Source First theory and how far to take it?

[Music Lover]

It was a good starting point as it made the improvement obvious when moving up to CD quality and personally helped me get my ear in, ready for more subtle improvements moving beyond CD resolution.

fyi
On some records the CD --> master is a bigger jump than mp3 -->CD

[Per A]

That is why the best bet for most people is to have a good dealer who loves music and can demonstrate which equipment and combinations improve the enjoyment of it. I know these dealers are not always easy to find and that is a pity. But they are worth the trouble in searching out.

With this I too agree! So many shops when you ask to listen they drag out these Hifi CDs or ask me didn't you bring your own?
Another bad sign is when they say this system is good with this or that kind of music :!:

[Lego]

I think we all by nature want to upgrade the source first.If I look back to all my non source upgrades its because I've had spare cash and bored with my current set up and there were no front end upgrade developments,if there were I would probably still have my naim 42.5/110(best amps naim ever made?) and kans .Linn have more control over us than we think; all of a sudden in the last year or so developments have been been source orientated..or am I just being cynical?If there is an option, unless you've got half a brain, you'll always s go for the source upgrade, except linns hype and marketing confuses a lot of its customers that they forget what is really all about; Source first, ALWAYS!Unless you've got a chance to get cheap pair of Isobariks :lol:

[Charlie1]

Yes, it's shocking just how much a brand new Linn vinyl system can cost you now. You're not even safe staying MM. These are very rough UK prices following May 1st price rises: -

1. LP12 £1,700
2. Radikal £2,500
3. Keel £2,200
4. Ekos SE £3,300
5. Adikt £300
------
£10,000

6. Slipsik £500
7. Kikkin £500
8. 2100 £1500
9. 109s+stands £1000
-------
£3,000

=======
£13,000

Add a rack, ICs and speaker cable and that's another few hundred - maybe a £1000 (or more)

Go MC with an Akiva/Urika and that's a cool £4k on top. £14K before you even think about a pre-amp!

I guess the Ekos SE would be first to go and be replaced by an Ekos 2 if you wanted to lighten the load - that would save you about £2K. Would still cost £8K just the source though!

These are big numbers that can creep up on you. I won't be upgrading my Ninka's anytime soon, that's for sure. Man I need a new hobby or a new job - or two jobs! Bring back the Sony Walkman, cassette tapes and acne. Maybe some awkward house partys too with everyone standing around not quite sure what to do.

[lejonklou]

Maybe some awkward house partys too with everyone standing around not quite sure what to do.

:lol: I've always felt music is the cure for all such situations. Turn it up until people start moving! :mrgreen:

[springwood64]

A dealer I spoke to recommended adding a Radikal to an entry level LP12 as a relatively cost effective way of creating a superb MC source:

LP12 £1700
Radikal £2500
Akito £700
Klyde £700

In his opinion, this £5600 gets you a more enjoyable source than LP12+Lingo2+Keel+EkosSE+Akiva (!) I'd love to hear comparisons with a KDS.

My dealer said that adding a Radikal to a very early LP12 combo is more of a gamble (in that the one may not benefit from the sonic improvements of plinth improvements, top-plate and base-plate) but from my perspective (updating an early LP12/Akito/Lingo2/Linto) it starts to look v interesting, since I can sell the Lingo2 and probably bring the extra cost down to around £2000.

Looks pretty good compared to adding a Keel, EkosSE and Akiva, doesn't it?

Does this show that the Radikal is a profound example of source first?

[Charlie1]

You're not even safe staying MM.

Sorry Fredrik - I think this comment of mine is open to misinterpretation having just re-read it. I didn't mean your components are expensive - far from it - I just meant that you can spend so much on the rest of the deck that going MM, instead of MC, isn't suddenly going to suddenly make the turntable affordable. You'd save a couple of thousand pounds at most, but there are several thousand required for the Radikal, Keel and Ekos SE. Before these when it was just a Cirkus, Ekos2 and Lingo then going MM probably made more of a cost saving in percentage terms. I'll stop digging, but that's what I meant anyway.

