How much difference does it make?

[Rexp]

For an average high-end system ($30k):

Amp=40%

Source=40%

Speakers=20%

 

 

 

 

[Rexp]

49 minutes ago, GregWormald said:

OP--

IMO there is really no way to put percentages on *sound quality*. Sound differences are another matter--that's mostly about room and speakers.

 

Quality however starts from the source, wherever that is for you. Once the quality is lost then nothing downstream can get it back.

 

For instance I've just started cleaning my LPs (one source) with an ultrasonic cleaner and the improvement in *sound quality* is very significant; and not just from the reduction in audible pops and clicks.

 

Another example--I sent my active speakers to the manufacturer to be upgraded to the current model, which retails about $30,000. While they were being done I listened through a very old amp and some bookshelf speakers (carefully chosen at the time but probably about $2000 total if they were made today) and the music was still very listenable even though the overall sound was very different. Same sources.

Yes the source is key, why is this so hard for some to understand, maybe they never heard a high-end source? 

[Rexp]

4 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Because for a close to life time we were spoon fed with the speakers being the most important factor ?

Maybe back in the days they were (say that I am from back in the days 😀) but back in those days the source just could-not matter as much as today. I am not talking about the wax cylinder era (that would make me quite dead) but from the LP-only era, yes. But look how easily we drift apart ... half of people swears that LP is the by far very best compared to digital. Well, they should dedicate the speaker the most important in the chain. I think.

If that makes sense ...

Actually back in the day when Linn were at the forefront of high-end, they and other UK Manufacturers always advocated spending the majority of budget on the source. With digital isn't it the same?