51 minutes ago, S1000XR said:

It certainly makes sense that lower sensitivity more modern speaker designs that generally are trying to get higher outputs from more compact cabinets with smaller drivers would pair better with higher power solid state amplification. 
 

Higher sensitivity designs with more generous driver and cabinet sizes would generally be a more suitable load for tube applications.

 

Obviously there are exceptions but is this a fair statement? 
 

i have only heard vinyl through tubes so it would be interesting to hear a quality digital source via a tube based system. 
 

 

That's a good generalisation about speaker efficient. However there are other factors which affect efficiency, such as the choice of drivers and complexity of the crossovers incl: how they're tuned. The best crossover is no crossover, but that is impractical in most cases. So simple, high quality x-overs like the ones below are the theoretical ideal..
 

 

Edited June 27, 2025Jun 27 by David A
fixed pic

Those cross overs would cost more than ordinary people are prepared to spend on speakers 🤪

Edited June 27, 2025Jun 27 by Lil Caesar

They are some serious caps! 😳

20 minutes ago, S1000XR said:

They are some serious caps! 😳

 

They're the x-overs in the speakers I plan to buy. From the amp to the compression driver, there are only speaker binding posts and a Mundorf MCap Supreme Evo SGO cap in the signal path. Rule of thumb: Don’t ask the amp to fight with all the demands of complex crossovers which can smear the time domain and transients.

 

Edited June 27, 2025Jun 27 by David A

36 minutes ago, Lil Caesar said:

Those cross overs would cost more than ordinary people are prepared to spend on speakers 🤪

 

The flagship Mundorf caps in that value are pricey, true. However the speakers those x-overs belong to only have 1 cap in the signal path. Compare that to more complex x-overs with multiple caps, resistors and inductors, and the total cost of the x-overs adds up.

We are talking pretty esoteric gear here David. Certainly sounds impressive. 

The concept of an end game in this hobby requires approximately equal quantities of money and self delusion.

There is no such thing.After a point you do not get better you just get different. Learning to enjoy those differences and accepting that all systems come with compromises will save  a lot of frustration.

Realising that it really isn’t that important.
 

 Many / most audiophiles spend years , often decades being unsatisfied.  Once I get A/B/C right it will sound fantastic. This causes stress and anxiety and ever increasing expenditure. Don’t get me wrong, finding a balanced enjoyable system is often achieved but like a shiny car with one scratch we can often only see the scratch.

On 27/06/2025 at 2:19 PM, S1000XR said:

 

 

I would also consider Model 30 with my Kanta n1 (same colour), but I already have a similar amp. Primare i25. 

11 hours ago, THOMO said:

The concept of an end game in this hobby requires approximately equal quantities of money and self delusion.

There is no such thing.After a point you do not get better you just get different. Learning to enjoy those differences and accepting that all systems come with compromises will save  a lot of frustration.

I think thats why every audiophile needs to determine their own definition of end game.
 

Cost really shouldn’t be the the primary factor for achieving a sound that someone is totally satisfied with as spending the most doesn’t guarantee complete satisfaction. Spending alot of money does guarantee a high level of technical excellence but that doesn’t necessarily mean it completely meets the purchasers expectations. 
 

Fundamentally someone investing 1000 dollars can be just as content with their system as someone investing 1 million. 
 

I agree it’s important to accept there is no such a thing as a perfect system, there is only the perfect system determined by you. 
 

 

44 minutes ago, Irek said:

 

I would also consider Model 30 with my Kanta n1 (same colour), but I already have a similar amp. Primare i25. 

i am sure many mid tier integrated amps or separates would give me a similar experience. I think the biggest surprise for me was how much of an improvement the dedicated stereo amplifier was over what is a quite high end and well specced AVR even with high power external amplification. 
 

I know the argument that no AVR will outperform a good quality stereo setup for 2 channel listening but I didn’t expect the gap to be as large as it was. 
 

My thoughts are the Kanta’s are also part of the equation as they are a capable enough speaker to take full advantage of the improved preamp and amplification of the Model 30. 
 

I wonder if the difference would have been so pronounced with the Chora 826 towers I had previously? 

I agree with all contributors. But what is the end-game if you don't define the game itself? Surely that is the feeling that your tastes in music and evident system musicality have aligned so closely that you don't wish to spend more ascending the slippery slope of technical perfection (and potential diminishing returns) in the current (synergistic) setup.

 

Very obviously there are hundreds of system configurations out there. Audiophiles are different. Look at the usual hifi systems of professional musicians, even many hi-fi designers--these setups can be very modest indeed. I won't start of the oh-so-satisfying car radio! No need to ask 'why is it so?' 'Let a thousand flowers bloom.'