[Charlie1]

There's something I'm trying to understand, but without success. Not sure I can even explain it very well, but here goes.

A speaker upgrade can make your system much more tuneful. Say you went form aktiv Ninka's to akitv 212s for example. It would be much more tuneful. Even torque screwing the drive units on my Ninka made it more tuneful. It's likely to be less work to follow the music. Great.

However, this doesn't necessary translate to greater understanding of the music (in my own experience), just more tuneful and less brain work. But upgrade a source component and I find that it does better convey the musical message, emotions, interplay or whatever you want to call it. So there seem to be different things at work.

If it's really the source upgrade that most effects musicality, then perhaps the term Tune Dem or Tune Method is misleading. We might follow a tune, but perhaps it's actually a measure of something else more important.

Fredrik has said that in his experience pitch accuracy is not the main thing. Instead, it's certain types of distortion that cause us issues.

I'm thinking that tunefulness is not what we're really striving for. Otherwise a hugely more tuneful speaker would make the music hugely more engaging, but I've not really found this myself. To me it's as if the source determines what information is available and that ALONE determines how engaging and meaningful the music is (Maybe it's about distortion as Fredrik says). But tunefulness is just the ability of each component to make light work of what the source has retrieved and far less important I'm thinking.

Maybe tunefulness is still the only repeatable measure we have but it's just far more significant to musicality when improved on the source than on the speakers. So speaker might sound much more tuneful, but it doesn't really change the way the music affect you so much as on the source. I've always thought that the improvement in tunefulness was a kind of set metric across the entire system. So 2 points improvement in the speakers meant the same as 2 point improvement in the source. That seems wrong now.

This leads me to think tunefulness is a bit of a red herring. It's the only reliable measure he have of improved musicality, but it's not necessarily tunefulness itself that's making the 'key' improvements i.e the improvements that make music more fun, engaging, emotive etc. Otherwise massively more tuneful speakers would give us these things in abundance and I don't think it will. So I think I've kind of answered my own question in the process of writing this :oops: but would be good as always to hear what others think.

PS Now I have a Kolektor and KK, I compared them using Black's on the KK and Silver's on the Kolektor. Same result as before, but much easier cos it's on the same playback and not using a poor Techniques midi. Feel more confident I did got it right previously, but it was so hard to tell before cos of the huge difference in sound - obviously a KK sounds somewhat better than a Kolektor but there's not quite the chasm of difference there was before.

[lejonklou]

You're not even safe staying MM.

I got your point, Charlie. But there are two other advantages with MM and that is low playing costs (all the other items you mention are a one time investment) and the ease of exchanging stylus (no need to worry about how many hours you have left).

Akiva is certainly far above Adikt in performance, but for those who can't afford a fully spec'ed LP12, I remain convinced that replacing the Adikt is the last step to take.

LP12 £1700
Radikal £2500
Akito £700
Klyde £700

For the same kind of money, couldn't you instead buy the following?
LP12
Radikal
Ekos (second hand)
Adikt

Surely much better. Adikt on an Ekos is vastly superior than any cartridge on an Akito (or Ittok), I've compared this a number of times. You can also add the cost of phono stage, where a second hand Linto will cost a lot more than a new Kinki2.

[lejonklou]

Charlie, are you saying that Silver IC's+Kolektor performs clearly better than Black IC's+Klimax Kontrol?

I don't think I've ever made that comparison myself. I know that some shops did similar demos when the Silver IC's were first introduced, but these days it seems more common to demonstrate "cost balanced" systems: Linn systems are connected in ranges (Classik/Majik/Akurate/Klimax), Silvers are used only in the best ones, etc. I find this approach boring. I've always been more interested in how to get the most musically exciting system for a given cost.

