Speaker re-arrangement

Mag · « **on:** 20 Jun 2008, 04:46 pm »

Did some speaker re-arranging. What prompted me to do this was imaging on voices was too high up. I wanted to lower it so that it would sound more like coming from a stage that I'm seated front row.

I lowered the center channel and re-positioned my Studio 100's to make better use of them and the tweeter is at the height level I wanted. Re-wired cheap IC with good ones and fired everything up. OMG the sound is to die for!!

One problem emerged however. I now have occasional glitches coming from cd recordings using the BCD-1. Could be caused from sound vibration having speaker too close to player. Or with the changing of IC the signal is so revealing that I'm hearing deteroration niks in the cd-r caused from Nanos eating away the plastic. I will look for some vibration control material to place under the BCD-1 and see if that helps. aa

Phil A · « **Reply #1 on:** 20 Jun 2008, 07:51 pm »

Looking good. I use Gingko Audio Cloud 10 isolation platforms on a few things. The LAT Int'l isolation pucks are decent for things that cost less. Sound treatments may make your system a bit better too. Ready Acoustics sells midrange ones and also bass traps that are decent for the money when you DIY.

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?action=gallery;area=browse;album=1772&pos=2

KeithA · « **Reply #2 on:** 20 Jun 2008, 09:25 pm »

Quote from: Phil A on 20 Jun 2008, 07:51 pm

Looking good. I use Gingko Audio Cloud 10 isolation platforms on a few things. The LAT Int'l isolation pucks are decent for things that cost less. Sound treatments may make your system a bit better too. Ready Acoustics sells midrange ones and also bass traps that are decent for the money when you DIY.

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?action=gallery;area=browse;album=1772&pos=2

Nice setup Phil A!!!!

Seeing how we are showing systems, another 'Bryston-dominated' system

niels · « **Reply #3 on:** 20 Jun 2008, 10:34 pm »

I am having some work done to my floor in the living room, so I will re-arrange my system a bit later, can post a new picture then.
Click on the link to see the system, a 37" plasma, the Bryston, Squeezebox, and my trusty old Philips DVD 963SA which hopefully will be replaced by a Panasonic BD-50 Blu-Ray soon....

http://67.19.167.226/~tdacquis/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=4929&stc=1&d=1180095798

Phil A · « **Reply #4 on:** 21 Jun 2008, 12:34 am »

Thanks Keith, nice system too. This is the basement system:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?action=gallery;area=browse;album=1772&pos=0

Mag · « **Reply #5 on:** 21 Jun 2008, 05:54 am »

Glitch problem solved!
I've been using Toslink which doesn't have a real snug connection. With my reciprocating fan on it was blowing against the wires causing small vibrations.

KeithA · « **Reply #6 on:** 21 Jun 2008, 09:28 am »

Quote from: Mag on 21 Jun 2008, 05:54 am

Glitch problem solved!
I've been using Toslink which doesn't have a real snug connection. With my reciprocating fan on it was blowing against the wires causing small vibrations.

You are using a Toslink to feed the BCD-1 signal digitally into another receiver/preamp/DAC??? Why would you not just use the RCA (analogue) outs on the BCD-1 and use the DAC in the BCD-1? Or am I misinterpreting what you are referring to here with respect to using a Toslink?

Keith

Mag · « **Reply #7 on:** 21 Jun 2008, 11:39 am »

I compared the two cables and I found the Toslink to have was slightly sharper and to my ears is preferred. I understand with Toslink it is still going through the BCD-1 DAC.
I'm not sure why but I think it's because I listen in MC and the signal is DSP through my Yamaha used as a pre-amp. If I was listened to just two channel stereo and had a dedicated pre-amp then analog would probably be preferred.

KeithA · « **Reply #8 on:** 21 Jun 2008, 12:32 pm »

Quote from: Mag on 21 Jun 2008, 11:39 am

I compared the two cables and I found the Toslink to have was slightly sharper and to my ears is preferred. I understand with Toslink it is still going through the BCD-1 DAC.
I'm not sure why but I think it's because I listen in MC and the signal is DSP through my Yamaha used as a pre-amp. If I was listened to just two channel stereo and had a dedicated pre-amp then analog would probably be preferred.

