Is There Such A Thing As "SYNERGY" Between Components In An Audio Chain?

[Steve Williams]

I would suggest that the happy pairing of Steve's Lamm amps and Wilson speakers is a matter of taste, not synergy

I would agree completely. It seems therefore that Lee's supposition that the notion of synergy is more related to coloration.

All of this leads me back to a thread I started many months ago asking whether "all systems that measure flat sound good as a result"

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I would agree completely. It seems therefore that Lee's supposition that the notion of synergy is more related to coloration.

All of this leads me back to a thread I started many months ago asking whether "all systems that measure flat sound good as a result"

I can answer that one pretty confidently. If measured sufficiently and correctly, all quiet, competent electronics operating well below clipping, playing good-sounding recordings (subjective), will sound good (subjective again).

P

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Synergy, in general, may be defined as two or more agents working together to produce a result not obtainable by any of the agents independently.

If the agents are the components in an audio system, wouldn't making any sound at all = the aforementioned "result?"

P

 

[JackD201]

From an operational stand point, I believe it. P mentioned input and output standards. Well, that is a vary wide range of acceptable values. None within the range necessarily better than the other and definitely none being wrong. There can be synergy however when the output of the preamp matches the sweet spot of the amplifier's input. Some components have outputs figures that make cable changes much less audible, if audible at all. Then there's the opposite where some are more sensitive to cable changes than others. The same is true for vibration isolation. There are some components that sound the same no matter what you put under or over them and there are some that benefit from some pucks. Conventional wisdom states that you are more likely to get two components to work best with each other if they come from the same manufacturer. Again this need not be the case. Finding complementary components might be more difficult but the possibility exists and many have come up with really oddball combinations that not only work well technically but sound darned excellent as well.

So, as qualified, P's position I think is correct in theory, but not in reality.

From an aesthetic standpoint, I believe it as well. Not everybody can afford gear that is really neutral, and by really neutral I mean gear that can be both bright and dark, lean or full, dry or liquid not because it is the gear's own characteristic but because it is what is what we've come to expect from particular recordings. EQ can help but as in anything in life every solution creates it's own set of problems. While I'm not too keen on using equipment and ancillaries as tone controls, at least in principle, in a machiavellan way it really is a means to an end. If that happens to be a "Happy Ending".....behave guys.....hey, why the heck not?

 

[c1ferrari]

Hypothetically, there should not be; however, empirically there often is My amplification chain is entirely BAT. I am confident synergy exists between their components relative to sonics, operation, and reliability.

Synergy within a manufacturer's product line, of course, is not confined to BAT. I would love, as a matter of scientific inquiry, to audition an entire Atma-Sphere and VAC amplification chain in my system!

 

[amirm]

Taken to the extreme, the concept of synergy means:

1. No magazine reviewer may apply to you. Your system may have more or less synergy than theirs.

2. No experience from members shared here may apply to you. Your system may have more or less synergy than theirs.

3. As we say in statistics, "the set" becomes infinite. If you have a choice of 5 DACs for example, the concept of synergy means that the combinations are Nx5xM, when one counts all the devices that could feed it, or sink its output.

4. No designer can know whether they have finished their job, or how good of a job they have really done. After all, per rule #3 above, they would never be in a position to have tested all permutations and as such, are releasing an unfinished product.

I could go on but you get the picture. Synergy can never be allowed to become a major factor because if we let it, the above factors come to haunt you.

My sense is that if a product is has strong weaknesses, then synergy may apply more. A low-power amp can drive an efficient speaker better than an inefficient one. But a powerful amp, would not care.

I like to think that if I test and find a great component, that its performance translates to any other place I plug it into. The alternative of chasing its perfect match is unpalatable to me and something I do not practice.

The only place where synergy plays a huge factor is the interaction of the room and speaker. In other place, I like to think the better the gear, the less synergy it needs to perform well!

 

[flez007]

I agree on the "sum of colorations" along the path approach. An electrical mismatch needs to be treated as that and not as "synergy" IMO.

 

[RBFC]

Instead of looking at "synergy" as a design decision by the manufacturer, might we define synergy as a fortuitous combination of components that exhibit inverse colorations? Perhaps this phenomenon can explain the Lamm/Wilson "synergy", where they combine to produce a midrange output that is flatter than typical?

In the case of an electronics chain from a single manufacturer, is it possible that design considerations for an amplifier (as an example) leave it with a frequency response anomaly that can be cancelled by using the "matching preamp" (that happens to contain the opposite of that response anomaly)? If a designer achieves a particular electrical "goal" at the cost of some other error, might that error then be negated by pairing the corrective component with it?

Just a few random thoughts,

Lee

 

[Steve Williams]

No one has answered my question about Spectral and MIT cables

 

[RBFC]

No one has answered my question about Spectral and MIT cables

Steve,

Could my previous response be a plausible answer? That the capacitance (or other certain electrical characteristic) of the MIT cables interact with the output impedance of the Spectral to produce a flatter or (insert quality of choice here) result?

