Source First theory and how far to take it?

[Charlie1]

This is pure curiosity on my part and a bit of fun. How far would members take the source first theory within a given budget? Do you have any first hand experience of just where the limits are? Linn themselves don't seem to take the concept very far at all judging from their own Majik and Akurate product lines. They include some anamolies too, such as the £6000 Akurate 242s being much more than the Akurate DS (£3450) or Akurate Kontrol (£3250)

With a budget of £13,000 for a digitally fronted system, would anyone expect the most tuneful solution to include the £9,600 Klimax DS, leaving just enough for the Majik-I (£1450) and passive Majik 140s (£1500)? Would you really expect this to Tune Dem better than a more evenly balanced spread of finances such as staying within Linn's Akurate range (A DS, A Kontrol, A 2200, passive A 212s). Alternatively and for the same £13,000, what about an Akurate DS (£3450), Klimax Kontrol (£6600), Majik-I and 140s which is still very source first?

I know that the only way to be sure is to listen to the actual setups, but I'm still curious what members expectations are. What would you gamble on if you couldn't A-B dem?

[dlorde]

I wouldn't take it too seriously. 'Source first' is just a way of emphasising the principle that the source component supplies the rest of the system with input, so however good the system, it is limited by the quality of the source. However, it needs to be put in context - if you supply a poor recording, it doesn't matter how good your source component is, and if the speakers are poor, but the source is good, you'll likely get more 'bang per buck' by upgrading the speakers than the source.

[Moomintroll]

Would you really expect this to Tune Dem better than a more evenly balanced spread of finances...

Actually, yes, I think I would. If I was starting from scratch with that budget and only wanted one source, that would be the first system I'd want to hear.

IMHO the Klimax DS is THE best source component I've ever experienced.

'Troll

[ThomasOK]

I agree with Troll but will take it one step further. I would substitute an LP12 SE with Akiva and a Linto (I am, after all, a vinyl guy - first, last and always :)), Majik-I and run it all into AVI Neutron IVs or Katans and Katan stands. I believe this would cost out about the same as the Klimax DS system with Majik components.

I do believe that the source is that important. As another example, from a musical standpoint I would say that an LP12/Lingo/Ekos II/Trampolin/Adikt at $8570US (if the Ekos II was still available) into a Rega Mira 3 at $1195 and Rega R1s at $595 a pair would also be a MUSICALLY balanced system.

I do, however, feel it is important to clear up a common misconception on the source first or hierarchy system. Price has nothing WHATSOEVER to do with following the hierarchy. If the hierarchy was based on price you would never be able to buy Artikulats or Komris as Linn doesn't make a source that is more expensive than those speakers. Only the relative performance of the components has relevance. A better source with good but lesser speakers will always outperform a lesser source with better speakers. The speakers (or amp) can only reproduce what is fed into them so the source is really that important.

I have just posted the Linn article on "The Hierarchy of a Hi-Fi System" under it's own heading. Anyone interested should give it a read.

[Charlie1]

Interesting responses everyone.
I honestly wasn't thinking about my own system when posting this! However, I will have to re-evaluate my view of it as I'd always presumed I'd spent a too much budget on the source (LP12SE into Majik pre/power).

Thomas, I presume there must be a cut-off point where the amp/speakers are so poor that you have to take some budget away from your source in order to get a vaguely decent amp and speakers. For instance, if the top spec LP12SE only left you a hundred bucks to spend elsewhere. What surprises me about your comments is that this cut-off point is already much lower than I'd expected.
PS I take your point that price has nothing to do with hierarchy.

[Lego]

With the way things have gone with Linns digital sources in the past and I planned to upgrade in the future I'd go for the klimax kontrol first,cheap speakers,amp and the rest of the cash on a digital source.Hopefully this set up would keep me happy long enough that when I was ready to upgrade ,lo and behold there's a Klimax DS beater just out and it only costs £3500 and it makes the DS sound broken.

[Music Lover]

With the way things have gone with Linns digital sources in the past and I planned to upgrade in the future I'd go for the klimax kontrol first,cheap speakers,amp and the rest of the cash on a digital source.Hopefully this set up would keep me happy long enough that when I was ready to upgrade ,lo and behold there's a Klimax DS beater just out and it only costs £3500 and it makes the DS sound broken.