Using Toslink, or any of the digital outs, completely bypasses the DAC in the BCD-1. You are only using the BCD-1 as a transport and whatever the Toslink is being fed to is doing the D/A convesrion duties. Only the RCA or Balanced analogue outs can be used to utilize the superb D/A converter in the BCD-1.

Keith

Mag · « **Reply #9 on:** 21 Jun 2008, 02:49 pm »

I thought that initially too. When I first compared Toslink to RCA analog IC, analog was clearly better. This may have been because I had an equalizer in the chain degrading the signal and Toslink cable wasn't the best.
However I recently compared Monster Lightspeed 100 Toslink to my Cardas Crosslink II cable and they were almost identical in my brief analysis. With more listening time I was hearing details that weren't as prominent with analog.

If I understood correct this question was answered in another thread. Using Coaxial bypasses the DAC not Toslink. However Toslink adds an unnecassary conversion if you not DSP.

James Tanner · « **Reply #10 on:** 21 Jun 2008, 03:00 pm »

Quote from: Mag on 21 Jun 2008, 02:49 pm

I thought that initially too. When I first compared Toslink to RCA analog IC, analog was clearly better. This may have been because I had an equalizer in the chain degrading the signal and Toslink cable wasn't the best.
However I recently compared Monster Lightspeed 100 Toslink to my Cardas Crosslink II cable and they were almost identical in my brief analysis. With more listening time I was hearing details that weren't as prominent with analog.

If I understood correct this question was answered in another thread. Using Coaxial bypasses the DAC not Toslink. However Toslink adds an unnecassary conversion if you not DSP.

Hi Mag,

There does appear to be some confusion on this. If you use any of the Digital Outs on the CD Player you do in fact BYPASS THE INTERNAL DAC.

james

Mag · « **Reply #11 on:** 21 Jun 2008, 04:24 pm »

Am I not getting upsampling of the cd and low jitter? If not I'm truly puzzled by what I'm hearing.

KeithA · « **Reply #12 on:** 21 Jun 2008, 04:33 pm »

Quote from: Mag on 21 Jun 2008, 02:49 pm

I thought that initially too. When I first compared Toslink to RCA analog IC, analog was clearly better. This may have been because I had an equalizer in the chain degrading the signal and Toslink cable wasn't the best.
However I recently compared Monster Lightspeed 100 Toslink to my Cardas Crosslink II cable and they were almost identical in my brief analysis. With more listening time I was hearing details that weren't as prominent with analog.

If I understood correct this question was answered in another thread. Using Coaxial bypasses the DAC not Toslink. However Toslink adds an unnecassary conversion if you not DSP.

The 'preamp' in your receiver may indeed be a limiting factor allowing you to reap the true benefits of the BCD-1 in analogue form. No matter how good the BCD-1 is, if the preamp is not up to the task (ie, the weakest link), you will not reap the rewards.

Keith

niels · « **Reply #13 on:** 21 Jun 2008, 05:59 pm »

If you use digital outputs, either Toslink or rca, you get digital data out. This is decoded by your receivers dac then, so you are hearing the sound of your receivers dac, and amplifier of course. And, no, you do not get upsampling, unless your receiver has this in its dac.
Doing it this way you use your Bryston as a transport only, and frankly, that might be a waste of money because you have paid for the dac in the Bryston, which you do not use.
(Toslink or coax digital out > Digital Inn on receiver.)
Using analogue out from the Bryston you of course hear the sound from the Bryston onboard dac, and your analogue amplifier.
(Analogue rca out Bryston > Line In on receiver.)

Which receiver are you using ?

jethro · « **Reply #14 on:** 21 Jun 2008, 08:22 pm »

Quote from: Mag on 21 Jun 2008, 02:49 pm

...

If I understood correct this question was answered in another thread. Using Coaxial bypasses the DAC not Toslink. However Toslink adds an unnecassary conversion if you not DSP.

Mag:

With Toslink there are always two extra conversions (both in the digital domain):

1. digital electrical signal to digital light signal, and
2. digital light signal to digital electrical signal.

