BRYSTON BP-18

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 2787 times.

alexone

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1892
  • Anthony Bauer, Stan Rybb, John Stoneborough
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #40 on: 2 Aug 2020, 07:01 am »


This will seem nit-picky at best, but I personally view the LEDs around the volume control as 80's boom box cheese. I love the industrial no-nonsence look of Bryston gear. This, in my opinion, spoils that look.

...that‘s what i thought when i first saw the BP18.

al.

James Tanner

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 18441
  • The Demo is Everything!
    • http://www.bryston.com
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #41 on: 2 Aug 2020, 10:56 am »
Hi Folks,

I got some questions from one of our customers and thought I would post them here as well.


Hi James,

1. In your description of BP18 you mentioned 2X XLR analog outputs, are these individually buffered?

The XLR outputs are not individually buffered but the buffers have a very high drive capability.

2. You also mentioned that among digital inputs it has 1X Pi4, not sure what it stands for, does it mean that BP18 has all the inputs that a separate BDP-Pi has?

Built-in Raspberry Pi 4 for streaming

3. In regard to DSD, will the unit handle DSD natively when received over USB, and will it convert DSD to PCM when sourced from USB HD / Pi

The BP18 doesn’t convert DSD to PCM, It will handle native DSD from either HDMI, USB or Raspberry Pi

4. I see in photo one large toroidal transformer, are all the PSUs in the unit linear or there are some switching ones?

All the power supplies are linear except for a small switching supply for the stand-by circuit.

5. You mentioned it has one Ethernet for network attachment, in what capacity can it be used, will the unit be recognized as uPnP device on the network so that software players supporting uPnP can send data over Ethernet to it for rendering and conversion? And can you send both PCM and DSD over Ethernet, with DSD being converted natively?

The ethernet connection can be used as a uPnP device and DSD is processed natively.


Sasha

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 541
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #42 on: 2 Aug 2020, 02:14 pm »
I will be grabbing BP18 as soon as it becomes available, this is the product I have been waiting for someone to make, it has all the capabilities of an ultimate digital source I seek.
It is not the first such product on the market but it seems to be the one that has been finally implemented correctly.
To being with, it employs modern 32bit DAC chips in balanced mode. IMO today’s modern chips from AKM, ESS approach performance levels of discrete DACs such as DCS.
Of course it is not the chip selection on its own that drives the performance but the overall implementation, and BP18 shows all signs of proper implementation.
In terms of conversion itself, there are independent reviews and measurements of BDA-3, it is safe to say that it can hardly get any better without costing significantly more, and to what point really considering the present level of performance and what you can squeeze out of available recordings.
It employs resistor ladder analog volume control and analog section capable of driving amplifiers directly, it is the analog section where many such DACs fail. IME removal of pre-amp device from the signal path regardless of how good it may be always results in significant improvement in transparency, provided the DAC has proper analog section.
Considering that BP18 supports uPnP, that DSD is converted natively regardless of being received over Ethernet or from locally attached disk, that it supports high resolution PCM and that the rendering is in such cases done within the unit, and is then sent over I2S (according to what I have seen, correct me if I am wrong), it eliminates all the issues with jitter and noise, it now depends mostly on internal clock and circuitry implementation.
Finally it employs beefy transformer with linear PSUs.
This is reasonably the present state of the art.

Unrelated, does anyone know how to include images into private messages?

BCRich1

Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #43 on: 2 Aug 2020, 03:28 pm »
Hi James,
Any chance this will support a DSD Rate higher than 256 over USB?
Thanks....Mike

bokko

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 40
    • My Photography
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #44 on: 2 Aug 2020, 03:37 pm »
Like to be able to see a volume control. Sounds like there is a dimmer and way to shut off

Looks like the Pi 4 is fully accessible from outside. Card reader is easy to access. Look into Sandisk Extreme flash cards very fast (gold and red) assuming reader used can support protocol.
I assume connection is internal using I²S protocol? As well as being accessible from outside? Be very interesting to hear a Pi 4b with low noise power by Bryston.