Regarding what I said about pitch accuracy/distortion, please regard it as ideas open to debate. All I have is some findings which sometimes seem to fit into a pattern and sometimes not. I certainly don't see any contradiction between pitch accuracy and low distortion.

I agree that it's a bit mysterious how we can perceive a small improvement in source quality as more important than a huge improvement in playback quality. Those who are not into the Tune Method often don't experience or understand this at all. They are usually convinced that Source First is some kind of theoretical rule that we blindly (and foolishly) follow. And that we agree so much with one another is interpreted a clear sign that we belong to a cult and don't think for ourselves.

But those of us who have tuned our listening towards the musical quality of the performance, Source First is a practical rule. Explaining it theoretically is difficult.

[Charlie1]

Charlie, are you saying that Silver IC's+Kolektor performs clearly better than Black IC's+Klimax Kontrol?

I wouldn't say it's musically clearly better - it's only small - i.e. the difference between Silver's (burned in on Vidar machine) and Black's that I'm hearing. The Black's/KK obviously sounds better and more organic and lifelike. The Silver's/Kolektor more like a hi-fi trying to sound like the real thing.

If I compare Silver's to Black's through the KK, the Silvers convey the music better to my ears and are easier to follow - as expected. I believe I can hear that same difference even when the Silver's are on the Kolektor and Black's on the KK. It's small, but the Silver's/Kolektor seems to convey the essence of the music better - easier to follow. No doubt many will think I'm nuts, but that's how it comes across to me. Maybe it's just my mind playing tricks and wishful thinking. Obviously, this is not a real-life situation same as all the other examples before. It's of interest to me, but probably not that many others. I didn't want to make a big deal of it again so just put a little PS at the bottom.

[Azazello]

LP12
Radikal
Ekos (second hand)
Adikt
(...)
You can also add the cost of phono stage, where a second hand Linto will cost a lot more than a new Kinki2.

Fredrik, I don't mean to ruin your calculations, but that LP12 really deserves a Slipsik ;)

[Music Lover]

I'm thinking that tunefulness is not what we're really striving for. Otherwise a hugely more tuneful speaker would make the music hugely more engaging, but I've not really found this myself. To me it's as if the source determines what information is available and that ALONE determines how engaging and meaningful the music is (Maybe it's about distortion as Fredrik says). But tunefulness is just the ability of each component to make light work of what the source has retrieved and far less important I'm thinking.

Maybe tunefulness is still the only repeatable measure we have but it's just far more significant to musicality when improved on the source than on the speakers. So speaker might sound much more tuneful, but it doesn't really change the way the music affect you so much as on the source. I've always thought that the improvement in tunefulness was a kind of set metric across the entire system. So 2 points improvement in the speakers meant the same as 2 point improvement in the source. That seems wrong now.

This leads me to think tunefulness is a bit of a red herring. It's the only reliable measure he have of improved musicality, but it's not necessarily tunefulness itself that's making the 'key' improvements i.e the improvements that make music more fun, engaging, emotive etc. Otherwise massively more tuneful speakers would give us these things in abundance and I don't think it will. So I think I've kind of answered my own question in the process of writing this :oops: but would be good as always to hear what others think.

Not sure I follow you but if I understand you correct - I have to disagre.
An enhancement in tune is increasing the joy of music regardless where the enhancement is, even speakers.

For me source first is true as small changes makes bigger impact the closer to the source you are.
Just take a power One and test it with source, pre and power amp - where is the biggest improvment?
Same test with silver IC's...

[Charlie1]

An enhancement in tune is increasing the joy of music regardless where the enhancement is, even speakers.

For me source first is true as small changes makes bigger impact the closer to the source you are.

I see. So you think that tunefulness is still the key to musicality and a small tunefulness improvement in the source can equate to a much bigger one in the speakers? - in terms of achieving the same improvement to the joy of music as you say.

[Lego]

I could understand(maybe) the Tkable to kolector sounding better than old cable to KK.....unless the blacks are only letting through 20% of the lp12/kk and the silvers 80% of the lp12/kolector..I'm starting to get a headache ...

