AudioCircle
Industry Circles => Bryston Limited => Topic started by: CanadianMaestro on 17 Jan 2018, 07:44 pm
-
I would be interested to know, from owners of both the BCD and BDP players, how much time do you spend listening to each player? Percentage wise.
For myself, it is roughly 35% BCD and 45% BDP (the rest 20% is vinyl).
cheers
-
99% BDP-2 vs. 1% BCD-1
That 1% is attributable to my wife who when she has problems and gets frustrated with getting the BDP-BDA combination to do what she wants, reverts to the CD player which is simple, straightforward and which she understands. :scratch: :scratch:
-
I would be interested to know, from owners of both the BCD and BDP players, how much time do you spend listening to each player? Percentage wise.
For myself, it is roughly 35% BCD and 45% BDP (the rest 20% is vinyl).
cheers
BCD-3 100% and BDP-1 0% since purchasing the BCD-3
I was listening on my PC i7 for about a week, the sound quality is very good. So then I played the very same recording that I'm quite familiar with on the BCD-3. The BCD-3 just exhibits music in a more detailed transparent manner. I wouldn't say the difference is huge but that percentage difference whatever it is for me engages me into the music sounding more 'live' like and I get my music fix. :smoke:
-
I don't own a Bryston CD player, but I am 99.9% BDP-2 and .1% Sony XA-5400ES.
-
Since I just got my BDP-pi, I can't give a realistic percentage. Right now I'm using the BDP 95%, but that may not be the case a few months from now. The BCD-3, no matter how fine it may be for playing CDs, is a non-starter for me. It won't play SACDs, of which I have quite a few. To be worth $3500 it needs to do a lot more than play plain old redbook CDs.
-
The BCD-3, no matter how fine it may be for playing CDs, is a non-starter for me. It won't play SACDs, of which I have quite a few. To be worth $3500 it needs to do a lot more than play plain old redbook CDs.
Agreed on this.
Even with BCD-1, which retailed for about $2500 back then, it was a head-scratcher for me....but no regrets so far ....it's a lifer for my rig.
-
Redbook cd is much better than what we ever expected. The BCD1 proved that to me over the last 5 years and now my BCD3 is taking it further. Records I have listened to dozens of times are now surprising me with greater detail and realism. Even the senses of space and imaging are on a higher level . I thank Bryston for yet again choosing to make a device that rekindles my digital listening experience . Money well spent if you can appreciate the result achieved ....bravo. :thumb:
-
BDP-3 70%, BDP-29%,Bot 1%, BDC-1 0% unless the bot has a hard time reading the cd.
-
curious if you guys are running your BCD through the BDA2..? :scratch:
-
curious if you guys are running your BCD through the BDA2..? :scratch:
With the BCD-3 I have to use 2-channel bypass on my SP2 to Yamaha MG-10 mixer to amps, as it doesn't process well piggybacked with SP2 digital dac and/or BDA-1.
With all other sources I have them connected through the BDA-1 piggybacked to the SP2 dac to Yamaha MG-10 mixer to Bryston 3B-SST/2 amps. :smoke:
-
curious if you guys are running your BCD through the BDA2..? :scratch:
No, straight to my linestage. It already has a very capable DAC and clock inside it. Besides, it sounds better straight thru.
Shortest signal path wins every time.
Besides, it's silly to spend $2500 on a device that just spins a disc to get 0s and 1s to a separate DAC (i.e. a transport). :nono:
cheers
-
CM, i think silly depends on the user. there are CD transports out there far greater than 2500 hun.
and i believe the pathway is more complicated than simply transporting 0's and 1's.
anyhow, i'm curious whether folks have tried a A/B test digital out to BDA2 vs. straight into the preamp.
james, any insight?
TJ.
-
TJ, well that would be news to me if a CD transport did more to 0s and 1s than relay them out to a DAC. Much of the price tag for some of the more expen$ive CDPs out there comes from the analog output circuit design (including power supply routing/isolation). DAC chips are a dime a dozen, and so are most CD drives.
There are indeed much more pricey players out there, but that argument is too cliche. A bit like arguing that an $80,000 Mercedes is great "value" because a Rolls costs $1M. How many actually own a Rolls, and in both cases, the end result is exactly the same -- the owner gets to point B, his destination, in the same physical state as when he started. Most audiophiles (or car owners) don't base their spending on the basis of the maximum price point currently in the marketplace.
cheers
-
anyhow, i'm curious whether folks have tried a :o digital out to BDA2 vs. straight into the preamp.
