Sound Quality or Convenience?


OK, asking this question to audiophiles might seem inane, but I have read enough threads (not to mention For Sale ads!) that make me think that we sometimes feel ok sacrificing sound at the altar of convenience.

Would like to hear your experiences, along with perhaps some theoretical quantification... such as how much SQ can be let go for how much convenience, etc. For those who chose this path, was it a keeper or did you want that SQ so much you went back to it?

My own is a probably a familiar one: Maggie 3.6, which were not just visually er, challenging, but also required a lot of work to yield that magic. I gave up on the magic in favor of much easier speakers, and then did it again a couple of years later. I now own Zu Druids, which are as diametrically opposite to Maggies os one can get. They look and sound great (to my ears, this is NOT repeat NOT a Zu thread) and are easy to work with in terms of space, weight and amplification.
kck

Showing 1 response by dlstephenson

I just recently purchased a Pair of Triangle speakers from a gentleman that replaced 2000+ vinyl recordings for CDs and went from tubes to a tripath amp and is currently using a Mac to burn 1400+ cds for a combination Home theater, uses the 20 inch MAC as the screen, and a player for his two channel system.

The problem is that I REALLY LIKE THE SOUND! Gosh should I combine my 2 channel into my HT and call it a day? It would certainly be less expensive than chasing the sound dog around the table.

No tube changing, no treating my CDs, no tweaking with cables, less is more? I would certainly have more time for other things. But reality tells me that when the Audio hobby becomes less of a hobby or something else replaces it, perhaps that will be the time to just relax and be happy with what I have. Until then CONVIENCE?