What's the most important component of any system, most say Source, some say Preamplifier, or even Speakers?

Dan.S posted:

Source->PreAmp->Amp->Speakers.

Everything in the chain amplifies then conveys the source signal. Given a good source, you'll have a good output.

Not so. If you have speakers that make music sound bad, it will sound bad no matter how good the source. Some people on the forum hate the sound of music through Speaker X: will the best source in the world make it give a good output for them? (X is any speaker that brings strong adverse criticism of how it makes music sound from any individual).

The most important thing in your system is YOU . If you are happy with the sound and enjoy what you are listening to then you are happy  and satisfied .

If you are not then start looking at your system etc.

The most important component in my system is electricity.

Source first will always work assuming the components down the line can at least pass the signal through without screwing it up. A terrible speaker will always be so, but a competent speaker fed with a great signal will always be better than a perfect speaker fed by a poor one.

Peder posted:

Richard Dane posted:

And remember, it's not about the "sound" but about the music that really matters; how the music communicates to you, and moves you.  You'll hear some impressive sounds, no doubt, but don't forget the music...

I am very shocked that such threads like this,are still showing up now and then here at Naim's forum.
Naim and Linn were the big companies in "Flat Earth",and Linn was the company that launched "Source First" hardest.

But Ivor (Linn) and Julian (Naim),were in complete agreement on this with Source First.!!

Here,the traders really have failed to bring forward their message,and by demonstration show that "Source First" applies,.....and will always apply.
This is a priority for music and not sound.

In Sweden,the traders were very "hard core" in the 80 and 90's and a bit into the 2000 century.
They taught their customers to really install their systems.
And no one in Sweden doubted "Source First" if you had a Linn or Naim system.

Know that Ivor Tiefenbrun (Linn),often told Göran Rudling (distributor) at the time.....that he thought we in Sweden was the best at System-optimization and installation at that time in Europe.
This was also something that Göran worked hard with against his dealers and customers.

Source First and Tune-Dem,as installation tools were,....and is what really applies,if you are going to have the maximum musical performance out of your music system.
This is also very easy to demonstrate if you have knowledge......So....

????Think on what Richard Dane writes above, this applies and has always shrilled.
If,...you listen to music instead of sound.

Ps: Unfortunately,Linn has market-adapted in recent years and deviated from its own "Source First".
They don't think as much on "Attention To Detail" anymore.
This has created two camps in Sweden,where the group that is "Attention To Detail" with its music system has left Linn.

This group is considerably larger than the remaining ones,in Linn's new way of thinking.
Many people have gone over to Naim instead,...I am one of them.

Some thoughts in a far too warm Sweden ????.

/Peder ????

You can’t divorce music from sound - music is sound, and how the music sounds - which is affected by the balance of the sound spectrum, or how distorted it is, etc, is important to some people for the enjoyment and appreciation of music, and important in some music even for the conveyance of all the emotion as intended by the composer or players. not just whether detail and the attack and decay of notes etc are correct. 

And then there are the questions as to degree of emphasis on any one component and balance of system: Taken to extremes, source first means an ND555 (or Innuos Zenith/MScaler/Dave or whatever) with 1 £100 amp and £50 speakers. Patently wrong, and clearly not intended by those who sing the source first dogma, but it illustrates my point.

However, I readily agree that ‘speakers first’ taken to the opposite extreme, is also patently stupid. Those of us focussing on the speaker angle are saying that we find that there are many speakers that to us detract from the music because they in some way make it sound wrong (examples may include missing the bottom two octaves that provide the completeness feeling in some music, or have the bottom end but wallowing about smothering the music, or they sound screechy and distract from the music, or make certain notes or instruments dominate and distract, or whatever). Speakers that make music sound right can be quite difficult to find, at least in my experience, and are very personal, where one person can love the sound of music through one particular speaker but hate the effect of another  (witness the disagreements on, say, the current Ovators thread). On the other hand, at least with digital, these days reasonably good sounding sources are not particularly expensive in relative terms, so there is no need to focus as much on getting that end spot on before ensuring the sound balance at the other end can convey the music well. (Maybe different with viny.)

I think you can separate music from sound. Music is in one's mind and is an emotional response.. sound creates a physical response that  we can map to many things including speech, music, warnings, natural sounds

Thank goodness Beethoven felt he could experience and write music without  hearing it in his later years. I suspect many experienced musicians can experience music without having to hear it... its us lesser mortals that require us to hear music to experience it.. as we need some helping cues.