Would the analog inputs be accessible in Asio layer? I would love to record my albums.
Look into adding support for booting from USB instead of card reader for Pi...believe that's now doable would reduce taking cover off there are also companies that make card readers you can attach so card would be accessible from outside. Problem is ensuring nothing is writing to card (erases it).
Don't mind layout on front but would display info be accessible in web interface so if dimmed or off you could monitor from there? Pics are low res so hard to make out details on front.
Look into an Autodark feature so display and volume light up for 10 seconds when used then goes dark. I don't find the other smaller leds distracting but some might, believe you have covered that with off option. Could everything autodark or you choose which banks?



James Tanner

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 18441
  • The Demo is Everything!
    • http://www.bryston.com
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #45 on: 2 Aug 2020, 05:01 pm »
Hi James,
Any chance this will support a DSD Rate higher than 256 over USB?
Thanks....Mike

Hi Mike

Not sure on that - I will ask.  sample rates are overrated anyway - it's the original master and much of the research now supports that 44.1 and 16BIT is all that's required at playback and 96/24 at the recording end.

james

Syncytial

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 14
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #46 on: 2 Aug 2020, 10:42 pm »
My thoughts about the BP-18…

For context, I have the following as part of my main hifi, plus two other full systems and a few headphone-only setups…

Bryston BP-17
Bryston BDP-2
Bryston BOT-1
Bryston BHA-1
Bryston 7B3 (x2)
Bryston Middle-T (passive)

There are a couple of pieces that I’d like to add from the Bryston lineup, but the system performs very well as it is and gets a lot of use.


BP-18 aesthetics:

I’d appreciate the visual indication of volume, either through a single pinpoint LED on the volume knob, or with a ring of pinpoint LEDs around the volume knob. I have a Shanling A2.1 integrated amplifier that has the latter, and it’s quite successful. I’ve attached a poor phone-quality photo - it’s better looking in real life (no LED flare, etc.), as it’s functionally useful without being blinding at night (it’s in the bedroom.)







Having user-settable illumination levels, with the option for full-dark, and auto-dark after a defined interval would be great. It’d also be appreciated if the volume LED could optionally be left on (at a preferred illumination level) while the others were dimmed or off entirely. Probably separate illumination control of the volume LED(s) would be best.

The front panel of the BP-18 is very busy, and I’d prefer to see it cleaned up. I prefer a minimalistic aesthetic, while providing all the useful feedback a user needs. I’d like to see fewer rows of buttons & LEDs. Two rows, one for input selection, and one for other functions, grouped sensibly, to the right of the display, matched aesthetically to existing current gear (e.g. BP-17, BCD-3, BDA-3.) The display of sampling rate etc. could then be accommodated in the space to the left of the volume knob, using the “classic” layout as found on the BDA-3, optionally with smaller (pinpoint) LEDs. Choice of LED colour should respect existing Bryston conventions (ideally user selectable) and I’d prefer volume indication to use a distinctive colour - e.g. red for volume, with green for source/function indication.

I’m open to associating the mute button and power with the volume control, but not fully convinced. I’d need to see a revised layout, ideally with a higher quality photo to make a final assessment. It might make sense to have mute and bypass buttons/indicators be the ones associated with volume, and separate the power function. LEDs for mute & bypass (or power) might look better if they were beside the label (on the "outside" relative to the knob) and not between the label and the volume LEDs.

I don’t care for the detail around the headphone jack - there again I’d prefer a clean jack with minimal involvement of the front panel. I’d pair it with a visually similar IR sensor and pair them symmetrically below the display (cf the BP-17.)

I’d relocate the BP-18 PRE-AMPLIFIER silkscreen, as it’s awkward where it’s currently placed and initially looks to be associated with the headphone jack, but offset improperly. It might end up over the sampling rate LED group to the left of the volume knob.


BP-18 Functions & Implementation:

I think you’ve chosen an excellent combination of inputs, allowing you to leverage development for your other platforms (good engineering practice!) and maintain a high degree of versatility while offering the benefits of internal coupling (avoids interconnect costs and “issues”), and reduced cost due to the single chassis and power supply savings. I would prefer having more than a single USB input - can an external USB hub be used to allow multiple storage devices, without compromise?

Is there provision for internal storage - i.e. spinning HD or SSD?

