Still as relevant as ever it was(n’t). but indeed brilliant marketing strategy by a TT manufacturer, especially when effectively in partnership with Naim so that Naim sold the idea as well.
2 Likes
The concept of source first is valid and makes perfect sense. Yes it was indeed a brilliant marketing strategy for the LP12 by Linn Products. Here though it was taken to extremes to the point where only the source really mattered and everything else was largely irrelevant. So systems consisting of an LP12 with say a dirt cheap Tandy amp and speakers were quite common and accepted as good because any system fronted by an LP12 was naturally excellent. Obviously this was pushing things much too far and most people would have found a more balanced system of say Rega 3 with NAD 3020 with say Mission 700 speakers far preferable. But that doesn’t invalidate the concept at all. It only shows how Linn ruthlessly exploited the concept in order to promote their turntable.
3 Likes
?Could the single most important factor be your room?
2 Likes
So you think mixing cables can bring easier a neutrality to the sound ?
Then what is neutrality ? A cold and anemic sound ? A sound which is dynamic, quiet , detailed… but a bit clinical?
A sound with true tone colours, textures, but lacking some bass extension and extensed highs?..
1 Like
In what way? The oft cited GIGO argument is fallacious other than with an extremely poor front end with significant noise or distortion, as otherwise it is not garbage being produced by a lesser source, rather not as refined or clear as it could be. And any system’s resolution and clarity is inevitably limited by the weakest link in the chain, which is an argument for a balanced system not better front end.
3 Likes
Ooooh FR…I did not put those ideas in my head…did you do it? Are we living in the film Inception?
2 Likes
Information not retrieved from the recording by the source is lost forever. It cannot be retrieved by an amp and speakers, however good they are. It follows then that it matters to have the most capable source one can get in order to maximise the musical potential of the system.
It’s true that resolution and clarity is limited by the weakest link in the chain. But the situation in reality is not so simple and straight forward. For example, let us imagine a system consisting of a Rega 3 with NAD 30230 and a pair of original Wharfedale Diamond speakers. One might easily imagine that the speakers are a weak link and upgrade them, lets just say, to a pair of Heybrook HB2’s. Will this sound better? Maybe. But would it have sounded even better by keeping the Diamonds and upgrading the Rega 3 to an LP12? Definitely yes. Much better. It will have better musical communication as more musical information is being retrieved from the record. Although the Daimonds won’t resolve this as well and be as revealing as the Heybrooks would be, they will still be capable of letting through enough additional information to make the improvement of the LP12 over the Rega 3 very obvious. In the case of the Heybrooks with the Rega 3 the information won’t be there to start with as the Rega 3 just can’t retrieve it. So despite the better resolution of and more revealing nature of the speakers this will be largely wasted.
Also, and this is where GIGO comes into play, the more revealing nature of the Heybrooks may start to expose weaknesses in the Rega 3. All right, it’s a misnomer calling it garbage, because a Rega 3 definitely isn’t garbage, but one can easily hear when a source is out of its depth in a system. The inappropriately revealing nature of a superior amp and speakers makes shortcomings in a lesser source very obvious. In the right context even a Rega 2 is really excellent. But stick it in front of a highly revealing system and it will sound very disappointing indeed. Not because it is feeding the system with garbage, but because it is only capable of retrieving so much information and its overall performance and balance is naturally limited by its price. A highly revealing system will highlight its weaknesses rather than emphasising its strengths. It will tell you more about what’s wrong with it than with what’s good about it. In the right context, which is a good capable budget amp and speakers, it will sound superb as it’s a really good turntable for the price and the amp and speakers will be good enough to show that but not so good as to highlight its weaknesses.
So yes it’s all about balance and that includes not over stretching a source with an amp and speakers that are too revealing for it. Such systems always disappoint. It’s not just a question of the source not retreiving enough musical information but also of it being engineered to a price which involves sonic compromises which a system which is too revealing will ruthlessly expose. I agree though that GIGO is not what’s happening here strictly speaking. That’s just an expression which was coined by Linn Products way back ( or rather appropriated by them from the computer industry) and it’s inaccurate but the result is the same.
1 Like
Interesting…
What does full loom make? Actually makes you feel good - as it has done for me. Except the speakers I was in full loom. All powerline - all naim - all superlumina. I would never had bought a different speaker cable than SL - and as it reached the system it was a huge step up. Was it the full loom effect (sum better than…)? Or myself knowing that I now own full loom? Or the SL speaker cable wich is so much better than naca5 in my ears? I think it was the latter.