[ThomasOK]

Charlie, are you saying that Silver IC's+Kolektor performs clearly better than Black IC's+Klimax Kontrol?

I wouldn't say it's musically clearly better - it's only small - i.e. the difference between Silver's (burned in on Vidar machine) and Black's that I'm hearing. The Black's/KK obviously sounds better and more organic and lifelike. The Silver's/Kolektor more like a hi-fi trying to sound like the real thing.

If I compare Silver's to Black's through the KK, the Silvers convey the music better to my ears and are easier to follow - as expected. I believe I can hear that same difference even when the Silver's are on the Kolektor and Black's on the KK. It's small, but the Silver's/Kolektor seems to convey the essence of the music better - easier to follow. No doubt many will think I'm nuts, but that's how it comes across to me. Maybe it's just my mind playing tricks and wishful thinking. Obviously, this is not a real-life situation same as all the other examples before. It's of interest to me, but probably not that many others. I didn't want to make a big deal of it again so just put a little PS at the bottom.

The thing I don't understand here is where you are changing the cables? If before the preamp I suppose the Silvers/Kolektor might outperform the Blacks/KK. But if it is after the preamp then I have little doubt that the KK/Blacks would outperform the Kolektor/Silvers. It really depends on where you are constricting the flow of information and how much you are constricting it.

But I think it might be helpful if you view the hierarchy more in that way as it truly IS a flow of musical information. If you restrict the flow of music early in the chain it doesn't matter how much flow you have later you can't have more than the source gives you. But once you have the maximum flow in the early parts of the system, then improvements later on let you hear more of that flow. Or stated another way, once the signal has been dirtied, nothing downstream can clean it up. It is not a perfect analogy but I think it helps in understanding why a better speaker might not make as big an improvement as hoped - because the information being fed to it hasn't been maximized.

If you follow this you might be lead to believe that it really makes little sense to go beyond Katans (or Majik 109s, AVI Neutron Vs, etc. - pick your favorite small speaker) until you have fully maximized your source and control components. I really don't think you'd go wrong by following that premise. Because if you really think about it, if I was the only one in the world to have a Radikal then I would automatically have the best Hi-Fi in the world almost regardless of the speaker on the end (assuming it is at least decent).

Once you are getting the most you can from the source and control the performance improvement of better amps/speakers become quite apparent and their musical improvement becomes obvious.

[Charlie1]

I'm starting to get a headache ...

I'm sorry - it's all my fault :(
I like to think that we can talk about anything here, but think my tests have probably outstayed their welcome.

I don't know about % getting through. It's just what I'm hearing - or think I'm hearing.

[Charlie1]

The thing I don't understand here is where you are changing the cables? If before the preamp I suppose the Silvers/Kolektor might outperform the Blacks/KK. But if it is after the preamp then I have little doubt that the KK/Blacks would outperform the Kolektor/Silvers. It really depends on where you are constricting the flow of information and how much you are constricting it.

Out from the Linto and into the pre amp

But I think it might be helpful if you view the hierarchy more in that way as it truly IS a flow of musical information. If you restrict the flow of music early in the chain it doesn't matter how much flow you have later you can't have more than the source gives you. But once you have the maximum flow in the early parts of the system, then improvements later on let you hear more of that flow. Or stated another way, once the signal has been dirtied, nothing downstream can clean it up. It is not a perfect analogy but I think it helps in understanding why a better speaker might not make as big an improvement as hoped - because the information being fed to it hasn't been maximized.

If you follow this you might be lead to believe that it really makes little sense to go beyond Katans (or Majik 109s, AVI Neutron Vs, etc. - pick your favorite small speaker) until you have fully maximized your source and control components. I really don't think you'd go wrong by following that premise. Because if you really think about it, if I was the only one in the world to have a Radikal then I would automatically have the best Hi-Fi in the world almost regardless of the speaker on the end (assuming it is at least decent).

