[NorthMac]

Having lived for many years now with 5 to 6 boxes in my system, including the Bryston BDP/BDA duo, and the attendant spaghetti factory of cabling, I have been watching with interest the slow movement towards fewer boxes in high end audio.  The ultimate reduction is of course to a single box, ie. the "receiver" of past years.  But my leaning (at least today...) is to a 2-box approach, at least for those of us who do not do vinyl, and have gone all-digital either file based or pure streaming or both. 

Box 1 is a simple power amp (say a Bryston 4B3.... which I will likely buy).  The Box 1 will defy obsolescence, last forever basically, and presumably you pick the power output reasonably needed for your speakers / room.   A single box approach will always be at some point power limited, or forced to use compact Class D only (which many would approve of I suppose). 

Box 2 would contain all the digital pieces: digital player, streamer, DAC, and enough of a pre-amp to allow either direct connection to most amps, or to powered speakers if one wanted to go that route.  Box 2 will not last forever likely, given the rate of development of electronic circuitry, and also the fast pace of change in the music sources themselves.  Cabling is simple; 2 XLR connects and your speaker cables.  Huge cost saving right there.  As I will likely have to replace Box 2, and it will depreciate faster than my classic power amp, there is a limit to what I will pay for a Box 2.  I would prefer an internal drive/server, but many who do only Tidal etc. would not want to pay for this, so in the end I am OK with my HD attached to the unit by USB, as I do with my current BDP.  All the pieces of Box 2 are these days circuit boards and chips, any loss of purity by losing the "separates" may be gained by the ultimate short connections possible in a single chassis.  The only issue for many may be using a digital volume approach?  Not sure how that can be improved. 

With all this backdrop, I find the hint (somewhere on another thread? ) that Bryston is musing about a BDA-18 device that would essentially be my Box 2.... would be perfect.  (Actually it would be perfect if Bryston developed a real control app and retired the Muddled Moose).

[JLM]

AM running a single box, a compact lightweight NAD M10 "streaming amplifier."  It contains streamer, ESS 9028 based DAC, preamp (analog and digital compliant), 100 wpc class D stereo amp, and Dirac room correction.  As the value leader of the NAD Master Series it sounds great.  My downfall is the speakers: 7!  2 single driver mains, 2 "Late Ceiling Splash" ambience tweeters - thank you Duke LeJeune, and 3 subwoofers to control in-room bass peaks/dips - thank you Floyd Toole.  Seems to be the ideal combination of high-end and life-style attributes. 

Of course this discussion quickly gets back to the worry of putting all your eggs in one basket in terms of design prowess (NAD has a good reputation and has been around for 50 years), fitting to your needs (the M10 is extremely well featured), and reliability (frankly it has operational glitches).  On the plus side it requires no interconnects, needs less space, has no worries about compatibility, and is simpler to use.  Another advantage is the lack of clutter that blocks the soundstage if you setup between the speakers to keep cabling short. 

Another example of a one box option is the NAD C658, containing streamer, DAC, preamp, and Dirac when used with active monitors. 

The real challenge is giving up the nearly universal audiophile hunter mentality, wanting to fill your space with big impressive constantly upgraded trophies.

[WildPhydeaux]

For an all-digital source system this is easily done with Bryston BDA-3.14. Many streamer/DAC combinations also provide variable output jacks for direct to power amp connection. Some even provide additional inputs for secondary digital inputs and even analog ones, performing an A/D conversion, generally for the purposes of DSP. So it's doable, and doable at high quality levels.

I do admire this approach and in fact was similarly enamored with a simplicity model well before the streaming digital days when my single source was a CD player with variable outputs connected to a power amp. Initially this was a Denon DCD-1650AR and Simaudio Moon W5. Later I chose a Musical Fidelity CDpre which is was an extremely interesting unit that never seemed to catch on.

Multiple input discussion aside, there seems to be a school of thought that a preamp should be a wire with gain vs. those who believe it does and should provide additional sonic benefit. I can tell you that the quality of sound - or the "feeling" - was progressively better when I moved from the Denon to the MF, then later to a SimAudio P5 and now onto a PrimaLuna Evo400 preamp. Part of this will be the DAC in the Denon and MF of course. Part of this will be the quality of design and components. Part of this is a switch to tubes from SS.

I have listened to my Bryston BDA-3.14 connected directly to my PrimaLuna Evo400 power amp and it was super in every way. However there was a certain "presence" or "air" or "holography" that seemed to be missing without the preamp in the mix. Maybe it was psychological, not seeing the preamp tubes glowing. But  I do believe the "magic" of the sound I'm enjoying these days has more to do with the preamp than the power amp.

Anyway, I'm on-board the simple is better (or simple gives up very little) train, if only in spirit at the moment.

Cheers,
Robert

[NorthMac]

@JLM: I do like the little NAD unit; unfortunately I like my Martin Logan electrostats more, and they need more oomph to drive well. 