 

While there is always something superior out there, if you've found the topology and the gear at the right price for you (and set it up in a good room) then you can relax. In the same way that you're happy and satisfied with your other toys, your car, your home, your partner...even yourself! This is aceptance--saying 'yes' to what is.. Acceptance is not agreeing that nothing more can be achieved, nor that you approve of every little thing in your system. Fine-tuning is one thing. 'Changing horses' another entirely. Satisfaction is the name of the game.

 

I think it's fortuitous that a valve-based system can be cost effective and wondrous (hallo Retrothermionic and McChanson!). For me, the sonority of valves (so utterly like real music in the right implementation) is so compelling that I don't care that there is better/different out there, because:

1. Typically I can't afford it, and

2. I would have to change my whole system around to an unknown end

 

For many years I tried different topologies and speakers and such. It's noteworthy that some took up residence for decades in my home: especially the Artemis EOS 2-way speakers driven by Leben preamplification and VAL-211 valve monoblocs. I was delighted and astounded when I owned the original Martin Logan CLS--driven by VTL valves--many years ago. On this audio path, for a short while, the QUAD ESL-63 speakers were in house and I was blissfully happy again as well (FM broadcasts via the pimped-out DYNA FM-3 valve tuner the cherry on the cake!) Today it's the DECWARE Zen triode EL84UFO2.1 driving Tekton Design Perfect SET speakers (98dB). Still the same satisfaction.

 

I say all this not to name drop but to emphasise the underlying unspoken question: Why did you change after being so content?

 

The answer is in the gist of this whole post. Also, probably why many own 2 or more systems. Or amplifiers. Or speakers. I recently saw a pic on Stereonet of a member's new giant rack from Bunnings  for holding some 20 primo valve amps (no, it wasn't xlr8or-Kirk). I understand, I really do. No finger pointing from me.

 

End game might therefore mean that you settle down and enjoy your music with what you have. Do I lust after the top Line Magnetic and Berning amplifiers and the Avantgarde horn speakers? Of course I do. I'm only human. But I have other lusts as well and those are in check too (fortunately). My delusions generally last only a brief time. I'm trying to befriend someone who does own this gear, just like when my brother owned a yacht. 😃

 

Just my 2c worth.

 

 

6 hours ago, doogie44 said:

I agree with all contributors. But what is the end-game if you don't define the game itself? Surely that is the feeling that your tastes in music and evident system musicality have aligned so closely that you don't wish to spend more ascending the slippery slope of technical perfection (and potential diminishing returns) in the current (synergistic) setup.

 

Very obviously there are hundreds of system configurations out there. Audiophiles are different. Look at the usual hifi systems of professional musicians, even many hi-fi designers--these setups can be very modest indeed. I won't start of the oh-so-satisfying car radio! No need to ask 'why is it so?' 'Let a thousand flowers bloom.'

 

While there is always something superior out there, if you've found the topology and the gear at the right price for you (and set it up in a good room) then you can relax. In the same way that you're happy and satisfied with your other toys, your car, your home, your partner...even yourself! This is aceptance--saying 'yes' to what is.. Acceptance is not agreeing that nothing more can be achieved, nor that you approve of every little thing in your system. Fine-tuning is one thing. 'Changing horses' another entirely. Satisfaction is the name of the game.

 

I think it's fortuitous that a valve-based system can be cost effective and wondrous (hallo Retrothermionic and McChanson!). For me, the sonority of valves (so utterly like real music in the right implementation) is so compelling that I don't care that there is better/different out there, because:

1. Typically I can't afford it, and

2. I would have to change my whole system around to an unknown end

 

For many years I tried different topologies and speakers and such. It's noteworthy that some took up residence for decades in my home: especially the Artemis EOS 2-way speakers driven by Leben preamplification and VAL-211 valve monoblocs. I was delighted and astounded when I owned the original Martin Logan CLS--driven by VTL valves--many years ago. On this audio path, for a short while, the QUAD ESL-63 speakers were in house and I was blissfully happy again as well (FM broadcasts via the pimped-out DYNA FM-3 valve tuner the cherry on the cake!) Today it's the DECWARE Zen triode EL84UFO2.1 driving Tekton Design Perfect SET speakers (98dB). Still the same satisfaction.

 

I say all this not to name drop but to emphasise the underlying unspoken question: Why did you change after being so content?

 

The answer is in the gist of this whole post. Also, probably why many own 2 or more systems. Or amplifiers. Or speakers. I recently saw a pic on Stereonet of a member's new giant rack from Bunnings  for holding some 20 primo valve amps (no, it wasn't xlr8or-Kirk). I understand, I really do. No finger pointing from me.