Once you are getting the most you can from the source and control the performance improvement of better amps/speakers become quite apparent and their musical improvement becomes obvious.

Thanks for clarifying this. It is always really useful to get your views, particularly on this topic.

[Lego]

Oh yeh the Linto I suppose you have a better front end with silvers than with blacks;I'd expect to get silvers thrown in if I'd bought a KK ..you've just proved source first Charlie ..it just shows you how good value upgrading close to the source is.

Isnt it amazing when there is a couple of grand upgrade for the lp12 everyone screams how much!!!Its when I hear so many thousand for a speaker I scream How much!!for what, a slightly better tune.Well I suppose speakers are quite big so your are getting something for your money :roll:

[Music Lover]

An enhancement in tune is increasing the joy of music regardless where the enhancement is, even speakers.

For me source first is true as small changes makes bigger impact the closer to the source you are.

I see. So you think that tunefulness is still the key to musicality and a small tunefulness improvement in the source can equate to a much bigger one in the speakers? - in terms of achieving the same improvement to the joy of music as you say.

No sorry to be unspecific.
With small changes I mean small modifications in the system. See the examples.
The closer the silver cable is to the source the more is it improving the tune.

But a 5% tune improvement (how to measure that btw) in the source is same as 5% tune improvement in the speaker.
It's not like you seems to think 5% tune improvement in the source = a lot more than 5% in the speaker.

I heard large tune improvement i power amps and speakers during the years resulting in a massive improvement to the joy of music

[Per A]

I would like to offer my interpretation of what tune dem means to me.

For every improvement of my system I have been able to hear song lyrics better. I would say that since singing is the essence of music it is a simple way to hear the difference between systems A & B! And when several voices work together do you hear that? And do you get a kick out of their voices.

Now I have no trouble following what Dylan or Aimee Mann are singing, which is a good start to understand what they mean :)

[Charlie1]

For every improvement of my system I have been able to hear song lyrics better. I would say that since singing is the essence of music it is a simple way to hear the difference between systems A & B! And when several voices work together do you hear that? And do you get a kick out of their voices.

Now I have no trouble following what Dylan or Aimee Mann are singing, which is a good start to understand what they mean Smile

I've certainly noticed this happen too at times and it's nice to suddenly understand what's being sung without reading the lyric sheet. I seem to recall just tuning the arm counter weight had this effect.

[Charlie1]

But a 5% tune improvement (how to measure that btw) in the source is same as 5% tune improvement in the speaker.
It's not like you seems to think 5% tune improvement in the source = a lot more than 5% in the speaker.

I heard large tune improvement i power amps and speakers during the years resulting in a massive improvement to the joy of music

I understand. Good to get your views on this and no doubt you are correct. I'm just throwing ideas around as much as anything to see what members think. Sounds like this idea wasn't valid.

[lejonklou]

But a 5% tune improvement (how to measure that btw) in the source is same as 5% tune improvement in the speaker.

I don't understand what that means. To me, a source improvement doesn't do the same thing as a speaker improvement. I rather agree with what I thought Charlie said earlier: Improvements are perceived differently depending on where in the chain they are made. Big source improvements have always been the ones that have left me most baffled.

[Music Lover]

For every improvement of my system I have been able to hear song lyrics better. I would say that since singing is the essence of music it is a simple way to hear the difference between systems A & B! And when several voices work together do you hear that? And do you get a kick out of their voices.

Now I have no trouble following what Dylan or Aimee Mann are singing, which is a good start to understand what they mean Smile

I've certainly noticed this happen too at times and it's nice to suddenly understand what's being sung without reading the lyric sheet. I seem to recall just tuning the arm counter weight had this effect.

yes you hear the lyrics better if the tune is increased, but hearing lyrics better is not a proof of good tune dem or even improving it.
I've heard many systems that is easy to hear the lyrics on but fails badly in regards to musicaliy.