Help me understand a mullet or how to avoid one.

This, the ‘skullet’,  is to be avoided at all costs.

All that you are considering sounds within the range on non-mullet. Avoid weedy sources and amplifiers into demanding speakers and you should be fine.

Audition, audition, audition. The three golden rules.

Good luck out there.

G

Make sure you like the sound of the speakers (of course as handled by your amp) - the speakers have the greatest influence of any component over the character of the sound, so if you find that what you like is the sound of transmission line speakers, which tend be on the pricy end of the scale because of their complexity of design and build, then you may naturally tend towards a ‘mullet’ approach. If on the other hand you don’t like/want deep bass at all, may be easy to avoid a mullet.

Some people (the anti-mulleteers) argue that you will only get out what you put into a system - and of course that is true ...but so indeed is the opposite, you will only get out what you let out (and through). Yes, you can tell the difference between poor and good sources with quite a limited speaker - and you can tell the difference between poor and good speakers using quite a limited source. 

At the end of the day there is no hard and fast rule, only what you like, bearing  in mind that systems have not yet reached perfection (if perfection is pure transparency) - though I believe that ignoring the limitations of the recording itself, of all components speakers are the furthest from perfection (hence an area where you can spend a lot of money getting the best balance of limitations). Meanwhile improvements in digital sources - DACs in particular - in recent years means that getting at least a half decent source need not be very expensive, perhaps shifting balance of cost more towards the mullet end for more people - or enabling even better sources for those with lesser demand on speaker capability.

There was a thread last summer entitled % Spend on Hi-Fi components which you might find of interest. My own present system is as below, based on current new recommended retail price, or maufactuerer's current equivalent where my own model is no longer in production (what I actually paid has been quite different because I bought much of it secondhand).

Source (music store, renderer and DAC: 33%
Amplification (power amp only as I don't use a preamp): 16%
Speakers: 50%
Cables: 1% 

Interestingly just 15 months ago the value proportion of my system was quite different, with  a single item (DAC) making the difference, though amp and speakers also changed. Whilst not as good sound, the earlier system was no less enjoyable, though maybe a little less addictive:

Source (music store, renderer and DAC: 12%
Amplification (power amp only): 21%
Speakers: 66%
Cables: 1%

I'm struggling with budgeting. I do like all 4 speakers I am considering and my amp can drive them. (100W valve amp). 

It just seems to me that in most systems I really enjoy (usually with Naim Source and sometimes Naim Integrated) the speakers have been the least expensive component not the most. 

I loved a Qute with Totem Mites. 

Was completely blown away with a CDX2 w/ Rogue Audio Cronus Magnum and Dali Mentor Menuet. 

Old school I remember my first exposure to Naim being a CD3 and Nait 3R with Linn Ninka speakers. (Possibly the most balanced system). 

Lastly a friend had a original Nait with Mission Freedom speakers and Rega Apollo-R. 

None of those systems was dominated by speakers. 

Thanks for the replies. I've been snowed in today and have decided completely against a bookshelf solution as my room needs more driver area to fill the room. 

Floorstanders seriously limits my options although I did just spot a pair of Ninka speakers up for sale locally. Hmmmmmmm. 

I would go for 40% source + 40% amps + 20% speaker...

ralf

I’d match the best components with the right speakers for the room.  In my case a compact but nonetheless quality speaker.   But if I had a more expansive listening area I’d have bigger speakers but still the same amps. 

T38.45 posted:

I would go for 40% source + 40% amps + 20% speaker...

 

ralf

I love a good Monkfish.

My own system is a terrible mullet, partially due to where I am in the "upgrade cycle". I'm driving S600s with a SN1/Hicap, and using the SN1 DAC  as the "source". It sounds good to me, though. So I'm like 5%/25%/70%

But I'd think that equal thirds wouldn't be far wrong for source/amp/speakers as a starting point. Cables on top of that, I guess. Speakers play differently in different settings. In any particular range, the bass extension typically goes deeper, the more you spend. If your room does not handle that deeper bass well, then less on speakers can sound better.

I can remember once hearing at the Bristol show the SN1 fed by a MacBook into Allaes.   It was fine.  