 

End game might therefore mean that you settle down and enjoy your music with what you have. Do I lust after the top Line Magnetic and Berning amplifiers and the Avantgarde horn speakers? Of course I do. I'm only human. But I have other lusts as well and those are in check too (fortunately). My delusions generally last only a brief time. I'm trying to befriend someone who does own this gear, just like when my brother owned a yacht. 😃

 

Just my 2c worth.

 

 

 

Thanks for your contribution. 

 

I agree the definition of end game is when you are completely satsfied with what you have, period. I suppose this can be applied to individual components as well as a complete system. 

 

I guess the fundamental difference is there are people that find a sound and level of performance they deem as special enough to satisfy them, where there are others that are not prepared to accept that anything can ever be end game and will always be looking for improvements. 

 

Neither is wrong and I can appreciate both camps as it makes the overall hifi community richer. These are also generalisations of course and there are many who fall somewhere in between. 

 

Technology changes are the uncontrollable variable as well. Many people who may have been completely satisfied with their system may have found themselves adding a streamer(😉) in recent times. 

Edited June 30, 2025Jun 30 by S1000XR

1 hour ago, S1000XR said:

Technology changes are the uncontrollable variable as well. Many people who may have been completely satisfied with their system may have found themselves adding a steamer in recent times. 

You can’t beat steam! Way more fun than electricity 😀😀😀

On 29/06/2025 at 9:25 AM, THOMO said:

The concept of an end game in this hobby requires approximately equal quantities of money and self delusion.

There is no such thing.After a point you do not get better you just get different. Learning to enjoy those differences and accepting that all systems come with compromises will save  a lot of frustration.

 

I like what Thomo says essentially. 

 

To add just a bit more to that - there are more differences out there than better, irrespective of price outlaid. Other factors to consider are an individuals changing preferences over time-and they do change. What was maybe less important a while back becomes important now. And finally, the element of somebody else's end game or perception of better influencing you. In recent years it is something that has become very evident to me. Dont chase somebody else's version of perfection. Try and stay with your end game objectives, because if you start to consider somebody else's, it is a guaranteed situation where you will never ever, ever get there to where you want to go. 

 

If you like it after living with it for some time, then it's gotta be half decent. Sounds a bit like the concept of wives too, now I come to think of it????? 😂

Got there about 2 years ago. Been to a few hifi shows, demos, etc. but have zero interest in anything anymore. I just compare it to live unamplified music these days.

2 hours ago, doogie44 said:

You can’t beat steam! Way more fun than electricity 😀😀😀

 

You got me there. Steam is good for straightening out warped vinyl right ?😉

Edited June 30, 2025Jun 30 by S1000XR

2 hours ago, aertex said:

 

I like what Thomo says essentially. 

 

To add just a bit more to that - there are more differences out there than better, irrespective of price outlaid. Other factors to consider are an individuals changing preferences over time-and they do change. What was maybe less important a while back becomes important now. And finally, the element of somebody else's end game or perception of better influencing you. In recent years it is something that has become very evident to me. Dont chase somebody else's version of perfection. Try and stay with your end game objectives, because if you start to consider somebody else's, it is a guaranteed situation where you will never ever, ever get there to where you want to go. 

 

If you like it after living with it for some time, then it's gotta be half decent. Sounds a bit like the concept of wives too, now I come to think of it????? 😂

 

100% agree that our tastes and hearing changes over time, so that could be a factor for making changes to a system you previously considered end game.  

 

And although we can agree money shouldnt be the primary factor when deciding you are satisfied, your resources and what you are prepared to invest in hifi does change over time. For most of us this corresponds with getting older and having more disposable income. 

 

My teen self or me as a new father of 2 kids would look at what I have spent on my system now and laugh. So can the talk of end game truly only be had when you get to the point that you have the resources to spend more than you currently have invested and choose not too as you are completely satisfied and feel there is no need to? 

Edited June 30, 2025Jun 30 by S1000XR

Parramatta winning the premiership

1 hour ago, Galactic Soap said:

Parramatta winning the premiership

 

I hear ya! On this basis, end game for me was 20 years ago (go Wests Tigers!) but since then I've been listening to white noise on an AM transistor radio.

5 hours ago, Galactic Soap said:

Parramatta  Storm winning the premiership

 

On 30/06/2025 at 5:18 PM, S1000XR said:

 

100% agree that our tastes and hearing changes over time, so that could be a factor for making changes to a system you previously considered end game.  

