Man, do I NOT get this synergy thang!
Why is it when we get down to brass tacks (aka arguing on an audio forum
) we never use the 'what is good for the goose is good for the gander' thingamebob?
Why is it, for but one example, that synergy is this mystical wonder that all good audiophiles strive for (and achieve mind) which works when *we* do it, yet the very same concept fails when it is done by the group we are (currently) arguing against.
Raffles,
Please note that I do not have anything fundamental against active speakers - we are not debating religion, but the implementation of an amplifier/speaker system. Surely in a theoretical perspective the active crossover with separate amplifiers wins. It is justly in the implementation that we must consider the practical limitations. And there are many, most of them have human origins. Consider that you have many amplifiers topologies and designs. Witch one will sound the best with one specific driver? Some people are experts in loudspeaker design, others in amplifier design, other in cables. If we could put all this people in a desert island and oblige them to work together perhaps we would have a great active loudspeaker! But happily the world does not run this way.
See, when audiophiles do it (chase synergy, ie that delicate task of finding the appropriate amp, or cable, or binding post that match the speakers) it is not only a noble pursuit, but one done very successfully by hobby audiophiles, yet when we then examine active speakers the very same thing is now suddenly fraught with insurmountable problems and seemingly doomed to failure? See these engineers cannot pull off the feat that is done everyday in the audiophile worlds, pipped at the post by their inability to match amps to drivers (not speakers and crossovers)! Hey, let's not examine whether or not it is an easier thing to do (match an amp to a driver) than it is to find that one uber amp which will do it's job on all the drivers and associated xovers.
This synergy thang is a moving target.
The very concept of it as far as I can understand is that not only can it's effects not be predicted beforehand (that would be engineering instead) but is some lucky dip usually only stumbled upon after exhausting trial and error. We only need to read a few posts to draw that conclusion, how even the slightest mismatch can completely destroy a system. Who'd ever want such an inherently unstable set of affairs is beyond me, but then again that IS the hobby it seems.
But here is the essential, unmistakeable and most important part of that whole idea...this wonderful concept is applied to the
system, the indivisible whole that works together. That means that in some cases the most counter intuitive results can occur, where the wonder is that component X somehow, in this instance (and against all predictions) now works with component Y.
This is such a strong plank in the audiophile philosophy it makes me curious why it is suddenly thrown out so often?
Well, if we step back and have a look we can see
when it gets thrown out, and it happens whenever we come across another all too familiar human trait...the barrow we push.
Like most barrows that are fully loaded, there is a lot of weight in them. In this case the weight comes from all our prejudices and unexamined assumptions. I have just pointed out an example above, when *we* do it (successfully match amps to
passive speakers) it is fine and achievable, but when *they* do it, attempting the same thing for for active speakers (ie what we have some objection to audio philosophy wise) it just can't be done successfully.
Why? Because this particular barrow is loaded up with 'passive is better than active, all the top regarded speakers are passive)
What other barrows are there? We see them all the time, how about one from the last few pages, digital filters (so completely in keeping with the current theme of the thread). See, that's
bad!
Well, ok, fine to have your opinion. But where in the hell is synergy now?? It's bloody gone, that's where it is!
No longer are we listening to a system (that complete set of components making the whole) which may sound marvellous due to synergy, but we jettison that and now concentrate on our barrow, digital active is bad. Forget that when it suits us we argue FOR synergy. Of course, it is often only when we KNOW this particular system uses digital filters that suddenly we KNOW it is bad...so we throw away our cherished concept of synergy for the more narrow and base human trait, making ourselves right.
When it suits us we listen to a system and it's synergy (or absence), when it suits us we listen not to the system but a component...in our head that is. We can't magically now isolate *that* particular contribution to the whole.
Oh the hypocrisy of it all.
Either embrace synergy or not, I don't care either way. But have the courage of your convictions.
Many times I have nearly posted what seems to me to be such a simple concept that not only would it be hard to properly articulate, it is so deceptively simple it's significance would not be gotten by most. Bu7t in the last few pages it has come up, so here goes I guess.
The thing is, ready for it?, all of the audiophile stuff is based upon comparisons.
There, simple eh. So what I hear you ask. Well, that means any and all of this synergy stuff for example is NOT an absolute, it does NOT exist in isolation.
Let's get the obvious out of the way, if you hear a 'bad system' then I can confidently tell you that 99% of that is down to the speakers. There could be the case where an amp is basically overdriven into horrible distortion etc, but really electronics have very little to do with it. Ok, maybe you can then change a cable and maybe hear a difference, but the basic tone is set.
So changing and auditioning, there is your comparisons happening. Franz touched upon it, you walk into steves room and no matter what he drives his system with electronic wise it will sound pretty damned good, always assuming the amp is basically up to the job. (you have never heard it before mind)
Ok, I am happy to accept that after comparison that you find amp B to do a better job, or cable C, whatever. The point is that the comparison must take place once the essential framework (speakers capably driven) is set.
But no, lately we have found out that these (very) minor inputs from cables, speaker spikes and whatnot have assumed such importance that the wrong one can completely destroy the sound! Ie, you now walk into steves room-with the wrong binding posts-and it sounds atrocious! That is actually believed??? Talk about inversion of not only importance, but reality too.
That is taking synergy waay too far and into territory it simply does not inhabit.
Man, do I not get this synergy thang.