Hififreak · « **Reply #15 on:** 22 Jun 2008, 06:42 am »

Quote from: KeithA on 20 Jun 2008, 09:25 pm

Seeing how we are showing systems, another 'Bryston-dominated' system

Some of my systems:

Dayton Wright pre amp (1985).
Bryston 3B poweramp (1982).
Philips CD104 (1986)
B&W DM2A speakers.

It's old, but sounds great!

Mag · « **Reply #16 on:** 22 Jun 2008, 12:09 pm »

Update:

From the info and advice in this thread I realized I wasn't hearing the full benefits of my BCD-1. Since I can't afford an SP3 at this time I updated my Yamaha RX-V2200 to RX-V1700. Got the unit for only $650, and its an improvement. Unfortunately I'm having trouble with the remote, fortunately old remote works the buttons I can't access.

Although I can't do a direct on the fly comparison between analog and toslink with this unit. I believe I'm hearing the full capabilities of the BCD-1 now in analog. My previous praise of the unit was not just blowing smoke, which was evident from cds I re-mastered.

Anyway my new Yamaha does 2-channel stereo right. Initially I listened in Pure Direct mode with just my Studio 100's. It was awesome, and for a moment thought that MC in my room might be obsolete. However once I was able to adjust parameters the MC still trumps 2-channel stereo. I reduced the speaker from 10 to 8. I might take two more speakers out, will sound test today.

Since getting into Home Audio, I've learned there is always I higher level of sound than what you think you are hearing. With this receiver upgrade I've past another threshold to ultimate sound. Can it get any better? Probably.

Thanx

James Tanner · « **Reply #17 on:** 22 Jun 2008, 01:06 pm »

Quote from: Hififreak on 22 Jun 2008, 06:42 am

Quote from: KeithA on 20 Jun 2008, 09:25 pm
Seeing how we are showing systems, another 'Bryston-dominated' system

Some of my systems:

Dayton Wright pre amp (1985).
Bryston 3B poweramp (1982).
Philips CD104 (1986)
B&W DM2A speakers.

It's old, but sounds great!

Boy HiFifreak the Dayton Wright preamp sure brings back memories. After I sold my La Scala horn speakers I bought a pair of Dayton Wright Electrostatics directly from Mike himself. Thought I had died and gone to heaven. The dam things kept loosing their sulferhexafloride gas though and eventually I had to give them up and move on.

Boy I miss those simple days of stereo and the constant upgrades and faulty product issues!

james

niels · « **Reply #18 on:** 22 Jun 2008, 01:47 pm »

Quote from: Mag on 22 Jun 2008, 12:09 pm

Update:

With this receiver upgrade I've past another threshold to ultimate sound. Can it get any better? Probably.

Thanx

Well, you might want to consider a stereo setup in the future. The culprit of most surround amps when dealing with stereo is the preamp, in most cases its just not good enough.
A solution, if stereo is no 1 priority, is to have a stereo amplifier, either pre/power or integrated with a processor loop. Then you have a cheap surround receiver or amp on the side.
All stereo sources go into the stereo amp, the dvd player connects to the surround amp. Front main speakers are connected to the stereo amp, surround and center speaker connects to the surround amp.
You then run an rca from the front left/right preout of the surround amp to the processor in on the stereo amp.
Now your stereo works playing stereo, and choosing Processor on the stereo amp will allow your stereo amp to drive the main speakers when using the surround amp for movies....

Mag · « **Reply #19 on:** 22 Jun 2008, 02:31 pm »

My room is the limiting factor. Being long and narrow I cannot accommodate a proper 2-channel setup, which is why I opted for MC arrangement. I do have a bedroom I can use for a second system that would be more appropriate but I would not be able to contain the sound at the spl I listen at.

Even so MC gives me such a wide spacious soundfield that I don't believe 2-channel stereo can match. The few 2-channel rigs I've heard, narrowness of the room is apparent to me.
Someday I have to travel east to hear some of your guys es stereo setups and see if I am proved wrong. Not aware of any dedicated audiophiles around my area, besides myself.