 

And although we can agree money shouldnt be the primary factor when deciding you are satisfied, your resources and what you are prepared to invest in hifi does change over time. For most of us this corresponds with getting older and having more disposable income. 

 

My teen self or me as a new father of 2 kids would look at what I have spent on my system now and laugh. So can the talk of end game truly only be had when you get to the point that you have the resources to spend more than you currently have invested and choose not too as you are completely satisfied and feel there is no need to? 

I consider this hobby as a lifelong journey for me as when i got into it seriously in my late 20's and having more disposable income (this helps immensely) to fund the gear changes etc in the late 2000's.  I also see this era where the fuss about dac's, jitter, and new emerging technologies to reduce jitter was also introduced.  Needless to say i have spent a lot of $$$$ in gear but in the process educated myself and kept a few good pieces along the way.  Fast tracked this to 2025 now with a young family of 5 (2 teenagers and 3 furry ones), i am very selective of what i choose to upgrade.  But my barriers are time...time..and funds.  But what i have now easily beats what i had when i had first started, now in my 40's.  I do see myself working towards an end game system before i retire, but thats many years away.  But what's priceless is the learning's of what you like/dislike and putting this knowledge to use when you get to the end game later in life (well for me at least).

Edited July 1, 2025Jul 1 by MrBurns84

On 27/06/2025 at 10:12 PM, David A said:

 

That's a good generalisation about speaker efficient. However there are other factors which affect efficiency, such as the choice of drivers and complexity of the crossovers incl: how they're tuned. The best crossover is no crossover, but that is impractical in most cases. So simple, high quality x-overs like the ones below are the theoretical ideal..
 

 

Oooh..i like the sound of the those Evo Silver Gold Oils 🙂 nooice!

 

6 hours ago, MrBurns84 said:

I consider this hobby as a lifelong journey for me as when i got into it seriously in my late 20's and having more disposable income (this helps immensely) to fund the gear changes etc in the late 2000's.  I also see this era where the fuss about dac's, jitter, and new emerging technologies to reduce jitter was also introduced.  Needless to say i have spent a lot of $$$$ in gear but in the process educated myself and kept a few good pieces along the way.  Fast tracked this to 2025 now with a young family of 5 (2 teenagers and 3 furry ones), i am very selective of what i choose to upgrade.  But my barriers are time...time..and funds.  But what i have now easily beats what i had when i had first started, now in my 40's.  I do see myself working towards an end game system before i retire, but thats many years away.  But what's priceless is the learning's of what you like/dislike and putting this knowledge to use when you get to the end game later in life (well for me at least).

 

Thanks for your input. 

 

Yours is a similar story to many of us, in that it does take a certain amount of time and money in most instances to discover what you truly like before you can start to build towards what you consider to be a worthy system. 

 

I think the timing of your entry into the hobby can have a massive influence on your choices as well. 

 

It was 80's and 90's hifi that had its biggest impression on me. Huge Sony and Technics seperate stacks with remotes as wide as a book, covered in buttons! Before that like for most of us, it was always what you could get your hands on to play the music we loved, from the 70's legacy family stereo to a Christmas present boombox(with detachable speakers of course!)

 

I think this is why when I finally accepted that I could not get the 2 channel performance I was looking for from a single box AVR(after many years of trying!), the idea of adding dedicated components from the same manufacturer was a major appeal to me. Thankfully Marantz didnt let me down and I have arrived at something I love the sound of and feels hifi to me. 

 

I think thats why some older audiophiles that were teens or adults during the 70's golden era are drawn to genuine vintage or vintage style products and you see alot of high sensitivity speakers and tubes. Its what you lusted after looking in hifi store windows and thought you would never be able to afford. 

 

I can absolutely appreciate those that painstakingly pick each component based on performance from various manufacturers and get joy from fine tuning and changing components until they get their version of perfection but my solution has worked for me and gives me that warm feeling we are all chasing. 

 

Regardless of your approach, one thing I have discovered is that while you dont need to spend crazy money to acheive your end game, sadly there is a level of investment required to get to that special place. 

 

 

 

 

Strangely enough you don't hear the 'end game' phrase in the world of music reproduced by guitar amplifiers.

 

Just achieving the fidelity and lucious sound of a VOX 30 EL84 amplifier (eg The Beatles) or using a Marshall stack (Jimi H.) or a Fender amp (tube or SS) or a mesa Boogie tube amp (any number of jazz guitarists) is quite enough for most players. There are plenty of options but relatively few 'greats' here. It seems that music makers know intuitively what they are looking for and prefer that sound.

 

I think that speaks for itself.