TJ.
I did a long time ago. I assume you are referring to a BCD. Came to the conclusion that there was no audible difference.
(I used a BDA-1, which is the same as the BDA-2 that you mention (apart from USB, which I don't recommend) ).
-
@TJ
You might be interested in this response from JT.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=155098.0 (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=155098.0)
-
Thanks Pundamilia. i just read james' response to your question, where JT indicates less jitter via BCD-1 >> pre-amp vs. BCD1 >> BDA>>preamp. Then adds, with the BDA3 - jitter is negligible.
I would be inclined to plug the BCD1 to the BDA3. I believe other factors - like more advance DAC chips, power supplies and output stage may bring additional sonic benefits....and sound different. Maybe even better... :scratch:
Have you tried both pathways?
TJ
-
TJ, well that would be news to me if a CD transport did more to 0s and 1s than relay them out to a DAC. Much of the price tag for some of the more expen$ive CDPs out there comes from the analog output circuit design (including power supply routing/isolation). DAC chips are a dime a dozen, and so are most CD drives.
There are indeed much more pricey players out there, but that argument is too cliche. A bit like arguing that an $80,000 Mercedes is great "value" because a Rolls costs $1M. How many actually own a Rolls, and in both cases, the end result is exactly the same -- the owner gets to point B, his destination, in the same physical state as when he started. Most audiophiles (or car owners) don't base their spending on the basis of the maximum price point currently in the marketplace.
cheers
what planet are you on CM?
-
To tell you the truth, I almost never listen to the BCD-1 anymore. My listening is nearly exclusively using the BDP.
-
I hear ya. I'm about the same. In my case, BDP1>>BDA2 - but sometimes it's nice to throw a disc in the 'ol tray....and run it through the DAC :)
-
what planet are you on CM?
The real world, man. Where CD transports costing thousands ain't really mainstream.
Can we get back to the topic of this thread??
Time spent BCD vs BDP.....
-
To tell you the truth, I almost never listen to the BCD-1 anymore. My listening is nearly exclusively using the BDP.
Considered selling it? Or maybe setup a second smaller rig as headphone source?
-
Naw. I need to keep it there for my wife to use whenever she has problems with the BDP/BDA combo.
It improves WAF of the whole setup.
-
Naw. I need to keep it there for my wife to use whenever she has problems with the BDP/BDA combo.
It improves WAF of the whole setup.
I admire strategic thinking. :thumb:
-
I sold off my whole computer audio set-up and now do digital exclusivity with my BCD-3. Love it, sound is fantastic. No confusing menus, settings, adjustments, PROBLEMS- just put in a CD and listen to music. It competes for time with my turntable, 40% BCD-3. 60% vinyl. I have SACD's too and the CD layer through the BCD-3 sounds as good as SACD, this player is that good with CD in my opinion.
-
I sold off my whole computer audio set-up and now do digital exclusivity with my BCD-3. Love it, sound is fantastic. No confusing menus, settings, adjustments, PROBLEMS- just put in a CD and listen to music. It competes for time with my turntable, 40% BCD-3. 60% vinyl. I have SACD's too and the CD layer through the BCD-3 sounds as good as SACD, this player is that good with CD in my opinion.
......that's my point about having a player of this quality....never had such great sound in over 50 years of being a hi fi fan..... :thumb:
-
Anyone compare the sound quality of the BCD-3 vs BDP-3/BDP-3?
-
Hi Tony1,
I think it's not easy to have these 3 available together.... maybe only James. it would be interesting, anyway I'm not expecting big differences in sound quality as the dac is the same
-
Great question Tony. I am curious about this too. But i suppose it could be broken into 2 parts.
CD-laser reader vs. BDP player. If the DAC's are the same (and i'm not sure they are), maybe your question is more pointed to playback... :scratch:
-
I'd say 40% BDP1/BDA1, 60% BCD1.
I still buy a lot of CD’s, and generally use the BCD before I get the chance/time to rip them to FLAC.
-
@ TJ-Sully & CanadianMaestro
The question of CD transports is a complicated one.
