[The Killer Piglet]

sonic, now JVC) and I am curios to see if anyone has compared them with the established digital amps (Spectron, PS-Audio, Bel Canto).

Since this forum seem to be "the" place for digital amplification, I am posting this here.

I have had the Spectron and the PS-Audio in my system
The PS-Audio amp did not work for me at all.
I liked the incredible dynamics of the Spectron, as well as it's imaging, but I still preferred the Rogue 1209 Magnums, as it sounded fuller and voices just sounded more real. I now have Rogue 150's, but I've always been interested in digital amps.

I am watching the developments and discoveries here, as well as the mod packages coming out for these amps with interest and will probably try another of these beasts (the Carver seems to have the power level that may tempt me) at some point although I will try to behave rationally and wait at least a year to see where this technology leads us.

KP

[lonewolfny42]

KP,

This will be a thread that you'll have to keep an eye on....the Carver Mods comparison at audiojerry's...  

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=12019   [/list:u]

[flintstone]

We have members of the Apogee speaker user forum who are using this new digital amp to drive their 1 ohm scintillas. $2,000 for the stereo version and $3,000 for mono-blocks.

http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/amp/messages/50638.html

Dave

[kana813]

If you want hear what a digital amp can do, check out the TacT M or S2150. Unlike all the amps above, no preamp or DAC are required. They've recently lower their price. Also responds well to some minor tweaking.

[The Killer Piglet]

I see the price of some of these mods, and they seem disproportionate. 1500 dollar mods for 800 dollar amps? 750 dollar mod for $200 receivers?

With no chance to audition, and you will take a huge hit if you sell them.

For that price, you can get a used Spectron, Bel Canto, or a fully modded -by Steve McCormack- himself DNA amp. I know that last one is not digital, but it puts it in perspective. The H2O amps also seem to fall within the same price range. All of these have multi-year warranties, and should you feel the need to sell, will sell at a lower loss.

I'd still love to hear from anyone that has actually compared these new amps (modded or not) to the "boutique" digital candidates.

KP

[dave_c]

The other thing about the digital receivers out there is the fact they are a DAC as well as pre and power amp.  So although you end up paying roughly $1000 for the receiver and mods, you're getting 3 components and cut out 2 sets of IC's.  Well worth the money if you ask me.

Probably not the end all of components, but convinience and value seem to be really high.

I'll be receiving my modded XR45 soon and will be able to comment more on Sound Quality at that point.

[TheChairGuy]

dave_c, def want to hear your impression of the modded Panny..

You having Wayne/Bolder or Steve/Empirical do it?  What's the mod coming to costwise?

[dave_c]

Steve at Empirical is doing it.  He did around $1200 worth of work to it and its only got 4 channels now.  Its a pretty extensive list of mods, including new inductors and Jensen Cap.  Considering Steve's experience with the Carver ZR1600 along with his digital circuit experience, I'm certain the Panny will be an awesome performer.

Still waiting to get it, but when I do I'll make sure to post a report.

[TheChairGuy]

Ah, I thought that might be yours that he was modding...he told me he had a Panny to mod and was waiting for parts a couple weeks ago.

Inquiring minds wanna' know... so, don't keep anything a deep, dark secret  

[dave_c]

I’ll be sure to post details as soon as I get some time with it.  What I should be receiving shortly is my modded Monarchy DIP Upsampler with USB receiver.  I’ve been on the Head Fi forums while the Panny has been out, trying to find out the best PC Source setup.  I’ve got Foobar2000 with Kernal streaming ready to go.  The next step is to rip my CD’s into FLAC files and load up my hard drive with my entire library.  Its kind of exciting to know that I can turn my laptop and external hard drive into a giant media library that still sounds good.  I hate to say it, but convenience may win the format war!

[TheChairGuy]

Convenience over ultimate sound quality will nearly always win....nearly nobody's life gets lesscomplicated over time, but your hearing grows worse by the day and your energy wanes each day after 21 or so (for a male) - that's fact, in general.

If you're a betting man, bet convenience every time. Except for a rabid few that care of sound quality at any cost and inconvenience, easier will win out over better/more complicated everytime in sum total.

Nothing wrong with that; just the way life happens to be.

Do let us know your thoughts on the modded Panny...thanx.

[azryan]

I hate to say it, but convenience may win the format war!

Which format war are you talking about? And how will 'convenience' be the 'format' that wins?

Sorry, confusing to me.

[azryan]

I see the price of some of these mods, and they seem disproportionate. 1500 dollar mods for 800 dollar amps? 750 dollar mod for $200 receivers?

Very true. And as a Bolder modded Panny XR45 owner I brought this up a bit in a follow-up review I did after about a month of break in.

On one hand it's a rip off because you get so little added 'product' for such a huge amount of dough. I mean in the end it's still mostly the same Panny boards, chips, etc...

On the other hand it's hand done work nad putting in first class parts that just isn't an option from an say high end company making a TOP quality version of the same Panny (which is something I'd like to see actually. Maybe a company like Outlaw Audio -someday).

The end result like dave_c mentioned is a unit that eliminates a slew of analog connections. You could say it's a powered DAC and there aren't any amps, preamp, etc... rather than saying you're getting all these things in one unit.

This is of course what the stock unit is in the first place though.

I really think there's some really awful parts/quality in the stock design and the modded unit fixes a top end that IMO HAD to be fixed for it to be a 'keeper' for me.

The end result is also a total cost FAR less than any combo of even high quality/high value amps, pre/pro,IC's, etc...

I don't think modding these things is the BEST thing to do but for now I think it's a great option.

