[DaveNote]

While replying to an interesting topic started by SoundGame, I mentioned that my Bryston 7BSST2 amps made the most dramatic improvement to my system.

I would be very interested in knowing from other members what single piece of equipment, or other change, has most dramatically made changes in their systems.

It also would be interesting to get a description of those changes.

Dave

[Diamond Dog]

I'm trying to put my finger on what was the biggest single change and I really can't... I think it's because I'm not big on incremental change. If I'm going to make a change, I wait and research until I can make a really substantial change. That being the case, it seems like every change has been a really big change because in reality it has been. If I'm gonna blow high dough on hi-fi, I want big improvement or else what's the point? Doing it by degrees isn't any cheaper in the long run but I guess the gear-swapping can be fun if you're so inclined. I'm not.

D.D.

[ricko01]

Speaker placement.

Due to a new room, I have spent literally years trying all different speaker/listening chair positions (some kinky, some not). And I would sit with one change for a month or two (hell, time is free).

No amount of equipment changes could provide the same amount of differences in listening perspective as moving my speakers/chair.

Not that saying the differences were all bad but they changed the amount of  "stuff" I was hearing that floats my boat to a lessor or greater degrees.
 
I ended up with two geometries that I moved between. One geometry made most recordings sound good (even crappy recordings) and the other made good recordings sound amazing at the detriment of bad ones.

After much hair pulling I decided that the geometry that made good and great recordings sound amazing (but crappy sound still crappy) was the one for me.

Peter

[Laundrew]

Great idea for a topic DaveNote 

My makeover required a little over one year to complete and occurred in the order listed below...

KEF Q1 Bookshelf speakers > JBL 1400 Project Arrays
Marantz SR-19 receiver      > 28B SST²/BP 26
Marantz CC-38 CD player    > Esoteric X-05

The biggest change was definitely the addition of the 28B SST² amplifiers, but this is not really a fair comparison at all. The JBLs was also a huge change, but the SR-19 was not capable of driving them - needless to say that the addition of the 28s certainly "woke" them up. My former system sounded great but it is most certainly a night and day difference.

Be well...

[SHV]

If "system" includes software, hardware, and usability,  then the BDP-1/BDA-1 combo.  I anticipate the upgrade from SP 1.7 to SP 3.0 will have the biggest change in sound.  Hopefully, that hypothesis will be tested in a few months.

Steve

[DaveNote]

D.D. I always expect only incremental changes, which is why I'm bowled over when I get a dramatic one.

Peter, speaker placement is a big deal to do, but unlike you, I haven't been lucky enough to get dramatic changes from making those endless small adjustments.

Laundrew, it's not surprising that the envy-causing 28BSST2s gave you your biggest cahange. However, given my question, it is more than fair that you say this.

I didn't ask what change gave you the biggest bang for the buck - i.e. the best price/performance ratio.

But that's a good supplmentary question, which perhaps we should ask.

Dave

[Diamond Dog]

Great idea for a topic Davenote 
My makeover required a little over one year to complete and occurred in the order listed below...

KEF Q1 Bookshelf speakers > JBL 1400 Project Arrays
Marantz SR-19 receiver      > 28B SST²/BP 26
Marantz CC-38 CD player    > Esoteric X-05

That's what I'm talking about - big changes ! 

My recent system evolution ( commencing 2010 ):
a) Arcam Delta 270 CDP to Bryton BCD-1 to Esoteric K-03
b) Arcam Alpha 9 / 9P bi-amp system-added Manley Jumbo Shrimp tube pre - replaced Arcams w/ Bryston 7B SST2- replaced Jumbo Shrimp w/ Manley NeoClassic 300B tube preamp ( since re-tubed ). Added a BIT 20 in there somewhere as a replacement for a Tice Solo...also upgraded cable to XLO Signature 3 from a mix of AudioQuest and Tara Labs.
c) Kef Reference 103/4 to PMC FB1i to PMC fact.8
Working on improving the actual room now to good effect. No gear changes planned.