I am slightly wary that the Pi may prove to be the limiting factor (in real or perceived terms), and it’d be great (if feasible) if the BP-18 could be offered with the equivalent of the BDA-3’s (or it’s successor’s) capabilities as an option. The rest of the BP-18 appears to be class-leading, and while the Pi allows for reasonable-cost implementation, it isn’t necessarily an ideal solution for large collections. I’m quite willing to be wrong about this though.  ;)

The modularity is welcome, assuming it’s the basis for reasonable user selection of capabilities or meaningful upgrades.

The outputs being only XLR is a bit troubling, as it reduces perceived versatility. While it may be possible to adapt to RCA/unbalanced passively, the output level may be restrictive depending upon the amplifier(s) used. It shouldn’t be assumed that a Bryston amplifier will always follow, much as that might be the ideal case. Having one set of outputs at a user-selectable fixed/variable level would be appreciated. That allow for connection to a BHA-1 in order to accommodate “balanced” headphones, electrostatics, etc. I’m presuming the BHA-1 will still outperform the BP-18 headphone output (at least in power), though the comment about the BP-18 headphone drive quality is encouraging. Inclusion of a tape/processing loop is probably asking too much!

The inclusion of Bypass and Invert functions is an excellent choice - again considering versatility and marketability/perception.

The lack of a digital output is, perhaps, slightly unfortunate, and I presume it’s because there’s no ADC for the analogue inputs, as well as the quality of the inbuilt DAC that it’s deemed to be unnecessary. Perhaps a USB connection could allow for output from digital sources? Considering this is an analogue preamp with inbuilt DAC and streamer, this seems very minor to me.

Inclusion of WiFi & Bluetooth, even if it’s an external dongle (potentially preferable, due to upgradability to accommodate evolving standards) would be very worthwhile. WiFi & Bluetooth capability should allow for reception of signals (e.g. streamed from a phone or tablet) and transmission (to wireless headphones or speakers) using the latest quality WiFi & Bluetooth standards.

I’m curious about the perceived audio performance compared to the BP-26 and the BP-17. It’s been mentioned that the spatial presentation between those two is different, and they do have somewhat different character - we’re not quite at the “wire with gain” stage yet. How would you compare the BP-18? It being fully balanced throughout will be something of a selling point, though the actual impact on objective performance will depend on the implementation. There is a certain “camp” that elevates objective performance using the suite of traditional measurements above all else, and in amplifiers that often comes down to bringing noise and distortion down to almost immeasurably low levels, which is indicative of engineering effort, but may go beyond what’s actually meaningful when listening to music.

While I am tentatively in the group that believes that there’s limited benefit of digital replay at very high bitrates, and any benefit is typically substantially outweighed by the recording and mastering processes (which include aesthetic choices as well as technical concerns), the market does respond to the inclusion of very high bitrate playback as an indicator of quality, so it’s vital that any digital piece accommodates the perceived markers of quality. Note that I acknowledge the actual merit of recording and processing audio at higher bitrates in the professional realm, to avoid compromising the end result when released at “sensible” bitrates. I say this as someone that has extensive former experience recording professionally, as well as being an active consumer of recorded and live music.

On the whole, the BP-18 looks like an excellent addition to the lineup, and while I’m unlikely to purchase one, given that I’m already well down the road with quality separates and I need more analogue inputs (at least in my main system) I hope it entices more people to join the Bryston family, and enjoy the highest quality reproduction of music - which is presumably why we’re all here…  ;)



Regards,

Syncytial.


James Tanner

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 18441
  • The Demo is Everything!
    • http://www.bryston.com
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #47 on: 2 Aug 2020, 11:27 pm »
Hi Syncytial,

Wow - quite the post!.

Yes the cosmetics are pretty well set at this time so no plans for a change on that front.

I will try and get to most of your questions going forward.

james

GeAllan70

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 20
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #48 on: 2 Aug 2020, 11:37 pm »



 :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:
 :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:
 :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Syncytial

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 14
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #49 on: 3 Aug 2020, 12:03 am »
Hi Syncytial,

Wow - quite the post!.

Yes the cosmetics are pretty well set at this time so no plans for a change on that front.

I will try and get to most of your questions going forward.

james

James,

Thank you... my comments have been brewing ever since your initial post, and it does take a fair bit of effort and time (at least for me!) to ruminate upon such things and offer something constructive without going too far towards fantasy. The end goal has to be a practical, realizable, product with marketplace appeal that is as broad as possible while remaining true to the vision that informs the whole product line.

