Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Technical Questions Rec Spec Check

Since I joined this board in 2002, I have espoused that the source is the most important device in the audio chain. It was not popular then, probably not now - especially on a speaker mfg'er board. I will expand it a bit - An exceptional source needs good pre/amp and then speakers. A great source feeding cheap speakers sounds better than a cheap source feeding great speakers.

I could explain with examples for days, but I think MatMan has the example above, without mentioning the source. :-)

Are you suggesting a pair of Realistic speakers with top of the line source equipment would sound better than active LFR1100s with "low end" source equipment like an integrated Onk fed by a Firestick 4K?

I think he means source as the content. Great in this case being dynamic range.

Maybe he can clarify.

If the OP hasn't been clipping and is happy with the sound I'd say he doesn't need a new receiver.
And it's probably not clipping if it lasted 10 years. I'd guess that some of that luck is because the sub has been doing the heavy lifting; but part of it might be that the common (mass-market) manufacturers used to over-design, but now I think they come right up to the spec line.

With that in mind scgm, if you do wind up getting a receiver I'd look for one rated at 4 ohm (if doesn't seem like your current receiver is). It worked out the last time, but you may not be as lucky the next time.

BBIBH and MattMan, in some respects I agree with you. In other respects, it’s not that cut and dry. So first let’s get Mattman’s point out of the way. Lousy sound in gets you lousy sound out no matter how good the components are which follow … no argument. But in general, IMO, the source is not usually the weakest link till you are far down the upgrade path.

I think the argument being made from the other side is more about money: starting and upgrading on a limited budget. Most don’t have $5k, $10k or more to start off with a system that benefits from subtle upgrades. So upgrading a budget system the most likely path is cost driven. So what gets you the most bang for the buck when it comes time to upgrade.

First let’s define a typical budget system. Todays low end devices (I.e. receivers, cd/dvd players, etc…) are less expensive and produce better quality sound then ever before. This is because more and more functionality is being packed into inexpensive chips saving design time and manufacturing costs. Speaker components and speaker design on the other hand have not changed that much. Making it, IMO, the limiting factor in a budget system. I’d bet that a $300 receiver with $700 speakers would sound better at medium volume than a $700 receiver with $300 speakers. So, if I had to guess at the weakest link in the average budget system I’d generalize it’s the speakers.

From there figuring out the weakest link will depend on the problem you’re trying to solve. So, if the sound is being distort because you like listening at higher volume than your receiver is capable of, my first suspect would be your clipping the amp (but not necessarily the only suspect). If it’s a high noise floor you’d need to work your way backwards though the chain as it can be a lot of things (and not necessarily the device with the worst noise spec)

That said, If I had to guess at the next weakest link, after getting decent full range speaker (or adding a sub to a decent bookshelf speaker), it would be to get a decent amp to improve dynamics at volume. The reason is that an ampifier cost increases significantly with the power it can deliver. Budget is a key factor preventing most people from doing this and, IMO, it’s the first cost trade off most people make even though they might not know it (I.e. the power difference between that $300 receiver and $700 receiver, call it 75 vs 110watts, would not make a perceivable volume difference). Note the $700 receiver might be justified if it has pre-outs in anticipation of adding a future amp.

So, to sum it up in a different way … the user determines the problem to solve and the best solution may or may not be what you think it obviously is. It may not even be a component upgrade … and of course the solution is always limited by budget.

Without a good front end the speakers dont matter.

Power on hand is always bottleneck in installs.

Trevor, not sure your referring to what I wrote … the point I’m trying to make is that it’s hard to buy a terrible ‘front end” these day.

Most use their phones and are very happy. Even over Bluetooth which definitely is limiting … it’s listenable.
All preamp and receivers that I’ve heard to date are good enough to be listenable.

Think as a group we often confuse a listenable system with a top notch audiophile one.
Some talk like only a top notch one is any good.


Now, there is an other kind of sound … just bad … it’s not subtle….

Clipping more then lightly Is not, IMO, listenable. Bad speakers can also produce very poor quality sound.
The difference between bad & listenable is a bigger gap in my mind than listenable & audiophile quality.

The audiophile sound is what we are striving for. The degrees of listenable is what we get till we achieve it.

Agreed. Was not about what anyone wrote. Just a general mutter like an old man on a park bench. Lol.

rrlev: My point about crap in crap out can be taken in so many ways.

I can't speak for every system out there. I have been on CanuckAudioMart for many years and have seen more brands named that I even knew existed. So clearly there are many companies that manufacture for the audio market. I would hazard to guess that some cater towards the budget end of the listeners, and others cater towards the money is no object. And there are a whole lot that fall in between


For example. If you went and look at Pioneer. They generally sell at the big box type stores like BestBuy and 2001 Audio. They offer quite a range of product prices, but are more marketed towards the lower end listener rather than a high end Hifi audio person. You can get receivers with quite impressive looking specs on paper but as your prior posts have shown, they really don't deliver.

Compare a $400 Pioneer with say a $400 Cambridge Audio for playing stereo. The pioneer has on paper 300 watts and all the bells, where the Cambridge is 80 watts, no fancy but a big ass toroidal transformer. Who will sound better? Sadly this seems to also hold true for many Yamaha, Sony, Onkio, Marantz, Denon. All were at one point a great name but have fallen victim to the mass manufacturing, spec driven and not sound and quality black hole. Sure they do have some good systems but as you have said they are priced well above what most people would be wanting to be paying.

If we look to the OP, he is running a set of Axiom M80 and an EP500. I would not put them under the cheapest set of speaker category. I bought my first pair of Axiom M80v4 speakers in 2014 and they were $1300. (now they are over $2600). I don't know what the v2 sold for, but I would tend to bet they were not a $300 pair of speakers. So your comment about a $700 receiver and $300 speakers seems a bit of a puzzler. There is a price point that you simply cannot drop below without having to take a serious sacrifice in quality and or functionality. Sorry, but a new $300 speaker that sounds good doesn't exist. Even the M2 speaker is $600.

So it comes back to my crap in crap out. In my case, the Pre-Amps that I had tried were not living up to the capable performance of the rest of my system, so it really didn't matter that I had a wonderful amp and perfect cross over cables and #10 speaker wire with Axioms top of the line speakers. it didn't sound its best or even all that great as the start of the line in my case, the not up to the task pre-amp caused everything after it to sound sub par.

At no point is that saying your example of you should have a $700 receiver with $300 speakers, but more to the point that perhaps the $300 receiver just isn't up to the task of driving the $700 speaker you have and maybe it's not the speakers that are letting you down, but choosing the right $400 or $500 receiver as the price tag (or spec given by the manufacturer) doesn't mean its going to be better than the one you currently have.

</rant off>

...and then you get the people who say that they have a great audio system at home, who when you turn yours on and play a few tracks look at you with that dumbfounded and somewhat confused look and say "WOW, that sounds amazing" as they suddenly realize the difference between good enough, listenable and when something can be truly great. You don't know what you are missing until you hear what you are missing and then you understand.

I have a factory stereo inside my car. it plays music via bluetooth out through factory speakers in the doors and front dash. It sounds ok and I enjoy listening to some music while i drive. Do I purposefully go sit inside my car to listen to music? No. Have I ever thought that I feel like relaxing an lets put on some Debussy, or Dvorak and sit in my car? No.

To me that is the difference between listenable and great.