All this because my CDP's drive started acting up. Madness....MADNESS !!!!!

D.D.     

[rbbert]

Without a doubt speaker placement followed closely by acoustic room treatments.  A much larger difference than any component change (except perhaps a huge speaker upgrade).

[Stu Pitt]

Like Diamond Dog, I have no interest in incremental changes.  Everything I've bought since my first system was a pretty big upgrade.  I guess they were all equal steps up...

Went from an NAD 304/Playstation 1/White Van speakers (seriously) while I was an undergrad.  Upgraded the CDP to an NAD 523.  Very big upgrade, even through some of the worst speakers you could imagine.

Then bought PSB Century 100 (I think) speakers.  Huge upgrade.  Live with that sysyem for several years, until I got my first real job after grad school.

Bought an NAD 320BEE to replace the 304.  I guess this was the smallest change ever, yet it was easily worth the money.  Upgraded to PSB Image T55s, and again, very big improvement.

After a few pay raises, I put together my system as it almost is today...
Bryston B60, Rega Apollo, Pro-Ject 1Xpression w/ Speedbox, acrylic platter, and Dynavector 10x5.

Replaced the Apollo with an Apple TV gen 1 and Rega DAC.  Big upgrade yet again.

In the spirit of this thread...

The B60 is truly the star of the show.  It's easily shown the differences of everything around it.  Speaker upgrades, source and cartridge upgrades, cable upgrades, even tweaks.

The Apple TV changed my system for the better from an ergonomic/convenience standpoint far more than any other piece.  No more searching for CDs, changing CDs after 1 or 2 songs, and so on.  I've got my entire collection at my fingertips through my iPhone as a remote.  Best thing for my system in a very long time.  It's a paradigm shift.  Won't go back to a CDP ever again.

The biggest enjoyment piece is my turntable.  There's just something about cleaning an album, sitting down with a huge cover and liner notes in your hand, relaxing and enjoying some vinyl.  I've had it packed up for about a year and a half now due to a move and my beautiful 15 month old daughter, but it'll be back out soon.

My Rega DAC was a big improvement on my temporary Theta Cobalt DAC.  The Theta was excellent, but the Rega just trounces it. 

Cables have had the least impact on my system.  There's definitely differences, but I liken them to that last dash of seasoning on food.  Sometimes a pinch of salt brings it all together, and that's how I view cables.  I don't get these jaw dropping results magazines and people on forums talk about.  Some people on Audiogon would have you believe cables are just as important snd make just as much of a difference sonically than components do.  Never heard a cable do that much.

Sorry for the long post. 

[Stu Pitt]

Sorry, I forgot my speakers in there...

PSB Image T55 to Audio Physic Yara Evolution Bookshelf.  Again, huge upgrade.  Far more detail, soundstage, PRaT, texture, tonality, and on and on.  Even the bass got faster, tighter and more articulate.  Sounds odd going from a 2.5 way tower with two 5.25" drivers to a 2 way monitor with one 7" driver.  I think I lost about 5 hz of extension.

But again, the B60 is truly the star of the show.  Every change has been easily audible, and it just flat out gets out of the way. 

[Mag]

I could say it was the BCD-1, followed by a 3B SST2. Then the SP2 paired with the BDA-1. But it was really the Monster AVS 2000 power conditioner that I purchased from Werd, that raised the sound level to the high end world.

My multi-channel set up was straining with the power supply. I could tell when Werd heard my system, besides being too loud was grating to his ears.

I think Werd would have a better opinion of what multi-channel can sound like if he listened to my system again.

For Werd to part with this Monster in favor of the Torus. Then I have to believe his report on the benefits of Torus power.

[DaveNote]

That's what I'm talking about - big changes ! 

