That was never any rule that I have read or heard about. The 'rules' as they have always been related to me are:
That each component should ideally be about the same level - which normally means about the same price. So souce, amp & speakers all cost the same. The idea behind this is that the sound is only as good as the weakest component - no matter how good your speakers or source for example a poor amp will strangle the sound before it gets there. That source IS the most important part - otherwise known as the 'garbage in, garbage out' rule. If you start off with something s**te then no amount of good amplification or 'speakeration'(!) will improve that. These rule actually equally applies to photography to bring it daringly close to being back on topic - you havre to start with a good vision and preserve it in the best way right through to the final result. Cables are also important - although it is often debated just how important. Consensus in the magazines seems to be about 10% of system budget. But the key thing is careful matching of all components together. When you buy a new componend, you MUST audition with the same partnering kit as you will have at home to really judge what suits your system best. Not wanting to judge anyone it seems to me that in the US, speakers are the most (if not only) important part of the system, followed by amp and then source. In the UK it is the other way around. I come from the UK, so not surprisingly I subscribe that that view. I have my views on the whole vinyl/CD issue and benefits/price levels, but I am going to stay out of those on this list as they will never be resolved and they seems to have died down already. Suffice to say that vinyl is alive and well in the UK and available new in most if not all major music shops, but it don't play very well in the car. Rob > -----Original Message----- > From: graywolf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 23 November 2003 19:44 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: vinyl Was: RE: Digital/Film body pricing > > > Remember the old high fidelity rule. Your speakers should be > 1/2 your system > cost so that $2K system would have a pair of $500 speakers. > Though all speakers > at a given price point do not produce the same quality sound, > so they are the > part you really need to listen to before you buy. > > If you read the guys comments on the Ultra High Fidelity > website he says the > source is the most important part of the system. As you > comment that is true, > but only after you system reaches a certain quaility point. > Also if one does not > crank the sound up where it blows you out of the room source > noise is not so > obvious. > > Another thing: I understand that most high-end vinyl is not > pressed but > individually lazer cut these days. Someday I hope I will get > to hear one of > those on a good system, at $100 a recording I'm not going to > be able to buy > them. That is for sure. > > Being poor these days I listen on a 10 year old boom-box I > bought when the > Charlotte library dumped everything but CD's from their audio > collection. The > sound from it is fairly clean (at low volumn), but dead > sounding. OK for > background music, but not for serious listening. > > Recently I decided I wanted something that sounds as good as > my old earily > 1980's system. It was a low Technics receiver, tape deck, and > turntable hooked > up to a pair of Baby Advent speakers. Nice clean sound. Those > Baby Advents cost > $300 each and were considered at the time to be the best > bookshelf speakers > available. I go down to the so called high-fi department of the > computer/audio/electronic chain stores and nothing they are > selling has that > clean sound. Of course all they sell is consumer grade stuff > even if some of it > costs more than the real thing. > > I decided to look for some old but good used stuff, then the > truck breaks down > and I have to put that idea on the back burner. This thread > started just about > then so the whole thing was on my mind anyway. > > My listening preferences are about 60% jazz, 30% classical, > and 10% other; so it > is rather easy to tell the difference. Wouldn't you know that > when I moved up > into the mountains I moved out of the area where I could > receive the only 100% > jazz station in the Carolinas (sad smile). > > -- > > David Mann wrote: > > graywolf wrote: > > > > > >>The funny thing here is I think we old folks need a better sound > >>system then the younger folks. Why? Well, I at least have a > far harder > >>time separating noise, so the less noise the better the sound to my > >>ears. Current consumer sound is: 1. loud. 2. excessively bassy. 3. > >>noisy. > > > > > > In my experience I've found that the more expensive the > equipment, the > > more of the subtle recording flaws I can pick out. If you > buy expensive > > hi-fi gear the recordings you buy had better be good or it'll just > > frustrate you. I guess its similar to a high-end film > scanner picking > > out more grain along with the extra image detail. > > > > I will say though that the sound coming out of cheap > consumer systems > > is > > a lot better for the money than what was available 10 years > ago... once > > you switch off the subwoofer(s). > > > > > >>That said I don't think many of us could tell the > difference between a > >>good $2000 system and a fine $20,000 system, but most of us > who care > >>can easily tell the difference between a $2000 high fidelity system > >>and a $500 home theater system. > > > > > > I'm young enough that I could probably tell a difference at > the higher > > end (more due to the speakers than anything else) but I doubt I'd > > consider that difference to be worth spending an extra 18,000 > > hypothetical dollars on. Heck, at the moment I don't even have a > > listening room that would do justice to the $2,000 system. > > > > > >>Note that "us who care" part up there, I understand that > that is only > >>about 30% of the music listening public. The other 70% > would be happy > >>with a $29 system. > > > > > > Just before reading PDML tonight I put one of my new CDs on. Bic > > Runga > > with the Christchurch Symphony live in concert. It was > performed in our > > Town Hall in October. I didn't attend but I went to see > Anika Moa with > > the Christchurch Symphony two weeks ago, and I hope they do > a CD of that > > one as well because I thoroughly enjoyed it. You guys have > probably > > never heard of these people. > > > > Anyway, my stereo is a small bookshelf system I bought > about 10 years > > ago. It was the bottom model of its series and the sound > is far from any > > kind of hi-fi standard. But somehow I'm still enjoying my > CD. It sounds > > a _lot_ better on my Sennheisers but I don't care right now. I'm > > listening to the music, not the sound. > > > > Another thing is that the "other 70%" aren't likely to be > listening to > > music which will benefit from a high-end system. I'm not > sure if Britney > > Spears would be any more compelling on vinyl than as an mp3 file. > > -- > graywolf > http://graywolfphoto.com > > "You might as well accept people as they are, > you are not going to be able to change them anyway." > > >