Good plan but I'm afraid it's going to be a long wait

[ThomasOK]

Interesting responses everyone.
I honestly wasn't thinking about my own system when posting this! However, I will have to re-evaluate my view of it as I'd always presumed I'd spent a too much budget on the source (LP12SE into Majik pre/power).

Thomas, I presume there must be a cut-off point where the amp/speakers are so poor that you have to take some budget away from your source in order to get a vaguely decent amp and speakers. For instance, if the top spec LP12SE only left you a hundred bucks to spend elsewhere. What surprises me about your comments is that this cut-off point is already much lower than I'd expected.
PS I take your point that price has nothing to do with hierarchy.

Yes, there is a cutoff but I believe it is actually lower than most people think. I would say going into a Rega Brio 3 integrated ($695US) and a pair of Paradigm Atom Monitor ($298pr) speakers would be about where I would bottom out. I almost listed the Rega Brio 3 in my original post but the Mira 3 is better and has a remote control. You can even go a little cheaper with a NAD C325BEE integrated amp at $449 but by the time you add a phono stage (included in the Brio 3) you are so close in price it makes no sense. But my LP12...Adikt combo above into a Brio 3 and Atoms is quite a nice sound. Substitute Linn Uniks (a truly underrated speaker) for another $160 and it gets even better.

Truthfully, it can be stated that you've never really heard Atoms or Uniks until you've heard them on the end of a full Klimax setup! :)

[Charlie1]

superb - thanks Thomas!

[Lego]

No such thing as a long wait listening to music Music Lover :)

[Azazello]

When people discuss "balanced" systems, they tend to come up with arguments like "a chain is never stronger then the weakest link", ignoring that the components of a hifi-system do different things (as oppose to links in a chain). I would like point out the (obvious) fact that a loudspeaker can't possibly be compared to a preamplifier (or anything except another loudspeaker). The idea of a "balanced" system is therefore, in my view, somewhat pointless.

Let me give an example: A system like: Karik/Numerik-Karin-Klout-Keltik was definitely considered "balanced" somewhere back in 1995 since all the components was top of the line. Today this system sounds like nonsense to us since Klout and Keltik still are fairly good compared to new alternatives, and therefore still expensive. Karik/Numerik, on the other hand is left far behind by a number of superior alternatives and can be bought for a fairly modest sum of money. Many people would today probably say that Klout/Keltik is overkill for a Sneaky DS even though it's a far superior player over Karik/Numerik. This shows that the idea of “balance” has no other base than the cost of the components involved. There is no such thing as a speaker "on the same level" as a given source or pre amplifier.

Source first. Amen. ;)

[Music Lover]

Yes that is a good example of the somehow strange logic of the "balanced system" concept.

This shows that the idea of “balance” has no other base than the cost of the components involved.

...and the hierarchy of the components when introduced.
Example, as soon a new better source is released, all previous top of the line systems get unbalanced

Amen :!:

[Azazello]

Example, as soon a new better source is released, all previous top of the line systems get unbalanced.

Fore sure! But you are using the term "balanced" in a much more sensible way than most people ;)

[Music Lover]

Example, as soon a new better source is released, all previous top of the line systems get unbalanced.

Fore sure! But you are using the term "balanced" in a much more sensible way than most people ;)

Balanced = source first you mean? :mrgreen:
And when founds permit...add two rather large active speakers :lol:

[lejonklou]

if you supply a poor recording, it doesn't matter how good your source component is

Quite on the contrary, I find that it's the recordings I like the least and/or consider to be of low quality that benefit the most from a source component upgrade.

I fully agree with Azazello's analysis; the talk about balanced systems is pointless. The Keltik system was excellent as an example.

What is always interesting, however, is how to maximise the musical enjoyment for a given sum of money. I think a lot of enthusiasts consider that as a fun part of their hobby. This is where Source First comes in. I consider it a conclusion from practical experiments, rather than a theoretical rule.

EDIT: Changed 'imaginary' to 'theoretical'

[Music Lover]

I find that it's the recordings I like the least and/or consider to be of low quality that benefit the most from a source component upgrade.

