What I find absurd is saying only "You're wrong," without bothering to type even one sentence explaining why I'm wrong or what is right.
--Ethan
ok, i'll bother. first; here is what i felt was absurd;
Here's a simplistic way to assign a percentage value: We can ignore electronic gear and cabling etc because anything decent will be flat within 1 dB over the audible range. Good loudspeakers are flat within 10 dB if not less. But most rooms vary by at least 30 dB, especially in the bass range.
A 20 dB difference is a 10:1 ratio. So loudspeakers have more affect than electronics by 90/10, and the room is more important than speakers by 90/10. Therefore:
Room = 90 percent
Speakers = 9 percent
Everything else = 1 percent.
--Ethan
i find that absurd because it trivializes so much that goes into the experience of music reproduction.
one day spent at an audio show such as CES or RMAF visiting multiple rooms, all which are not ideal, few of which have any treatment, illustrates time and time again how careful set-up, excellent gear assembled synergistically, and great sources and recordings can result in very good sound. if a room was 90% of the performance then these rooms would sound like crap. some do sound like crap, but many sound good, and some sound wonderful.
not objective enough approach for you? how do you know that? have you measured these rooms and compared them to an 'Ethan' approved room? and then had listeners offer their subjective viewpoint on whether these 'best of audio show' rooms sound better or worse than the rooms you help.
forgetting about controversial issues such as cables and tweaks; there are many aspects to any system performance that end up being significant in the final level of performance.
it starts with the quality of the power grid. how clean is the power? this affects noise floor and dynamics, as well as the performance of every step in the signal path.
source gear quality as well as importance of the format and software/performance. really; the very best recordings somewhat trump everything. crap in-crap out. sometimes you would rather not hear everything that marginal recordings can tell you. i'm trying to stay away from the whole analog-digital issue for sure; but at a show, when the rooms all sound the same to a degree, a great analog recording raises the level of performance of a room.
amplification. Steve's Lamm ML3's can actually put lipstick on a pig. to say that it's contribution is less than 1% to the audio reproduction is an absurd statement.
finally; speakers are easily more than 9%. whether it's 20% or 50% is a question, but whatever it might be (and it likely varies from system to system) it's more significant than you suggest. if one listens at modest SPL's and the room is reasonably sized, the room's significance is reduced and the speakers are increased. i've heard magical systems in small rooms that look like they cannot sound as good as they do.
my initial response noted that i have made a huge commitment to having the best possible room, with the best possible room treatments designed into that room. hell; i even moved to another home so i could build my 'room' in a barn. so i do not feel i sell the significance of the room short. OTOH i realize that it is not anywhere near 90% of the performance.