My recent system evolution ( commencing 2010 ):
a) Arcam Delta 270 CDP to Bryton BCD-1 to Esoteric K-03
b) Arcam Alpha 9 / 9P bi-amp system-added Manley Jumbo Shrimp tube pre - replaced Arcams w/ Bryston 7B SST2- replaced Jumbo Shrimp w/ Manley NeoClassic 300B tube preamp ( since re-tubed ). Added a BIT 20 in there somewhere as a replacement for a Tice Solo...also upgraded cable to XLO Signature 3 from a mix of AudioQuest and Tara Labs.
c) Kef Reference 103/4 to PMC FB1i to PMC fact.8
Working on improving the actual room now to good effect. No gear changes planned.

All this because my CDP's drive started acting up. Madness....MADNESS !!!!!

D.D.   

MADNESS! Had the same kind of experience, starting with messing about with speaker placement. This is ironic given the replies by others here. I tried to improve my MB2 speakers by spending weeks adjusting their placement. Ended up buying MB2i speakers costing a small fortune.

Remember this ironclad rule D.D.: MADNESS comes with the audiophile affliction.

Dave

[DaveNote]

My Rega DAC was a big improvement on my temporary Theta Cobalt DAC.  The Theta was excellent, but the Rega just trounces it. 

Cables have had the least impact on my system.  There's definitely differences, but I liken them to that last dash of seasoning on food.  Sometimes a pinch of salt brings it all together, and that's how I view cables.  I don't get these jaw dropping results magazines and people on forums talk about.  Some people on Audiogon would have you believe cables are just as important snd make just as much of a difference sonically than components do.  Never heard a cable do that much.

Sorry for the long post.

Nice description, Stu.

I discovered something about DACs some time ago that initially was a surprise. I once had a Theta Prime Basic III DAC. Many years later I considered buying a Bryston Preamp, with DAC. I called Theta to ask how it might compare. Theta told me it probably would be way better, since DAC chips keep getting better. Turned out they were right. And my BDA-1 made the preamp DAC sound like a dog by comparison.

Have had the same experience you have with cable.

Dave

[mike678]

By far, the most important change in my system comes from the XTA DSP crossover/eq/delay
 unit. With it, and good computer programs,and LOTS of practice,  I have been able to adjust my system to flat, and, from there, to any flavor I like. Compared to this, amplifier flavor changes are very tiny. Even the differences between the very fine SST2 amps and the older generation. (I even once matched a QSC to a friends uber priced amplifier.)

Also, aside from performing their primary function, IC's PC's and such are irrelevant. (Yes, properly shielded and proper gauge matter.)

Even more importantly, playing with the unit has given me skills to work with anyone's system, to their taste.

It's to the point that the XTA, or things of its ilk, are the core of any system in my estimation.

[Diamond Dog]

Pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease don't let this turn into another cable crap-flinging thread.

Please....

D.D.

[DaveNote]

Pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease don't let this turn into another cable crap-flinging thread.

Please....

D.D.

D.D. Pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease read the two posts carefully. Stu and I are not starting the old and tiresome cable debate. We have said we have found some small, but not dramatic differences using different cables. I will be the first to concede that others might find no differences, or great ones. It was my hope in this thread to solicit experiences, not challenge contributors' opinions based on changes to which only they can attest.

Dave

[Stu Pitt]

Nice description, Stu.

I discovered something about DACs some time ago that initially was a surprise. I once had a Theta Prime Basic III DAC. Many years later I considered buying a Bryston Preamp, with DAC. I called Theta to ask how it might compare. Theta told me it probably would be way better, since DAC chips keep getting better. Turned out they were right. And my BDA-1 made the preamp DAC sound like a dog by comparison.

Have had the same experience you have with cable.

Dave

That's very interesting regarding what Theta told you about newer chips being better.  It makes total sense in theory, yet it doesn't hold up in the real world to my ears.  My Theta Cobalt 307 sounded a good bit better than a bunch of new DACs in my system.  Not just the whole 'musical' aspect, but actual aspects like soundstage, tone, details, clarity, etc.