I am not at all surprised that the development process is as far along as it is, and I hope my comments, and those of others with constructive feedback, will help to inform discussion for future products. I would have liked to have had the opportunity to comment at an earlier stage of design, especially with respect to the user interface/cosmetics, perhaps with the aid of an engineering line drawing of the front panel concept, though I recognize there are potential pitfalls to exposing such deliberations, and you cannot design based on what's effectively an external committee (a distributed, virtual camel?)


Regards,

Syncytial.




James Tanner

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 18441
  • The Demo is Everything!
    • http://www.bryston.com
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #50 on: 3 Aug 2020, 01:48 am »
James,

Thank you... my comments have been brewing ever since your initial post, and it does take a fair bit of effort and time (at least for me!) to ruminate upon such things and offer something constructive without going too far towards fantasy. The end goal has to be a practical, realizable, product with marketplace appeal that is as broad as possible while remaining true to the vision that informs the whole product line.

I am not at all surprised that the development process is as far along as it is, and I hope my comments, and those of others with constructive feedback, will help to inform discussion for future products. I would have liked to have had the opportunity to comment at an earlier stage of design, especially with respect to the user interface/cosmetics, perhaps with the aid of an engineering line drawing of the front panel concept, though I recognize there are potential pitfalls to exposing such deliberations, and you cannot design based on what's effectively an external committee (a distributed, virtual camel?)


Regards,

Syncytial.




Hi

Recognize that front panel layout as well as internal positioning of each module has a lot to do with making sure the signal paths and grounding circuits as well as power supply shielding are optimized for low noise and low distortion performance.

james

Syncytial

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 14
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #51 on: 3 Aug 2020, 04:24 am »
Hi

Recognize that front panel layout as well as internal positioning of each module has a lot to do with making sure the signal paths and grounding circuits as well as power supply shielding are optimized for low noise and low distortion performance.

james

James,

Yes, that's understood, especially in the context of sharing sub-assemblies between devices. That "practical" aspect to component design does constrain you in how the internal components are arranged and interconnected, which in turn is reflected in front and back panel layouts. Engineering for results trumps visual aesthetics, particularly if it's not a ground-up design from a blank page.


Regards,

Syncytial.

fbny71

Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #52 on: 3 Aug 2020, 12:36 pm »
...Inclusion of a tape/processing loop is probably asking too much...

Missing tape loop is the only thing keeping my BP-17 put when this comes out!

James Tanner

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 18441
  • The Demo is Everything!
    • http://www.bryston.com
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #53 on: 3 Aug 2020, 02:19 pm »
James,

I posted this in the AudioCircle thread, but thought I'd send it to you as an email as well, largely to provide a higher resolution image as an attachment. I expect your development is far enough along that substantial modification is unlikely, but feedback is useless if it's not offered...  ;)

------------------------------------------------------------------

My thoughts about the BP-18…

For context, I have the following as part of my main hifi, plus two other full systems and a few headphone-only setups…

Bryston BP-17
Bryston BDP-2
Bryston BOT-1
Bryston BHA-1
Bryston 7B3 (x2)
Bryston Middle-T (passive)

There are a couple of pieces that I’d like to add from the Bryston lineup, but the system performs very well as it is and gets a lot of use.

Hi David – my answers below


BP-18 aesthetics:

I’d appreciate the visual indication of volume, either through a single pinpoint LED on the volume knob, or with a ring of pinpoint LEDs around the volume knob. I have a Shanling A2.1 integrated amplifier that has the latter, and it’s quite successful. I’ve attached a poor phone-quality photo - it’s better looking in real life (no LED flare, etc.), as it’s functionally useful without being blinding at night (it’s in the bedroom.)

Yes the BP18 has separate pin point LED’s surrounding the volume knob - so only one LED is illuminated at a time.


Having user-settable illumination levels, with the option for full-dark, and auto-dark after a defined interval would be great. It’d also be appreciated if the volume LED could optionally be left on (at a preferred illumination level) while the others were dimmed or off entirely. Probably separate illumination control of the volume LED(s) would be best.

Yes the LED’s and the Display can have their intensity controlled – from light up my room so I can take pictures at midnight to fully Dark.