I have same experience, but like to add that this applies regardless where you improve the system.

[ThomasOK]

Example, as soon a new better source is released, all previous top of the line systems get unbalanced.

Fore sure! But you are using the term "balanced" in a much more sensible way than most people ;)

Balanced = source first you mean? :mrgreen:
And when founds permit...add two rather large active speakers :lol:

Well stated and I agree thoroughly. I also agree with Fredrik about better equipment improving the sound of records that were once considered poor, and sometimes doing so radically. I do feel it works with all equipment but also feel it more common with sources and preamps. See also my post about other turntables in the "Non-Linn products..." thread for a closely related story.

[Charlie1]

I'm am finding it very hard to believe that there isn't a point where 'Source First' theory breaks down, even if it is a quite ridiculous extreme. Has anyone ever found such a point - no matter how extreme? I know Einstein's 'General Theory of Relativity' is slightly more important than this one, but even that breaks down at the quantum level.

I do understand that if the information isn't extracted in the first place then it can never be recovered, but surely an extremely unmusical system can bottleneck and deteriorate a signal to such an extent as to make it worse than a system with a fractionally less musical source, but massively better downstream components?

I recall Fredrik saying on the forum that Source First is just a theory, so even though it had always held true in his experience, that didn't mean there isn't a scenario where it wouldn't - or something along those lines.

How about this as an extreme example: A tune dem between two identical top spec sources, with one source sounding just a fraction more musical than the other (due to normal variances between units), with the slightly better source feeding the most awful unmusical system and poorer one is feeding a superbly musical one.

Sorry if I'm becoming a nuisance with this, but please bare with me.

[Lego]

Hey Charlie! Quick question but I feel it is very important,what planet is this set up on? :lol:

[Charlie1]

Planet Laa-Laa Ball.

Scooooter!

[Azazello]

I believe that such a system ultimately reaches a point where the "music" actually still is better. BUT the sound is so much worse that it's not worth it. My LP12/Keel/Lingo2/Ekos2/Adikt - Slipsik - Timpano - LK100 - Index Plus was in some way "better" than LP12 without Keel - same pre - 5125 - aktiv Ninka. But if I had to live with one of those systems... I don't know.

[lejonklou]

I agree with Azazello and his system is a perfect example. He traded down severely on his playback to get a Keel. I installed both systems and the Index Plus were acceptable on some records, but far from as good as in my memory (used to own a pair many years ago).

Keel sure made a great improvement, but the loss of aktiv Ninkas resulted in a harsh sound... I can understand the difficulty choosing between these.

[Lego]

Sometimes I feel its ones actions that tells the story.You would probably want the 2 systems in seperate rooms or planets!over a period of time a pattern would form as to which system you played the most.Like that pre intellectuall state..!Very Zen.. :oops:
My 2 little girls both have a portable plastic toy like casstte player.The younger one got hers at xmas and this is the one they play all the time the nursery tunes fell by the wayside when they found my old Bowie 'Earthling' tape in their toybox(sounds really good even on a toy).I decided to do a quick tume dem..yeh I know.. and the new one although it doesnt play as loud and sounds the same as the old one, musically it is far superior.

[Music Lover]

I agree with Azazello and his system is a perfect example. He traded down severely on his playback to get a Keel.

My old rule; never ever upgrade if not all parameters are equal or better.

[Charlie1]

I believe that such a system ultimately reaches a point where the "music" actually still is better. BUT the sound is so much worse that it's not worth it. My LP12/Keel/Lingo2/Ekos2/Adikt - Slipsik - Timpano - LK100 - Index Plus was in some way "better" than LP12 without Keel - same pre - 5125 - aktiv Ninka. But if I had to live with one of those systems... I don't know.

Interesting. Perhaps that's what Thomas meant when he used the term 'musically balanced system' - majoring on musicality (source first), but with good enough sound so that its not annoying or too fatiguing and basically doesn't detract from the music - cos what would be the point of source first if that happened, as in your case.

Sorry - I know this is like grade 1 'source first' theory for dummies :roll: Most of it makes perfect sense and clicks straight away, but then I keep thinking of these 'what ifs'