Another factor of significance is where you are in the upgrade game: Is it a one off system or endgame, with no planned upgrades? And if not, how many steps might be envisaged - lots of small,  steps aiming to keep balanced (whatever that means to the listener) along the way, or a few big ones, minimising overall cost while accepting that overall balance might not be perfect along the way? With respect to the last, the emphasis, I contend, should be on what sounds good (to the listener).

I'm at the end of my upgrade journey.   Speakers are the last item on the list.  I want no more upgrades (other than a decent cartridge for my TT, but that is a secondary source).  

Brubacca posted:

I am trying to understand the concept of a Mullet system.  My understanding is that a Mullet has put significantly more  resources into the speakers than electronics.  I am not asking about the specific equipment I mention, but merely the idea of the different levels.

Don’t try to understand the concept of a Mullet system.  If you like the sound of the system with the speakers enjoy it, don’t post here and don’t worry.

If it’s final go holistic, you’re looking for a system that works together. Source first is an upgrade strategy to maximise enjoyment during the process not an end point.

Brubacca posted:

I'm at the end of my upgrade journey.   Speakers are the last item on the list.  I want no more upgrades (other than a decent cartridge for my TT, but that is a secondary source).  

Then the one and only important thing is to find speakers that sound good to you, in your room, using your amp (and rest of system), absolutely regardless of cost/relative value/component 'level', subject only to being affordable (and personally I would look secondhand as that opens the door to better speakers). It doesn't matter if their value is <$1,000 or >$10,000. Personally I would think what I could afford, and see what is available up to that...

You did say you're not seeking recommendations, and in any case that is very difficult as everyone's taste is different, both in musical styles and what sounds right to them. I know from my own experience that if you pick a handful of speakers at the same price point - even quite an elevated one - they will all sound very different.

If you're buying secondhand or for any other reason can't try at home, do take your own amp and existing speakers to audition at the seller's place - speakers because they will allow you to aclimatise yourself to the difference in the room, and so hear the difference in the speakers you're auditioning. Unless you have reason to be in a hurry, take your time until you find something that sounds really great to you, after all, it is the final piece in your jigsaw and it needs to satisfy.

The Strat (Fender) posted:

I can remember once hearing at the Bristol show the SN1 fed by a MacBook into Allaes.   It was fine.  

And yet, I found the CDX2 into the same SN1 and Allaes was rather better - initially it seems quite subtle, and on a quick comparison you may wonder what differences there really were, and yet it soon became significantly apparent, to the point where listening to a piece of music through the CDX2 and then going back to the ALAC CD rip on iTunes via the Macbook, the drop in "realism" to the performance was marked.

As you say, the Macbook was fine. But even with the internal DAC of the Supernait helping it out, it couldn't compete with the CDX2.  

[@mention:41551091830475636]

I'm not looking for specific recommendations because I know what I want to Audition.  The biggest issue is affordability or lack thereof.  I'd like a pair of Totem Forest or Monitor Audio Gold 300.  Unfortunately I can't afford either.  I can afford their comparable bookshelves, but it just isn't what is needed in my room.  I don't want to spend time at the dealer if I can't afford to support them.  Also final decisions obviously haven't been made.  I would need an extended listening session after I get my funding in order.  Maybe I'm another year or so off.  

It sounds like it wouldn't be crazy to buy $4,500 speakers to go with my system, once I have the money for them.  

Brubacca posted:

Help me understand a mullet or how to avoid one

1) start with a basic system that suits your immediate budget, - ground zero - we all do this and progress from there,

2) do some rudimentary room treatment to eliminate the basic deleterious reflections,

3) fine tune with due diligence on racking, interconnects, power cords, cable dressing, and a power strip,

4) exhaust all speaker options at your disposal to find the pair that best works in your room,

5) having done steps 1-4, all other box changes and potential upgrades should logically show their true merit, 

6) let your ears be the final judge and don't let folks on a forum dissuade you; no one else has your ears or particular taste in how hi-fi replay ought to sound.

Steps 2-4 might be interchangeable and you may have arrived at step 4 from the beginning, but skip one of those and you could be chasing your tail with needless black box "upgrades".

Bottom line - there is no such thing as a system mullet if it works for your ears, in your room, and to your budget.

Richard Dane posted:

The Strat (Fender) posted:

I can remember once hearing at the Bristol show the SN1 fed by a MacBook into Allaes.   It was fine.  