Dan.S posted:

Meerkat posted:

Mr Underhill posted:

For instance, the 272 has always seemed like a fine bit of kit to me, but if you know you will climb the pile then you may find it quickly becomes limiting, and you end up with redundant functionality.

M

That is what I kinda thought. I will never climb as high as the S1 or 500 series though (Says he! )

Naim actually recommends that the 272 be paired with the 300 DR and 555 DR power supply. The 300 DR is quite high up, and the 500 DR is top end. I have absolutely no idea, but is that not considered as unbalanced? 

No, it does not. The ideal partner Naim suggests for 272 is the 250DR. 300DR is suggested for 282.

Dan, I was just quoting what it says in the 'Overview' for the 272. "Paired with a NAP 200, NAP 250 or even a NAP 300 power amplifier, the 272 is an ideal choice for those seeking the convenience of a single box streaming system". "It’s also performance upgradable with the addition of a Naim Audio XP5 XS, XPS or 555 PS power supply".

In a world - synergy.   

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

 

Thank goodness Beethoven felt he could experience and write music without  hearing it in his later years. I suspect many experienced musicians can experience music without having to hear it... its us lesser mortals that require us to hear music to experience it.. as we need some helping cues.

After many years of hearing how one particular instrument sounds by manipulation and as part amongst others, I'm sure Beethoven mastered the ear worm and could hear the sound and playing in his head - enabling him to compose later when deaf.

Could explain why many very talented musicians are not that bothered in high fidelity replay in the home.  They already have a hi end hifi in their head that they can dial in over a very basic one.   

When you start pursuing a musical system at a (relatively) high level,their is an importance to build a balanced system. However, the piece of equipment that can most easily be compared and brings about a noticeable change is speakers. So does this make the speaker most important?  - Well no, it can't improve on what it receives,it can mask deficiencies or work synergistically with Your source. It's all about balance and some compromises. Also $$$, and is musical enjoyment immediately the goal or with the intent to pursue up-grades (even before hearing your beginning system) - which may actually sound good enough. Guilty as charged- as I await a 282 to replace a perfectly good  202  . Ultimately, just buy what sounds good to you, with all or most of the conveniences you want.

The Strat (Fender) posted:

In a world - synergy.   

Of course I meant in a word

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

I think you can separate music from sound. Music is in one's mind and is an emotional response.. sound creates a physical response that  we can map to many things including speech, music, warnings, natural sounds

Thank goodness Beethoven felt he could experience and write music without  hearing it in his later years. I suspect many experienced musicians can experience music without having to hear it... its us lesser mortals that require us to hear music to experience it.. as we need some helping cues.

I think that is a great point. Seems to me that lots of serious musicians with much better ears than me don't NEED really good hifi to enjoy music because their brains are able to paint a picture of the music from far fewer clues/cues.

Proterra posted:

The most important thing in your system is YOU . If you are happy with the sound and enjoy what you are listening to then you are happy  and satisfied .

If you are not then start looking at your system etc.

Gosh, that's a radical thought !    You're obviously not a hifi sales person Proterra.

JedT posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

I think you can separate music from sound. Music is in one's mind and is an emotional response.. sound creates a physical response that  we can map to many things including speech, music, warnings, natural sounds

Thank goodness Beethoven felt he could experience and write music without  hearing it in his later years. I suspect many experienced musicians can experience music without having to hear it... its us lesser mortals that require us to hear music to experience it.. as we need some helping cues.

I think that is a great point. Seems to me that lots of serious musicians with much better ears than me don't NEED really good hifi to enjoy music because their brains are able to paint a picture of the music from far fewer clues/cues.

Speaking as a happy amateur musician of more years standing than I care to think about, I'd agree that my ears do allow me to paint a picture of the music .................. shame my fingers have never been able to keep up! 

Adding a 300DR and 555 to a 272 certainly rings every last ounce out of it but I always had the nagging doubt that the 272 was holding it all back. Moving from 272 to NDS 252/SCDR was an absolute revelation and the system now feels much better balanced.

IMHO the natural partners for the 272 are the 250DR and XPSDR and that is a stonking system for the money. 

What was that Beethoven line? Something like "Do you think I bother about your puny little fiddle when He speaks to me?"

I defer to all those here far more technically authoritative than I. However, for me this year’s purchase of a Nova has demonstrated, more than anything else, that the most important component of a system for me is the one that really makes me want to listen to music.

