stuck with my 'inverse mullet'.  Speakers only about 3% of cost of the current system (not including extra components such as Arcam AVR850).  The nSats have always easily shown the benefit of moving to better source amplification, and I can't think of any other speaker which would work as well tight against a wall and in corners. Nowhere else to put them.   The Royd Edens weren't bad, as long as I placed them with their ports facing away from the nearest side wall, though.

I did consider getting the 500DR rather than the 300DR, but couldn't see how I was going to fit it into the room.

No one is saying that the N Sats won’t benefit from better amplification but have you tried say Kudos S10s which work very well in small spaces?

Well, the room's window constrains the the right speaker to close to wall (n-bracket) and <2" from side wall.  I think the S10s probably need more space.  I've got my nSats to sound very nice indeed.  I do occasionally switch in the nSub as well (about one album in 50 or so), but it took me weeks to get that balanced in correctly.

I am guilty too ... and would love a large set of speakers .... unfortunately I am space constrained ..... my pmc 21's do sound staggeringly good :-)

This is an interesting thread because I, too, cannot understand the monkfish approach, as I anticipate such systems would simply be far less satisfying to my ears.

I like my music to include the bottom couple of octaves uncurtailed, including playing at realistic music levels, and speakers that do deep bass well inevitably tend to be expensive. Emphasising the harmonics of the upper bass, as some speakers do is not full bass and is no substitute. And of course the mid and top have to be good, too, but that is less difficult and tgerefore less costly for a manufacturer to achieve. 

Of course the source is important, and if really bad, distorting or imposing a strong character on the sound, no speakers would make it sound good. However the argument about not getting out what you put in is irrelevant if one values the overall sound balance over sound detail, which I suppose is my position if I can't have both. And of course the ideal is to have both!

I have always been mullet-oriented, initially from my original learning about speaker design to build my own, and then discovering how much speakers influence the overall character of a system (a startlingly discovery at the first point when I bought rather than built my own speakers, when I was shocked at how vastly different the bunch of speakers I auditioned sounded, despite the not insubstantial price bracket equivalent to about £2-2.5k in today's money.)

Back when I bought my first non-diy speakers my source (turntable/arm/cartridge) to speaker value ratio was about 1:3 or 1:4, and sounded great to me. Before I got Dave a year ago (four decades and various changes since that previous mullet), the value ratio was remarkably similar at about 1:4 (source counted as store/renderer/DAC): and it sounded extremely good to me, something I could have lived with indefinitely, but just happened to have the opportunity to go for Dave, which has reduced the value ratio to around 1:1.3.

I am not saying I have spent that much on speakers, as, since one pair of speakers back in 1975, I have only bought them secondhand, wheras I've bought DACs new.

Dungassin posted:

 

 

Well, the room's window constrains the the right speaker to close to wall (n-bracket) and <2" from side wall.  I think the S10s probably need more space.  I've got my nSats to sound very nice indeed.  I do occasionally switch in the nSub as well (about one album in 50 or so), but it took me weeks to get that balanced in correctly.

With the nSub now balanced with the nSats, why do you not use it all the time?

Sorry for the confusion.  Indeed size constraints would make it impossible for the S10s to be bottom ported.   However,   I understand they still work well in smaller areas but as ever there’s only one way to find out.