@WildPhydeaux: Does the BDA 3.14 have true pre-amp? It has no volume control when I looked?  But yes, the pre-amp issue will provoke some resistance if makers build it in.  An advantage is that you could do a really nice volume control, like Naim does with their Uniti series.  I still think I prefer the pre-amp function in my source box, as opposed to in my amp, but I could see arguments both ways.

I should have mentioned that my 2-box future is in preparation for inevitable down-sizing of living spaces.  But even before down sizing, the reduction of clutter is of value - like many, I do not have the luxury of a "listening room", it is the shared family room, and audio gear ends up being prominent.   

[Elizabeth]

I stopped counting after 60.... 

[James Tanner]

I stopped counting after 60.... 

Hi Liz

Sixty boxes or sixty years

james

[Don_S]

Two boxes for me. A high quality digital source and a high quality integrated amplifier. DAC can be in either box. I spend more on a power cord than many spend on a box. Interconnects are another cash drain.

Minimizing boxes eliminates component matching and cable matching. Reduced cost for cables and not spreading available cash across multiple boxes allows the purchase of better boxes. My simpler systems are exceeding any more complex system I ever had. 

I concede that staying with the same brand for multiple boxes removes component matching issues and may outperform an integrated from the same company. But out-performance is not guaranteed and there is still a requirement for more cables and their cost.

[alexone]

Hi Liz

Sixty boxes or sixty years

james

...JAMES! NEVER talk about a woman's age...

al.

[WildPhydeaux]

@WildPhydeaux: Does the BDA 3.14 have true pre-amp? It has no volume control when I looked?  But yes, the pre-amp issue will provoke some resistance if makers build it in.  An advantage is that you could do a really nice volume control, like Naim does with their Uniti series.  I still think I prefer the pre-amp function in my source box, as opposed to in my amp, but I could see arguments both ways.

No, not a true preamp as it's done in the digital domain. I assume there is more than enough bit depth that it's all happening well below (or above, depending on how you think) the practical volume range. I guess there must be a volume setting in Molten Moose, I don't recall. But from Roon you can certainly control it. I also do not have a handheld remote control - is there volume control from there? Dunno, I would expect so...

Cheers,
Robert

[gbaby]

.... (Actually it would be perfect if Bryston developed a real control app and retired the Muddled Moose).

I disagree. I think Manic Moose is an excellent control interface.

[James Tanner]

Hi Folks,

I wonder if Manic Moose is just too complex and like most interfaces it takes some getting use to?

Obviously I am bias but I find it excellent so not sure why some dislike it.

I think I might start a thread about Manic Moose - and get some input as to what some customers fine objectionable and how they think we can improve it.

james

[NorthMac]

Hi Folks,

I wonder if Manic Moose is just too complex and like most interfaces it takes some getting use to?

Obviously I am bias but I find it excellent so not sure why some dislike it.

I think I might start a thread about Manic Moose - and get some input as to what some customers fine objectionable and how they think we can improve it.

james

Good idea James, to avoid diverting this philosphizing about boxes....

[James Tanner]

Hi Folks

Here is what I in vision the ‘all in one’ BP18 to be.

Modular Design

Digital inputs:
2 Toslink
2 Spdif
2 AES
1 USB
4 HDMI
1 Pi4
 
Analog Inputs:
2x RCA (1 can be phono)
2x XLR
 
Analog outputs:
2x XLR
 
Analog volume control, digitally controlled.

[schmidtmike76]

Hi Folks

Here is what I in vision the ‘all in one’ BP18 to be.

Modular Design

Digital inputs:
2 Toslink
2 Spdif
2 AES
1 USB
4 HDMI
1 Pi4
 
Analog Inputs:
2x RCA (1 can be phono)
2x XLR
 
Analog outputs:
2x XLR
 
Analog volume control, digitally controlled.

will this compete with the 26 or is this a different animal.  Thanks James

[NorthMac]

will this compete with the 26 or is this a different animal.  Thanks James

I think in another thread he said it was being envisioned as a player-DAC-preamp, so yes, different.

[James Tanner]

will this compete with the 26 or is this a different animal.  Thanks James

HI

Yes different.

The BP26 is a pure analog preamp and will remain so.

james

[NorthMac]

James - "Analog volume control, digitally controlled" - translated, does that mean no physical volume control, but volume would be passed to any control app? 

[WildPhydeaux]

James - "Analog volume control, digitally controlled" - translated, does that mean no physical volume control, but volume would be passed to any control app?

I expect he means similar to the Naim Uniti you mentioned earlier where the preamp is analog but ramps up/down in sync with a digital controller.

Cheers,
Robert

[James Tanner]

I expect he means similar to the Naim Uniti you mentioned earlier where the preamp is analog but ramps up/down in sync with a digital controller.

Cheers,
Robert

Correct - it's an analog resistor ladder adjusted using a digital controller. Works great!

james