I auditioned a bunch of $500 and under new/current DACs - DAC Magic and V-DAC to name two.  I also compared the Benchmark to it.  The Theta was easily better than the first group.  The Benchmark was a tad better, but more different IMO.

The chip used is only one part of the equation.  Power supply and output devices are critical.  A new chip powered by a cheap wall-wart and placed in front of op-amps just don't hold a candle to a torroid transformer and class A discrete outputs, regardless of the chip used IMO.

The Cobalt is about 15 years old, used an "off the shelf" chip (as Theta described it), and was about $500-700 if I'm not mistaking.

James said he was surprised at how little difference the chip made when they were developing the BCD-1 (or was it the BDA-1?).  He said they found far more difference in power supplies and output devices.  This was in response to people asking why they didn't use the flavor of the month ESS Sabre chip.  Not that I take his or anyone else's word as gospel, but I've noticed the same when comparing old DACs to new ones.  When all else is equal, which are they ever?, a new chip would probably make a big difference. 

Not trying to side track the thread, sorry if it does!

D.D.,

Not trying to start a cable war either!

[DaveNote]

That's very interesting regarding what Theta told you about newer chips being better.  It makes total sense in theory, yet it doesn't hold up in the real world to my ears.  My Theta Cobalt 307 sounded a good bit better than a bunch of new DACs in my system.  Not just the whole 'musical' aspect, but actual aspects like soundstage, tone, details, clarity, etc.

I auditioned a bunch of $500 and under new/current DACs - DAC Magic and V-DAC to name two.  I also compared the Benchmark to it.  The Theta was easily better than the first group.  The Benchmark was a tad better, but more different IMO.

The chip used is only one part of the equation.  Power supply and output devices are critical.  A new chip powered by a cheap wall-wart and placed in front of op-amps just don't hold a candle to a torroid transformer and class A discrete outputs, regardless of the chip used IMO.

The Cobalt is about 15 years old, used an "off the shelf" chip (as Theta described it), and was about $500-700 if I'm not mistaking.

James said he was surprised at how little difference the chip made when they were developing the BCD-1 (or was it the BDA-1?).  He said they found far more difference in power supplies and output devices.  This was in response to people asking why they didn't use the flavor of the month ESS Sabre chip.  Not that I take his or anyone else's word as gospel, but I've noticed the same when comparing old DACs to new ones.  When all else is equal, which are they ever?, a new chip would probably make a big difference. 

Not trying to side track the thread, sorry if it does!

D.D.,

Not trying to start a cable war either!

Thanks, Stu, for this clarification. It may be that the experience I had with the three DACS I used just coincidentally were progressively better and not necessarily better because of different chips.

Dave

[mike678]

It's also been my experience lately that the dac doesnt matter nearly as much as other things in the system. In most cases, it IS the analog section that varies the most. Some attack leaner, EMM Labs for instance; some attack with a richer tone, Burl or Bryston for instance.

Both types of dacs can work just fine in an active cross-overed and eq'd system since you are dialing in what flavor you want in the first place. In many cases, I just use the on-board dac of the XTA, or others of its class, and buffer the analog out if there are long cable runs.

I was not disparaging cable, or cable choices, but just remarking that, since they are in the overall eq solution,and thus compensated for,  their specific flavors just dont matter to the overall picture. Good shielding, controlled RF behavior, and robustness are my primary needs.

[ricko01]

Peter, speaker placement is a big deal to do, but unlike you, I haven't been lucky enough to get dramatic changes from making those endless small adjustments.

Dave

Actual it wasnt about endless small adjustments... it was trying some really kinky placements as well as trying some of the standard "maths" based ones (cardas, audio physic etc).

Some of the non-standard ones were excellent.. so my point is trying stupid placements that are unconventional (such as extreme toe in, toe out, speakers in far flung corners) taught me stacks about my system and my room.

And as I say while the timeline was long, I tried maybe 6 different settings but left each one in place for several months then compared the current to what were my existing two favorites.

So not a lot of shifting and it was free...