The front panel of the BP-18 is very busy, and I’d prefer to see it cleaned up. I prefer a minimalistic aesthetic, while providing all the useful feedback a user needs. I’d like to see fewer rows of buttons & LEDs. Two rows, one for input selection, and one for other functions, grouped sensibly, to the right of the display, matched aesthetically to existing current gear (e.g. BP-17, BCD-3, BDA-3.) The display of sampling rate etc. could then be accommodated in the space to the left of the volume knob, using the “classic” layout as found on the BDA-3, optionally with smaller (pinpoint) LEDs. Choice of LED colour should respect existing Bryston conventions (ideally user selectable) and I’d prefer volume indication to use a distinctive colour - e.g. red for volume, with green for source/function indication.

I’m open to associating the mute button and power with the volume control, but not fully convinced. I’d need to see a revised layout, ideally with a higher quality photo to make a final assessment. It might make sense to have mute and bypass buttons/indicators be the ones associated with volume, and separate the power function. LEDs for mute & bypass (or power) might look better if they were beside the label (on the "outside" relative to the knob) and not between the label and the volume LEDs.

The cosmetics and button placement are really an outcome of the best placement of the internal components to optimize noise and distortion. Function before Form.

I don’t care for the detail around the headphone jack - there again I’d prefer a clean jack with minimal involvement of the front panel. I’d pair it with a visually similar IR sensor and pair them symmetrically below the display (cf the BP-17.)

The headphone jack is like it is because we are thinking about offering a Balanced XLR connector as well at some point and wanted the larger hole available on the front panel.

I’d relocate the BP-18 PRE-AMPLIFIER silkscreen, as it’s awkward where it’s currently placed and initially looks to be associated with the headphone jack, but offset improperly. It might end up over the sampling rate LED group to the left of the volume knob.

BP-18 Functions & Implementation:

I think you’ve chosen an excellent combination of inputs, allowing you to leverage development for your other platforms (good engineering practice!) and maintain a high degree of versatility while offering the benefits of internal coupling (avoids interconnect costs and “issues”), and reduced cost due to the single chassis and power supply savings. I would prefer having more than a single USB input - can an external USB hub be used to allow multiple storage devices, without compromise?

Not sure on that I will ask.

Is there provision for internal storage - i.e. spinning HD or SSD?

No space for that so you would use a Thumbdrive or rotary drive or better yet the Ethernet with a NAS.

I am slightly wary that the Pi may prove to be the limiting factor (in real or perceived terms), and it’d be great (if feasible) if the BP-18 could be offered with the equivalent of the BDA-3’s (or it’s successor’s) capabilities as an option. The rest of the BP-18 appears to be class-leading, and while the Pi allows for reasonable-cost implementation, it isn’t necessarily an ideal solution for large collections. I’m quite willing to be wrong about this though. 

Yes the cost would increase drastically if we included the same digital capabilities of the BDP-3 and the way we have implemented the the Pi’s digital function I think customers will find excellent in performance.

The modularity is welcome, assuming it’s the basis for reasonable user selection of capabilities or meaningful upgrades.

Yes things change in digital annually so hopefully this approach gives us a leg up on these issues.

The outputs being only XLR is a bit troubling, as it reduces perceived versatility. While it may be possible to adapt to RCA/unbalanced passively, the output level may be restrictive depending upon the amplifier(s) used. It shouldn’t be assumed that a Bryston amplifier will always follow, much as that might be the ideal case. Having one set of outputs at a user-selectable fixed/variable level would be appreciated. That allow for connection to a BHA-1 in order to accommodate “balanced” headphones, electrostatics, etc. I’m presuming the BHA-1 will still outperform the BP-18 headphone output (at least in power), though the comment about the BP-18 headphone drive quality is encouraging. Inclusion of a tape/processing loop is probably asking too much!

Yes we looked at a single ended output connection but wanted to keep the BP18 fully Balanced from input to output so decided to allow the customer to use an adapter or a adapter cable (which we make) was the better option given that most customers at this level use Balanced lines. The headphone section in the BP-18 is much improved over the previous headphone sections in our other preamps. The measurements on the headphone output are exceptional but as you say not as powerful as the BHA separate headphone unit. I think we can supply a variable and a parallel output on the XLR outputs – I will check.