It is not a mtter of simple extraction of 0s and 1s from the disc. Japanese manufacturers have discovered problems inherent to digital equipment long before CD was even invented. Later they also discovered new techniques to combat these problems.
A well-designed CD transport should have a stable CD drive void of vibration, mechanical components that are inert enough to be immune to vibration, laser assemblies with precise servo mechanisms, stable power supply to these servos (even grounded in some cases) etc. Some Japanese manufacturers were not happy with what was available so they made their own drives. Companies like Sony, Kenwood and Pioneer.
All of these things are expensive to make, a lot more expensive than installing a reference-level master clock which is the best you can get with a modern-day CD transport.
A few years ago, I did extensive tests on different CD transports. The results were interesting to say the least. The best-sounding and best-measuring CD transport was in fact DVD player from Pioneer. Nothing special, a cheap player bought only to do this test and compare it against a dedicated CD transport that costs literally eighty (yes, 80) times more.
No service manual for the Pioneer made it impossible to discover why this is but then I saw something about "Perfect Playability" feature. According to Pioneer, all of their machines, at least of this generation, can play all discs, no matter how badly damaged. Needless to say, all of my discs are in perfect condition, but this means there is some kind of processing inside that deconstructs, interpolates and then reconstructs the original dana. Obviously, this has to include audio syncing as well. Now of course, this system was designed for video primarily but obviously, it affects audio as well because the square-wave on the oscilloscope was essentially textbook-like. Only the slightest artifacts are visible at maximum magnification.
But no matter how good the transport is, errors can still creep in once the signal leaves the S/PDIF generator within the CD transport. If the input receiver chip inside the DAC has nothing to combat this, this will only get worse when it reaches the actual D-A conversion. In fact, I'd say that the quality of the input receiver chip is probably more critical than the entire CD transport.
The Pioneer DVD is as good of a CD transport as I have heard and I already have a Bryston BDP-2 with the BUC-bord installed.
In all fairness and interest of full disclosure, our tests were inspired by Lampizator website, their Pioneer DVD player modification page in particular.
As for modern-day CD transports, they are pretty much gone. Unless you want to spend a fortune which is something I wouldn't do myself, even if I had the Money. It appears to me the best one comes from Onkyo, namely the C-7000R. It belongs to their top-level range and has some interesting features. It is a CD player in fact but all analogue circuitry can be switched off leaving only the digital outputs active. It has a balanced AES/EBU output and thermally-stable clock. More importantly, the clock feeds the digital outputs directly with a shielded wire thus bypassing the circuit board completely.
For what it's Worth.
Cheers!
Antun
-
Hey Antun, nice to hear from you, long time. Thanks for the description/explanation. In the end, if I hear no diff, I don't go for a transport vs straight-to-preamp. Simple as that. No tech manuals, jitter measurements, etc. Just my reliable ears.
Who says great-sounding gear had to cost thousands? DVD player... :duh:
cheers
-
@ TJ-Sully & CanadianMaestro
The question of CD transports is a complicated one.
It is not a mtter of simple extraction of 0s and 1s from the disc. Japanese manufacturers have discovered problems inherent to digital equipment long before CD was even invented. Later they also discovered new techniques to combat these problems.
A well-designed CD transport should have a stable CD drive void of vibration, mechanical components that are inert enough to be immune to vibration, laser assemblies with precise servo mechanisms, stable power supply to these servos (even grounded in some cases) etc. Some Japanese manufacturers were not happy with what was available so they made their own drives. Companies like Sony, Kenwood and Pioneer.
All of these things are expensive to make, a lot more expensive than installing a reference-level master clock which is the best you can get with a modern-day CD transport.
A few years ago, I did extensive tests on different CD transports. The results were interesting to say the least. The best-sounding and best-measuring CD transport was in fact DVD player from Pioneer. Nothing special, a cheap player bought only to do this test and compare it against a dedicated CD transport that costs literally eighty (yes, 80) times more.
No service manual for the Pioneer made it impossible to discover why this is but then I saw something about "Perfect Playability" feature. According to Pioneer, all of their machines, at least of this generation, can play all discs, no matter how badly damaged. Needless to say, all of my discs are in perfect condition, but this means there is some kind of processing inside that deconstructs, interpolates and then reconstructs the original dana. Obviously, this has to include audio syncing as well. Now of course, this system was designed for video primarily but obviously, it affects audio as well because the square-wave on the oscilloscope was essentially textbook-like. Only the slightest artifacts are visible at maximum magnification.