I'd love to see quality/value companies like Rotel/NAD/Outlaw ect... leap frog the megabuck high end and put out a Rec. based in these TI Equibit boards that does all the tricks of a top pre/pro and has a power supply that's really well done.

I think then mods might make it even better but probably not that worth it for the cost of cracking it open and replaceing real good parts for a little better ones by hand.

All the Pannies seem to really be are crappy cheapo recs. with TI's whole Equibit board tacked on... but that seems to be mostly enough.

I'm not sure about power supply. Lots of people seem to hate switching PS's but they can charge a lot better than torroids so maybe a small combo of both. You could use a couple real small torroids. Great quality, but still cheap.

[dave_c]

I hate to say it, but convenience may win the format war!

Which format war are you talking about? And how will 'convenience' be the 'format' that wins?

Sorry, confusing to me.

You’re right, convenience isn’t a format; what I was trying to say is that convenience will be a deciding factor in the format war.  I’ve had / heard SACD and its great.  But the fact remains that I have much more CD’s than there are decent SACD’s.  What’s really appealing about the Redbook format, is the fact that I can store my CD’s onto my hard drive and have access to all the songs all at once.  The appeal may not sink in at first, but try using it for a while.  I think the two biggest things keeping audiophiles from using PC's as a source were: 1) Lack of good playback hardware/software, 2) stigma around MP3’s and lossy compression.

The current range of soundcards and playback software can turn you computer into an excellent source.  Using Foobar2000 for software playback, you can use software resampling (if you like) and kernel streaming to avoid any unnecessary software mixing.  Of course if you are playin mp3’s the quality will not be there regardless of how good the computer.  However, there are many lossless codecs available which will cut file sizes to around half the size of a wav file.  With storage prices dropping, storing and playing your music from a hard drive has become a very attractive option.

I know there’s special feeling you get when handling media (vinyl especially), but in the end I think the ability to cue up a playlist spanning multitudes of albums will win out.  Maybe the more relevant format war will be overthrowing mp3 as the reigning digital media format.  With the widespread acceptance of the iPod, Apples lossless version of AAC may start overshadowing mp3 as the digital format of choice.

My guess is that media companies are beginning to see the light in terms of digital media.  Hopefully that will lead to the development of a high resolution digital media format which may even go beyond the limits of SACD or DVD-A.  If you are able to get beyond the inherent limitations of media (limited storage, complex playback mechanism, physical damage) the options available when creating a hi-rez format increase tremendously.  Of course I know that its unlikely we will avoid our reliance on media altogether, but I think its importance in audio and video will decrease in the near future.

Anyways, this is pretty off the topic of comparing the digital amplifiers out there.  I guess I’m excited about the changes happening to my system!

[ABEX]

I wonder what will be out around Xmas. Would like to see some of these companies come out with low cost seperates.Seems like the Sharp unit was a sham!

It still might be beneficial to keep them in a one in all unit which eliminated the need for IC's. If they come out with an all in one that does not screw up the Mastering clock with a CDP\DVDP that has a Dual Laser in it then this could really be something.

[Rob Babcock]

Well said, Dave C.  I agree with you completely.  Although I hope to retain a physical medium (or archival/fair use rights) & integrate a complete digital solution including hirez digital amplification.

[azryan]

dave_c,

I guess I wasn’t thinking CD and SACD were in a format war since all SACD’s are also CD’s.

And I guess I feel SACD and DVD-A are the same as far as convenience is concerned.

I don’t have my audio hooked to my ‘puter but I do have a bunch of CD’s converted to FLAC like you’re doing to save space.
I’ve found that most rock is only about 30% smaller than WAV files, but Classical can pack down usually to about 50-60% smaller.

I wonder about uncompressing the audio on the fly though? If that does anything bad to it?

“-I know there’s special feeling you get when handling media (vinyl especially)-“

I’m not like that myself. I’d rather go 100% digital if possible. I do hope someday to see tube tone emulators in future digital gear to try out though.

The best of all worlds IMO, and freedon to pick your front end sound if you want -though I'm mostly very happy with pure digital's sound.

“-Hopefully that will lead to the development of a high resolution digital media format which may even go beyond the limits of SACD or DVD-A.-“

WOW... what do you want it to do that they can’t audio-wise?

Better than DVD-A is easy... just bump up the rates to 32bit/384kHz and beyond but what’s the point? 24/96 is already better than you can hear and far more dynamic than most actual music gets recorded.

Lots of music doesn’t even come close to maxing out CD’s bit depth, but it doesn’t have to.

I guess there's the idea of even MORE audio channels but IMO they could add a matrix effect to fake 6th and 7th channels out of 5.1 SACD's and DVD-A's and that should be fine IMO. More and more channels just makes each channel less important and for how compromised sound coming from behind us is already.... it doesn't need to be ultra high rez. IMO at all.

I'd like to see added FRONT soundstage channels though! That's the key to making realisitic yet HUGE soundstages up front for the masses and it's where are ears are pointed.

[Rob Babcock]

All SACDs most certainly are not CDs.  The discs you describe are "hybrids"- many SACDs have no Redbook layer.

[azryan]

All SACDs most certainly are not CDs.  The discs you describe are "hybrids"- many SACDs have no Redbook layer.

Crap, I keep forgetting that. I think I've gotten corrected on that at least 3 times now (I believe more than once by you even! hehe) and somehow can't seem to remember. I guess it's 'cuz I have all of one SACD and it is a hybrid.

Aren't 'most' SACD's hybrids now though?

I think my point that CD and SACD aren't really in a format war is still valid despite my screw up on hybrids.

[Rob Babcock]

What can I say, I have nothing else to do!