Follow-up 1 Mo. modded XR45 impressions...

azryan · « **on:** 5 Jun 2004, 05:07 pm »

I said I'd follow-up on how this Pannie breaks in after a month so here it is...

About the only thing I have to say is that it sounds as far as I can tell the same -which is really good.

From my early impressions it took about a week and made what I thought was a clear change vs. 'day one' which I've already described in this thread -

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=10319&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

After that... I can't say that it keeps getting better and better like other people have said. It' seems the same to me.

That (again) though is REALLY good IMO. Clean, smooth, dynamic, bright/detailed but not harsh (unless the recording is crap).

Seems to (again, as far as I can tell) let what's recorded shine through with so little added or taken away.

Red Dragon Audio · « **Reply #1 on:** 5 Jun 2004, 06:21 pm »

azryan:

Would you say that your modded XR45 is now on par with the eARTwo?

Wayne1 · « **Reply #2 on:** 5 Jun 2004, 06:32 pm »

Thanks for your impressions, Ryan.

Your observations mesh with mine. The modded SA-XR45 is as NEUTRAL a sound as I have heard with Redbook CDs.

It just lets through whatever is recorded on the CD, warts and all.

The modded Panny will not "warm" up your system or change the sound in any way.

For some sytems that is great. Others may want some coloration added.

azryan · « **Reply #3 on:** 6 Jun 2004, 01:22 am »

Very nice job on this little rec. Wayne! thanks again.

heavystarch,

In my 'early impressions' thread I linked to here I wrote -

"-Last night I was really feeling like this thing is sounding as good as the eARTwo does on the top end in the form of smoothness clarity.-"

Seeing as you were the person who posted both before and after I made this comment... I'd figure you'd have already seen this??

Obviously the XR45 has a lot less power per chan. than the eARTwo. My speakers are VERY effi. though.

I'm typically WAY below it's max though so I think it'd still be solid for many many speakers -but I'm guessing.

Also... the XR45 is in a way amps, dac, and preamp and in another way it's not exactly any of those things (if it's a digtal amp then there are no DAC's. If it's a power level DAC then there are no amps. All point of view) so you can't 'really' directly compare it as an amp alone vs. another amp.

Since I no longer have the eARTwo I was simply going by my impressions of what I felt was the best that I have gotten out of that amp vs. how this XR45 sounds.

I tried to break it down to specifics like dynamics, smoothness, detail, highs, mids, lows, etc...

I think this was all in that 'early impession' thread.

Red Dragon Audio · « **Reply #4 on:** 6 Jun 2004, 03:30 am »

azryan:

I always had high marks for math and science but in reading comprehension...well that is one of my weaknesses. Check that last sentence for mispelled words too.

Seriously, that is great that the Panny scores so well against some serious competition.

Wayne
What would you charge just to put the new 4-pole power supply cap in the XR45? I'm confident I can handle the other mods myself and I like the small sense of accomplishment it brings to know "I did that".

azryan · « **Reply #5 on:** 6 Jun 2004, 07:30 am »

I'm just taking a guess for the heck of it that for what Wanye would have to do to even get in there and put that cap in that it'd probably be much of the full mod cost for the trouble and then might as well just have him do it all so it is the full official Bolder Cable solution he's worked out.

Again, I'm NOT answering for Wayne. I'm just making a guess. We'll see if I'm right or wrong.

It's off topic though and seems like more of a PM type question. Please let this thread be about the original subject ok?

wshuff · « **Reply #6 on:** 8 Jun 2004, 08:05 pm »

Quote

Also... the XR45 is in a way amps, dac, and preamp and in another way it's not exactly any of those things (if it's a digtal amp then there are no DAC's. If it's a power level DAC then there are no amps. All point of view) so you can't 'really' directly compare it as an amp alone vs. another amp.

I've seen you mention this before, but this time the little light bulb finally went off and now I get it. I've also read where people have commented that the Pannie's performance with analog is less than stellar. So if I understand what you're saying, the reason would be because with an analog input there would have to be an A/D conversion before output. Does the mod do anything in that area? And how does the Pannie handle a hi-rez analog input? Is it digitized?

azryan · « **Reply #7 on:** 8 Jun 2004, 11:35 pm »

Analog ins are convered to digital and while that step isn't as good as a pure digital path I personally wouldn't say the analog in sucks or anything so drastic at all.

Mods to the power supply and replacing awful ribbon strips of wire for 'real' internal wire and awful 2 cent connectors for 'real' ones and, in my Pannie's case, Bybee thingies on the main and center outputs will have a benefit whether using digital or analog input.

I don't know what 'level' of quality the analog to digital converter is (maybe Wayne has an opinion on this?) and of course the quality of the analog signal coming in certainly should make a diff. on the result you get from the analog in path.

Remember this rec. first got discovered by Newform Research using it in stock form with digital x-overs sending an analog signal to the main and surround RCA inputs to bi-amp their 645 speakers -which I own and think they're outstanding in several ways, though quirky in some other key ways.

wshuff · « **Reply #8 on:** 9 Jun 2004, 01:13 am »

If I understand what you are saying, then, that means that all DVD-A and SACD hi-rez tracks will have to be digitized before they can be played. I know that there are some pre/pros (like the Lexicon MC-12 and the ML40) that can do that, and possibly some lower priced models and receivers, but generally that is assumed to be less than ideal, at least by the hi-rez connoisseurs. Of course, if digitizing the hi-rez stuff gives you access to bass management and time alignment in your Pannie, I suppose that in and of itself could be a good thing. Anyway, thanks for the info.

azryan · « **Reply #9 on:** 9 Jun 2004, 06:55 pm »

The diff. in your examples is of course that after being converted to digital they're converted back to analog, sent out those pre/pro sections into analog amps where there are assorted more processing.

In the Pannie once it's digital (which is at a hi rez PCM sample rate I believe so hopefully nothing is really lost) then it stays digital till just before hitting speaker wire.

I think the prob. people have vs. the analog in is not so much the A to D conversion step so much as the actual analog signal coming into the player itself -but that depends of course on how good the player is.

Personally I don't think this is as big an issuse as people'd like it to be.
Analog vs. Digital WAR!!!

Naw... we've come so far in both.

Maybe the main idea is that the ultra high end can't keep climbing higher while the the low end is getting huge benefits from chips advances.

The powerDAC Equibit chips are a great part of that I think. Previously unavailable 'cept in the form of super costly TacT gear.

clyde · « **Reply #10 on:** 11 Jun 2004, 12:52 am »

I posted some comments a few months ago comparing my ICEpower engineering sample to the XR25. After break in, I thought the XR25 with analog inputs was nearly indistinguishable from the ICEpower. I didn't listen to the XR25 much in analog though, since the digital inputs were so much cleaner.