And yet, I found the CDX2 into the same SN1 and Allaes was rather better

Surely in the context of this discussion thats irrelevant.  No one is arguing that all sources sound the same.

Now the question is does a CDX2 into a SN1 into a pair of cheap a$$ speakers sound better than the MacBook into SN1 DAC and Allaes?  In other words - which was more important to the equation; the speakers or the source.

As I recall the "Mullet" system debate really comes from the early (?) days of mating a LP12 with a NAD 3020 and a pair of Wharfedale Diamonds compared with a Thorens turntable with Quad Electrostatics and Amplification.  The modern electronics just don't lend themselves to the same debate (especially IMO at the mid to high end).

Eloise posted:

Richard Dane posted:

The Strat (Fender) posted:

I can remember once hearing at the Bristol show the SN1 fed by a MacBook into Allaes.   It was fine.  

And yet, I found the CDX2 into the same SN1 and Allaes was rather better

Surely in the context of this discussion thats irrelevant.  No one is arguing that all sources sound the same.

Now the question is does a CDX2 into a SN1 into a pair of cheap a$$ speakers sound better than the MacBook into SN1 DAC and Allaes?  In other words - which was more important to the equation; the speakers or the source.

As I recall the "Mullet" system debate really comes from the early (?) days of mating a LP12 with a NAD 3020 and a pair of Wharfedale Diamonds compared with a Thorens turntable with Quad Electrostatics and Amplification.  The modern electronics just don't lend themselves to the same debate (especially IMO at the mid to high end).

Yeah - it is just cheaper to produce a good streaming source than a vinyl one (or even a CD player IME). Because of that the old rules of thumb are not so relevant.

Also relevant in this discussion is that certain aspects of speaker technology have evolved in stride with streaming advances. Specifically the use of CAD to reduce the iterations of exploratory speaker cabinets used in development. CAD allows virtual development of the optimal cabinet while simultaneously evaluating effects of various internal damping materials. Port tuning as well. Hence, less R&D time spent on mock-up cabinets. With less time and money spent on overall speaker design more energy can be focused on optimizing crossovers and matching drivers. Crossover tweaks can be done virtually as well, via software. Add to that cheaper outsourcing of components from all over the world and the result is high quality speakers can now be produced at relatively low cost. Just more fodder to the notion that price and badges now play an objectively reduced role in the quality of system output. Let your ears be the judge.

Brubacca posted:

....

Floorstanders seriously limits my options although I did just spot a pair of Ninka speakers up for sale locally. Hmmmmmmm. 

Hi Brubacca, you're right in that needing floorstanders limits the options around the $2k budget. The MA Silvers you mention are one of the better affordable options. I found them easier to match amps than the gold equivalent. So much so that I preferred the Silver8.

I know you didn't want specific recommendations but since I listened to 30 odd sets of floorstanders in this price range during my search, and you mention liking ribbon tweeters, there are a couple of options which you should hear if you can. Goldenear Triton 7 or 5, plus maybe B&W 683s2. Quad S5 for me beat all of these, but may be a bit more expensive. Maybe the quad S4 could be big enough and both are worth hearing for sure.

One other left field option would be to try a pair of larger active studio monitors, if you can separate the preamp function in your system. Taking the passive crossover out of the equation enables speakers like the Yamaha HS8 to sound as natural and dynamic as far more expensive 'hifi' speakers. With the 8 inch drivers they can also fill a room as easily and go as deep as most of the floorstanders you would be looking at.

Best of luck and as always trust your ears.

Dylan

It doesn't matter one iota:  Don't judge a speaker on the basis of cost.

You already have the electronics, so get a demo of the speakers (preferably in you own home) and pick the speakers that sound best to you (taking in the balance of factors that are important to you).

Whether someone else considers it to be a mullet, a monkfish or a flatfish is totally irrelevant; it's your system, in your room and with your ears.

As we upgrade our systems (usually one component at a time) it is inevitable that we may stray into mullet and/or monkfish territory. When we do and like what we hear some may choose to stick. So nothing wrong with any kind of fish you choose, as long as it sounds good to you in your home.

Unfortunately it all depends on your cash flow.

Some people don’t like fish.

Is it the eyes?

mullet refers to a hairstyle in any case, thin on top.