What have I done later - as the full loom was not as perfect as I wanted it to be. Too much energy In sometimes.
I broke full loom SL and exchaned 5-5 din with chord music. Full loom gone - huge upgrade.
Synergy yes - that is the key. But it’s not always the full loom of one cable - a mix can do best. I would not try it with naim amps. They are made for each other. Streamer? Could be another story - maybe someday later. Maybe not!
1 Like
OC can be tough on ears and need taming. NC has better top end IMO. Less hard. More airy. Better fit with SL. I believe SL was developed for S1 which NC derives from.
1 Like
Information then lost by the amp or speakers is not heard, so what’s the benefit in having a more capable source? (A better speaker can at least give a better sound presentation)
Balance of course is ideal, however unless someone has sufficient resources to upgrade whole system at a time then imbalance is inevitable if on a path to some target level. And in my view it is better for the speaker to be the better component (provided amp is capable of adequate control and source not bad) as that brings the sound character and fullness of sound.
we will have to agree to disagree!
3 Likes
I do not think that OC in general needs taming - my room does do. And also I do not think that NC shares much sonic genes with statement - statement is in a different league to both OC and NC.
NC more smooth and gentle - that’s nice.
1 Like
And i even haven’t begin to enter into the philosophical aspects of the phenomenoms reality and consensiousness.
1 Like
A treated room, expensive speakers, but with average electronics and source, will generally sound poorer vs average speakers, not so problematic room , without acoustic treatment, and high class electronics and source.
2 Likes
You just keep regurgitating Linn dealer propaganda from the 70s/80s, it didn’t work too well back then, not much different from today.
1 Like
This may have been used by Linn as propaganda but it is nevertheless self evident fact as a moments consideration will make obvious. You cannot dismiss fact just because you dislike Linn’s marketing strategies, which you do seem to be rather hung up on.
1 Like
My thoughts on system synergy were perfectly expressed in a Naim Audio brochure from the 1970s:
4 Likes
Is this your or my solpolism?
Better not continue this, people will be angry!
2 Likes
I believe back in the late 70’s early 80’s we (consumers) were told by the Dealers that a balanced system was required ie match front end to amp to speakers to get the right system. I also remember that if you think you will be upgrading in the next few years, spend more on the front end. Seemed to make sense to me then and I believe so now for those coming into the music/HiFi past time
1 Like
No amp or speaker is perfect. All of them will lose some of the information transmitted to them from the source. The benefit of having a more capable source is that you are then maximising information being fed to the amp and speakers and in so doing will be minimising information loss as much as possible for that combination. I’ve never encountered a system, however lowly, that didn’t respond positively to a better source. Even the Steepletone stereo record player I had as a 10 year old sounded better when I upgraded the fitted BSR crystal cartridge to a better BSR ceramic type.
The speakers will certainly tend to influence the tonal character of the sound more than the source. What they won’t ever do, no matter how good they are, is to restore musical information lost by the source. In my experience the most satisfying systems have been those where priority has been given to obtaining the best source possible and compromising on the speakers. Personally I would much rather listen to an LP12 and a Nait 1 driving a pair of £100 bookshelf speakers than to a Rega 3 and a Nait 1 driving an electrically matched pair of large speakers costing say £2K. Why? Because experience has shown me that the LP12 fronted system will be more musically involving, even if it doesn’t have the scale and tonal realism of the system with the more costly speakers. But if your own priorities align with these qualities, even at the expense of some musical involvement, then it’s a perfectly valid choice.
1 Like
And isn’t that also true with better speakers and amps?
And if the information from the source is then lost by the amp or speakers, the result is the same - the weakest link is the determining factor.
As I said,
It’s not a matter of any priorities other than musical involvement and enjoyment - and for me, that comes from the music itself, in its entirety, of which minutiae of detail is only a part, icing on the cake rather than core carrier of emotion. My experience has shown me that music constricted in spectral and dynamic range by inadequate speakers is not as enjoyable as otherwise, and that includes having heard the LP12 as source. As I said, we will have to agree to disagree - and I know I am not alone in this.
But one additional thought: perhaps a relevant factor is musical style preference: some music doesn’t have a wide spectral or dynamic range, and such music can indeed sound more or less as good with less capable speakers subject to their sound character within the range reproduced. If I have picked up correctly from sme things you have said in the past, your musical preference has gravitated to jazz, whereas the core of mine is prog rock and orchestral including opera, intensely disliking most jazz.
1 Like