But no matter how good the transport is, errors can still creep in once the signal leaves the S/PDIF generator within the CD transport. If the input receiver chip inside the DAC has nothing to combat this, this will only get worse when it reaches the actual D-A conversion. In fact, I'd say that the quality of the input receiver chip is probably more critical than the entire CD transport.
The Pioneer DVD is as good of a CD transport as I have heard and I already have a Bryston BDP-2 with the BUC-bord installed.
In all fairness and interest of full disclosure, our tests were inspired by Lampizator website, their Pioneer DVD player modification page in particular.
As for modern-day CD transports, they are pretty much gone. Unless you want to spend a fortune which is something I wouldn't do myself, even if I had the Money. It appears to me the best one comes from Onkyo, namely the C-7000R. It belongs to their top-level range and has some interesting features. It is a CD player in fact but all analogue circuitry can be switched off leaving only the digital outputs active. It has a balanced AES/EBU output and thermally-stable clock. More importantly, the clock feeds the digital outputs directly with a shielded wire thus bypassing the circuit board completely.
For what it's Worth.
Cheers!
Antun
Very interesting Antun and thanks for sharing!
What model # was the Pioneer DVD player?
Bill
-
Hey Antun, nice to hear from you, long time. Thanks for the description/explanation. In the end, if I hear no diff, I don't go for a transport vs straight-to-preamp. Simple as that. No tech manuals, jitter measurements, etc. Just my reliable ears.
Who says great-sounding gear had to cost thousands? DVD player... :duh:
cheers
Thanks mate!
LOL yes, a DVD player! Isn't that just hilarious!
The first mistake people make is they go to the very limit of their budged and start their search from there. They should decide on a reasonable sum to spend and go from there if they're not happy.
Cheers!
Antun
-
Very interesting Antun and thanks for sharing!
What model # was the Pioneer DVD player?
Bill
Hi Bill!
I will check and let you know. It's the basic model I believe. The only reason I got a Pioneer is because it had a coaxial digital output. Usually, players of this price have an optical output.
But remember that more expensive models aren't necessarily better because a digital output and CD transport functionality isn't what DBD players are about. So, the most basic model might be as good as the top model if you intend to use it as a CD transport only. In fact, things might get worse with higher-end models because they usually include more signal processing and circuit boards that are more complex.
Cheers!
Antun
-
The first mistake people make is they go to the very limit of their budged and start their search from there. They should decide on a reasonable sum to spend and go from there if they're not happy.
Cheers!
Antun
Aim high, go low (if possible).... :lol:
-
Aim high, go low (if possible).... :lol:
LOL! Yeah, that's the ticket!!
-
LOL! Yeah, that's the ticket!!
Sometimes, realizing is too late... :duh:
-
.
-
good one fellas! I have an old Carver CD player i bought with my student loan when i was in my third year of university.
It cost about $1000 and that was a ton of money for me back in the early 90's. The fine gentleman, Rick, from Magic Forest Audio in Fredericton, let me borrow his new nakamichi CD player - and truck it up to his competitor - to run and A/B test against the Carver. The Carver won. I still have it, and lug it out from time to time - and run it's SPDIF coax digital out to my BDA2.....and it sounds friggin' awesome. but i agree w/ Mr Bill, it's more than simply transporting 0's and 1's...
TJ
-
Very interesting Antun and thanks for sharing!
What model # was the Pioneer DVD player?
Bill
Hi Bill!
I checked the model number on the Pionner DVD player. It is DV-2022. Like I said, a very cheap player.
Cheers!
Antun
-
Hi Bill!
I checked the model number on the Pionner DVD player. It is DV-2022. Like I said, a very cheap player.
Cheers!
Antun
Unfortunately this player no longer is in production since 2014.
-
...i'd say around 90% BDP-1 and 10% BCD-1. it's much easier to listen to tons of music with the BDP :thumb:
but i still love the BCD-1 - it is absolutely great sounding!! one thing that drives me crazy is the display...it shows weird signs while playing a disc (and it does it even when the player stops :o).
al.
-
Unfortunately this player no longer is in production since 2014.
Yes, but you can get a DV-2242 which is most likely identical, apart from some minor cosmetic changes.
Cheers!
Antun