Lee

 

[JackD201]

In the case of an electronics chain from a single manufacturer, is it possible that design considerations for an amplifier (as an example) leave it with a frequency response anomaly that can be cancelled by using the "matching preamp" (that happens to contain the opposite of that response anomaly)? If a designer achieves a particular electrical "goal" at the cost of some other error, might that error then be negated by pairing the corrective component with it?

That certainly was the case with my No.360s DAC (bright) and my No.380 Pre (dark) a few years back.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Instead of looking at "synergy" as a design decision by the manufacturer, might we define synergy as a fortuitous combination of components that exhibit inverse colorations? Perhaps this phenomenon can explain the Lamm/Wilson "synergy", where they combine to produce a midrange output that is flatter than typical?

With respect to Steve's request that people hear the Lamm/Wilson combo before criticizing it (I'd love to, Steve, if you lived here I would have been over by now...) I seriously doubt this is the case. I've heard Wilsons, in a well-treated room with good, accurate, solid state amplification. Midrange is their strongest suit. They do not require compensation to deliver a flatter response, and (sorry Steve), I'd bet the farm that the Lamms give the Wilsons a more colored response, not a flatter one. That it may be a compellingly beautiful color is separate issue.

In the case of an electronics chain from a single manufacturer, is it possible that design considerations for an amplifier (as an example) leave it with a frequency response anomaly that can be cancelled by using the "matching preamp" (that happens to contain the opposite of that response anomaly)? If a designer achieves a particular electrical "goal" at the cost of some other error, might that error then be negated by pairing the corrective component with it?

I'm sure this is possible. I'm sure this has happened. I do not approve. Designing each component to be electrically compatible with other components in the line, with well-designed components outside of the line, and as flat as they can possibly be would be a much better approach.

P

 

[Steve Williams]

the farm that the Lamms give the Wilsons a more colored response, not a flatter one. That it may be a compellingly beautiful color is separate issue.

I agree with you 100% but answer me this.....do all systems which measure flat sound good

 

[JackD201]

Darn Steve is quick

 

[Steve Williams]

Darn Steve is quick

Huh

 

[JackD201]

Beat me to it by a couple of seconds. I was gonna collect on the farm on the basis that a flat amp and a flat speaker does not make for flat sound.

 

[RBFC]

There have been studies that show the preferred in-room response rises gradually in the bass. Perhaps each individual's hearing response, another component in the "chain", determines what sounds "correct" in the end. Also, certain colorations in equipment might be nullified by room acoustics. Therefore, a flat listener-position sound may be the result of colored playback chains coupled with colored room response.

Lee

 

[JackD201]

Yes Lee, I'd go as far as saying that to get flat in-room response one would most likely need to resort to signal manipulation via analog eq or dsp. So much for taking care of the signal integrity.

Flat amp + flat speaker means nothing outside an anechoic chamber.

 

[Steve Williams]

Precisely my point Jack. I have heard systems that measure flat and for my $0.02 I often find them cold and sterile. I suppose Tim et al would argue that adding coloration adds warmth but I still maintain that not all systems which measure flat sound good. However as the thread evolves Tims point for me makes the most sense and in retrospect the word synergy on my part could have been mis-stated. Tim however maintains that if an amp is switched out for another which measures just as flat there should be no audible difference in perceived sound. IOW the amp imparts no sound. Makes sense to me and I know sooner or later we will all start hearing about DBTs but I am not so sure about the premise. I have heard some solid state amps which in fact have been reviewed by reviewers here who are members who espouse how great an amp is. Case in point was 4-5 years ago there was a review on Halcro amps which after reading the review and hearing the amp in a well set up room left me non plussed. It is true that many of us here love tubes. It is also true what Tim says about tubes adding warmth and coloration. At the end of the day however when it is our ass sitting in that sweet spot spinning the music nothing or no one else counts

I found in a post yesterday by Tomelex also made a world of sense regarding tone controls and playing as to how the music moves him at that moment in time

Perhaps we are all talking about the same thing but using different terms.

I would be interested therefore in doing a test with all here who maintain that the best sound is produced with a system which measures flat vs another which according to definition is slightly flat. Do this as a blinded test and see who prefers what

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I agree with you 100% but answer me this.....do all systems which measure flat sound good?

If the recording sounds good, absolutely.

But....all my over-confidently stated beliefs about the virtues of low noise, low distortion, flat frequency response and excessive headroom are qualified by the following (just add it to all my arguments and we'll be fine): All bets are off when it comes to transducers and rooms. This is why I believe in choosing your color at the transducers (and why I love near field listening). Coloration in transducers can't really be avoided anyway, and staying flat until you get there makes everything about putting a system together much simpler and much more efficient. I believe it is the better path for most people, particularly those with reasonable budget limitations (thousands instead of tens of thousands). But that's not a consistent qualification. There are some very expensive systems that could be bested for a fraction of their cost, following those simple principles, and ending with some decent speakers. With that said, if the color that the Lamms create with your Wilsons makes your soul sing in a way that no accurate set of electronics can with any transducer you've ever tried, enjoy, my friend. It's the music that matters.

Tim, the crackpot formerly known as P