Should speakers be the most high-end of your components?

I've been doing research on components for awhile now, and I'm a bit stuck on the speakers. I'll be getting a Rogue Cronus Magnum and was wondering if Magnepan 1.7's would be good, or should I move up to the $3000 range instead?

 

I'd suggest choosing the best speakers for your room and preferences, then build everything else around them.

 

I still stick with 1st priority is the source (vinyl/cd/hi res) then the amp , then the speakers.

 

There is the old Linn theory that the source is the most important part of the chain. Of course they sold turntables. Then there is the adage that you should spend 2/3 of your budget on speakers because, except for the room, they will have most affect upon how your system sounds. I tend towards the second. But listen and see what you think.

 

...but with the caveat that I would spend, proportionally, much more on speakers than the other components. They will make the single largest contribution to the quality and character of your system.

 

I'm sure The Good Guy is a really good guy, but I'd go in exactly the opposite direction. I believe the only thing that affects sound quality as much as speakers is the room you put them in and the way you place them in that room.
-Bob

 

I think first of all You should choose a speaker You like i Your home, where they should be used. I have no idea what high-end means in this regard.
You have to lend home speaker and listen to, and really decide what You want from them. They should fit You and the room.

 

I absolutely agree...

 

Depends on the speakers you choose as to what kind of amp it needs. My Klipsch sounded fine with a crappy ole receiver.
My Apogee Stages Planar Speakers needed more power (and more precise positioning in my home), so I chose Krell to drive them.

 

I was always speakers first then I bought a good amp and it was like I was hearing the speakers for the first time. ultimately everything has to work together, if you get too far out in front with one thing over the other it diminishes the return. That being said, speaker technology is pretty durable. buy the ones you want most and grow into them if you need to.

 

Well, your assuming that a $3000 speaker is by that very fact better than 1.7's. I don't think that's a valid assumption. Get the speakers that you love and that you can afford. If there's a $3000 speaker that to your ears blows away 1.7's, do it right and save up the extra grand and go that way. The saying " do it right or do it again" applies to audio gear.

This is why I have the same turntable 17 years and the same speakers 15 years. I saved up enough back then to do it right.

 

I think you're goal has a lot to do with it as well. I have seen source and amplifier have tremendous effect with making speakers sing, providing you like the speakers in the first place. $20k in source and amp can't make crappy speakers great, but a crappy amp can sure sink a great speaker. I think you have to identify your weak links and then think of it as a system. Then you have to decide if you have the ability to upgrade pieces along the way. I would always want to start with at least one good foundation that will last through the process.

 

I'm sure looking forward to when my new decent speakers arrive next week. They're only A$2000.00 and are pretty amazing for the price.
They're replacing a set of floorstanders that were part of a 5.1 speaker pack and Onkyo receiver totalling about $1300.00 all up (so pretty cheap).
I'm just hoping my current receiver drives them well though everyone assures me they will

 

The old school ways were, find some speakers you like the sound of and work for you then purchase the right amp to power them, them continue from there.

 

Great speakers and amplification are the foundation to build upon. Sources (while important) tend to revolve through my system much more frequently (especially DACs).

 

Speakers should get the most attention in my view.

 

My speakers (Monitor Audio GR60s) are the most expensive part of my set-up.

I bought them used for around £1200 but they were roughly £2500 when new. Once they were in place I suddenly lost the itch for new speakers for the first time. They're that good IMHO.

They've also sounded better as I've upgraded amplification, speaker cables and interconnects, although the view that I've tended to take is that the upgraded component sounds better than its predecessor, i.e. I've assumed that the speakers are a clear window into everything else and that the upgrade is just giving them a better quality signal to transduce.

I'm now in a position where everything sounds great and I can just listen to music rather than fight the urge to upgrade.

If I do end up upgrading anything, it will probably be my turntable, since I know that I can probably do better. That, however, is intellectual knowledge rather than a deep dissatisfaction with what I hear, so I'm in no hurry.

 

IMO everything is very important, from start to end of the chain.

But speakers first

 

I built my system, starting with nothing but the desire to have a good hi fi setup, starting with speakers. I listened to quite a few with a variety of integrated amps, not knowing which amp I'd end up with, and landed on my Devore The Nines ($6500) because I kept going back to them and their sound. Then I built the rest of the system, and after a few upgrades, independently verified for me that "source first" is right. At least for me.

As I improved my source, I continues to hear the benefits of that from the very same integrated amp. At no point did my then amp (Nait XS; $3000) not reveal source upgrades.

I am comfortable with the source being the 'most high end' part of my system.

 

Although I'm a believer in building from the ground up and thereby feel strongly about having the best source you can afford, I think that speakers are next in line. How you divide that pie in terms of allocated dollars is a personal choice and doesn't carry with it a right or wrong answer.

 

Depends on the speaker.

Ribbon or electrostatic speakers aren't all that expensive, really more of a bargain. But you need lots of space. And not a lot of folks are willing to have 5 to 7.5 foot tall speakers in a room. If you are, & you want to get the best out of them, amplification and turntable sure do get expensive. Certain type of speakers change the %. Cost is a whole lot different than dealing with say horn loaded vs ribbons.

 

The source. Turntable,arm,cartridge.

"Garbage in,garbage out".

 

I say buy the best source you can afford and build around that. Good speakers won't make a turntable with a plastic tonearm and cheap cartridge sound that much better.

Same goes with DAC. An airport express is decent and convenient, but there are fare better options out there that can be had for the price of a really great vintage turntable (sub $1K).

 

True, but great sources played through lousy amplification and bad sounding speakers aren't going to sound good, either. The bottom line is that everything in the chain impacts the sound. I think it makes most sense to build a system of relative quality throughout, according to one's overall budget.

 

If you play a cheap turntable through good speakers then you'll hear the issue and you'll also hear the improvement when you get a decent turntable.

If you play a good turntable through bad speakers then you won't be able to tell which item is letting you down.

The speakers are the windows through which you see the rest of your audio world. If the glass is dirty or obscured then everything else will seem to be as well.