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

Christopher_M posted:

gary yeowell posted:

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.

I can vouch for CDS3 into NAIT XS. Glorious.

Good to see you back, Gary.

C.

Thanks Chris!

Meerkat posted:

hungryhalibut posted:

Meerkat, I don’t know whereabouts you live, but you’d be most welcome to come round for a listen if you are anywhere near south east Hampshire. That said, you are probably on the other side of the world.

Thank you HH, that's very kind of you. I would have loved to, but I now live in Lincolnshire. To some though, Lincolnshire is the other side of the world.

Going back through the 'System Pics', as far back as 2011...people have changed their system on several occasions. Sometimes the source, the amps, the speakers...even the racks. I'm sure, for all manner of reasons.

You are so right, there will always be something bigger, or better sounding than the system we own. By the very nature of this forum, many of us do like a bit of upgraditis, including me!

I'd pop around to see you both, but I'm in New Zealand. Though, visited Salisbury a few years ago, but missed visiting HQ! I've stretched to a Core/Nova/Forest Signatures upgrade, as far as my budget will go. It's reborn my love for music, so yes, could always do better, but if I'm loving the experience and the toe is tapping, life is good.

Although some have got close, no-one seems to have nominated the actual source, I.e. the records, CDs, radio waves, data streams,  etc., without which everything else is just a room warmer.

TallGuy posted:

Although some have got close, no-one seems to have nominated the actual source, I.e. the records, CDs, radio waves, data streams,  etc., without which everything else is just a room warmer.

When people talk of source first, it's a given that the recording is the source, which in conjunction with the bit that de codes it, record player/CD player/streamer/tuner/tape... becomes the source.

We purchased a Uniti Atom and a Mega CD player some three months ago. My wife has difficulty listening to many sources because of her digital hearing aids so we thought that we were doing the right thing. One month ago, I bought a Mega record deck and she has realised that even CDs had their problems.  She has got on so well with vinyl that we ave now sold the CD player back to our suppliers (Signals in Trimly St. Mary, Suffolk) and have put the money into a fund to enlarge or currently small record collection.

gary yeowell posted:

TallGuy posted:

Although some have got close, no-one seems to have nominated the actual source, I.e. the records, CDs, radio waves, data streams,  etc., without which everything else is just a room warmer.

When people talk of source first, it's a given that the recording is the source, which in conjunction with the bit that de codes it, record player/CD player/streamer/tuner/tape... becomes the source.

Sorry, I was being facetious in the hope of raising a smile. While aware of that I’d rather have 10000 records and CDs and a reasonable set of equipment than blow alll my money on bigger, blacker boxes and only have  10  things to play on them, hence the point that the “real” source should come first. 

Back on point the whole concept of splitting budget between bits of kits got somewhat skewed with the introduction of CD where many people found they could spend far less on the source for an equivalent, or, better sound than they could with turntables, arms, cartridges and the magic wands to make them work to their best ability. With more digital methods coming along that gets skewed even more as you can use a pc/Mac you bought for something else along with an inexpensive DAC to get far more bangs per Hifi buck than with cd,and certainly vinyl,  meaning  the source/amp/speaker triangle can be moved away from source as main cost, either giving more to split between amp and speakers, or, back to my original point, more to spend on the real source - recorded  music in your preferred hard or soft format.

in order, for me:  1) source 2) preamp 3) amp/speakers combo 4) cables 5) rack.  room treatment if necessary between 3) and 4).   eventually, if only one source, the quality of the volume control in place of the pre.

TallGuy posted:

gary yeowell posted:

TallGuy posted:

Although some have got close, no-one seems to have nominated the actual source, I.e. the records, CDs, radio waves, data streams,  etc., without which everything else is just a room warmer.

When people talk of source first, it's a given that the recording is the source, which in conjunction with the bit that de codes it, record player/CD player/streamer/tuner/tape... becomes the source.

Sorry, I was being facetious in the hope of raising a smile. While aware of that I’d rather have 10000 records and CDs and a reasonable set of equipment than blow alll my money on bigger, blacker boxes and only have  10  things to play on them, hence the point that the “real” source should come first. 

 

I think, again, that's fairly obvious. Most on here are music first people, and most would likely have very large music collections.

TallGuy posted:

 

Sorry, I was being facetious in the hope of raising a smile. While aware of that I’d rather have 10000 records and CDs and a reasonable set of equipment than blow alll my money on bigger, blacker boxes and only have  10  things to play on them, hence the point that the “real” source should come first.

Back in the mists of time,  I popped into my dealer, and he was really wound up. (It was near a cathedral on the Thames to help narrow it down.) He'd just come back from installing a system, his top of the range system, SME Model 30/SME5/Kiseki LL into Acoustic Research amps into top-end Sonus Fabers (IIRC). The customer had one record, and it was "****** Andrew Lloyd Webber's ***** Requiem".

Eoink posted:

TallGuy posted:

 

Sorry, I was being facetious in the hope of raising a smile. While aware of that I’d rather have 10000 records and CDs and a reasonable set of equipment than blow alll my money on bigger, blacker boxes and only have  10  things to play on them, hence the point that the “real” source should come first.

Back in the mists of time,  I popped into my dealer, and he was really wound up. (It was near a cathedral on the Thames to help narrow it down.) He'd just come back from installing a system, his top of the range system, SME Model 30/SME5/Kiseki LL into Acoustic Research amps into top-end Sonus Fabers (IIRC). The customer had one record, and it was "****** Andrew Lloyd Webber's ***** Requiem".

I used to work about 200 yards from that dealer so I know exactly which one you mean

I always describe Andrew Lloyd Webber as music for people who don’t like music. 

It was people like that I was getting at in my messages, along with those who only have a handful they play because “the rest sound terrible” - I find, and I bet many here do also, that good equipment allows you to listen past poor recording quality into the performance, which may well be stunning. I found when I first bought Naim that I was suddenly going through all those albums which I hadn’t listened to in ages and I could hear why I bought them in the first place. I’m sure it’s not unique to Naim, but it seems something their equipment is good at.

I’m not convinced that a system that lets you hear the performance has to be expensive, or your budget split in a certain way - it’s all about symbiosis and interoperability, and for that you need a good dealer with a demo room, willingness to let your ears choose and not a formula for cash allocation.