The sheer delights of streaming ripped CDs and downloaded high resolution music from a NAS have revolutionised my music listening. I’ve listened to more than I ever did when I had a CD player and I’ve discovered more music than I ever did previously. (I should say that I listen exclusively to classical music.)

The Nova flung open musical doors for me and I’m wandering happily through all of them. Could the music sound better on an expensive separates system? Of course it could. Would I be happier? I’m not sure of the answer to that question—but I'm very happy with what I have at present.

Stephen

Just remember chaps it’s all relevant.    

TOBYJUG posted:

Could explain why many very talented musicians are not that bothered in high fidelity replay in the home.  They already have a hi end hifi in their head that they can dial in over a very basic one.   

I have no idea why many talented musicians are not bothered with 'high fidelity' replay in the home - though I suspect they spend much of their time making music and practicing, and I am sure there are some musicians that enjoy the experience of the reproduction of the recording or master session, and as such a quality system might be important to them to convey that experience. However i am confident that many musicians can appreciate the beauty of music without needing to listen to it, ie they can read and interpret the beauty of music from how it is written or a lofi recording of a given performance- and when many are listening I suspect they are appreciating the experience and the expressions and interpretations put in by the performer(s) rather than the nuances of the sonic reproduction of a 'high fidelity' recording replay system... at least from the small number of skilled professional musicians I personally know. That said I know some musicians and music professionals that will appreciate a good replay system for what it is, - and not for some existential  reason that it somehow 'makes' music or is required before one can appreciate the music in a recording, i think some might even find that assertion offensive.

So why do I like quality recording replay system and love my 552?  - because I like to capture sound experience of  the master or the recording - to me that is powerful. I can however appreciate the actual music in the recordings on many systems including lofi ones. Some of my most powerfully emotional musical recording are some of my lowest quality ones .. the fidelity ceases to be relevant to appreciate the music.

Stephen_C posted:

The sheer delights of streaming ripped CDs and downloaded high resolution music from a NAS have revolutionised my music listening. I’ve listened to more than I ever did when I had a CD player and I’ve discovered more music than I ever did previously. (I should say that I listen exclusively to classical music.)

The Nova flung open musical doors for me and I’m wandering happily through all of them. Could the music sound better on an expensive separates system? Of course it could. Would I be happier? I’m not sure of the answer to that question—but I'm very happy with what I have at present.

 

Spot on Stephen!

Japtimscarlet posted:

A good  balance is the most important thing.

And then no, a CDS3/XS is pretty good ime

It’s clear to me that the source is more important (garbage in, garbage out) but I think it would be a mistake in thinking this automatically translates into a price cascade from expense source to cheap speakers,

The biggest opportunity for information loss and energy loss is when energy is converted from one form to another.  Think moving stylus to electricity, light to electricity or electricity to movement. It’s aguable that the money in a system should be spent at the points of conversion. This would put the amp last behind source and speaker. That’s the logic but my personal experience is that I have found upgrading amps to give me the biggest benefit. Go figure.

I think the real trick is balance which will be different things to different people, different rooms etc. It might mean a ‘cheap’ (digital) source and expensive speakers or the reverse. As you prefer.

Perol posted:

Japtimscarlet posted:

A good  balance is the most important thing.

And then no, a CDS3/XS is pretty good ime

I have had my CDS3 10 years, and in that time i have used it with many Naim amps (almost all) from a Nait 1 through to a 552/300. There is something rather special about the CDS3 and a Nait, be it 1, 2, 5, XS or SN, and i've lived very happily with all of them. Owning a CD5 as well, i've had the opportunity to try the other approach, and it's  less satisfactory.

I have found that the speakers provide the character of the sound you get, the preamp  and amp give them the means to do it.  I have always found that changing the speakers has the most effect on the sound (once you are beyond the simplest of preamp/amps), changing the power amp enhances that.

Innocent Bystander posted:

And then there are the questions as to degree of emphasis on any one component and balance of system: Taken to extremes, source first means an ND555 (or Innuos Zenith/MScaler/Dave or whatever) with 1 £100 amp and £50 speakers. Patently wrong, and clearly not intended by those who sing the source first dogma, but it illustrates my point.

I would definitely go that far. For a while I ran my LP12 into an A&R Cambridge A60 and very cheap Boston Acoustics speakers (CR8s) - those would roughly be "£100 amp and £50 speakers" (used, but still).

Sounded pretty good. I'd have no qualms running whatever source into those.