The inclusion of Bypass and Invert functions is an excellent choice - again considering versatility and marketability/perception.

Agreed but phase polarity is a bit of a guessing game.


The lack of a digital output is, perhaps, slightly unfortunate, and I presume it’s because there’s no ADC for the analogue inputs, as well as the quality of the inbuilt DAC that it’s deemed to be unnecessary. Perhaps a USB connection could allow for output from digital sources? Considering this is an analogue preamp with inbuilt DAC and streamer, this seems very minor to me.

We did not want an ADC in the analog circuit path.

Inclusion of WiFi & Bluetooth, even if it’s an external dongle (potentially preferable, due to upgradability to accommodate evolving standards) would be very worthwhile. WiFi & Bluetooth capability should allow for reception of signals (e.g. streamed from a phone or tablet) and transmission (to wireless headphones or speakers) using the latest quality WiFi & Bluetooth standards.

Yes there are numerous Bluetooth and WiFI dongles available that you could implement in the P1-4.

I’m curious about the perceived audio performance compared to the BP-26 and the BP-17. It’s been mentioned that the spatial presentation between those two is different, and they do have somewhat different character - we’re not quite at the “wire with gain” stage yet. How would you compare the BP-18? It being fully balanced throughout will be something of a selling point, though the actual impact on objective performance will depend on the implementation. There is a certain “camp” that elevates objective performance using the suite of traditional measurements above all else, and in amplifiers that often comes down to bringing noise and distortion down to almost immeasurably low levels, which is indicative of engineering effort, but may go beyond what’s actually meaningful when listening to music.

So the way I see our preamps currently is the BP-26 offers a ‘pure’ analog preamp.  The BP17 is an analog preamp with a few Digital sources (Optical and Coax). The BP18 is more a Digital preamp with 2 analog sources. Measurement wise each preamp is a neutral as we know how to make so in most cases it comes down to the feature set our customer prefers. 

That being said I would say sonically the BP26 has a more forward soundstage presentation and transients are fast and forward. The BP17 is probably a more neutral sounding preamp frequency wise and the sound stage spreads back and away from the speakers. With the BP18 I am still in the early stages of my listening but I would say the thing I noticed immediately is a further expansion of the soundstage.


While I am tentatively in the group that believes that there’s limited benefit of digital replay at very high bitrates, and any benefit is typically substantially outweighed by the recording and mastering processes (which include aesthetic choices as well as technical concerns), the market does respond to the inclusion of very high bitrate playback as an indicator of quality, so it’s vital that any digital piece accommodates the perceived markers of quality. Note that I acknowledge the actual merit of recording and processing audio at higher bitrates in the professional realm, to avoid compromising the end result when released at “sensible” bitrates. I say this as someone that has extensive former experience recording professionally, as well as being an active consumer of recorded and live music.

I agree that the Mastering side of the music reproduction should be done at higher bitrates – generally 96/24 and the delivery system to our homes at 44. 1/16Bit will work nicely.  So much of the performance  is determined by the Mastering quality and not the delivery system.

On the whole, the BP-18 looks like an excellent addition to the lineup, and while I’m unlikely to purchase one, given that I’m already well down the road with quality separates and I need more analogue inputs (at least in my main system) I hope it entices more people to join the Bryston family, and enjoy the highest quality reproduction of music - which is presumably why we’re all here… 

Yes I think the integrating of these systems keeps the initial costs down and provides a more compact option for those customers that see the merit in such an approach.


Regards,

« Last Edit: 4 Aug 2020, 05:23 pm by James Tanner »

Sasha

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 541
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #54 on: 3 Aug 2020, 05:00 pm »
Hi folks,

Have the prototype home this weekend for some tests so hope we will soon be able to move forward.





Check out the measurements!




Hi James,

The diagram in the upper right corner, what does it represent, does it show harmonic distortion and second and third harmonic being at -110dB?
If so, under what conditions was this measurement taken ans does it indicate that BP-18 actually measures better than BDA-3?

Thanks,
Sasha

James Tanner

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 18441
  • The Demo is Everything!
    • http://www.bryston.com
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #55 on: 3 Aug 2020, 08:31 pm »






GeAllan70

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 20
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #56 on: 3 Aug 2020, 11:00 pm »
Nice!!!

 :thumb:

rmurray

Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #57 on: 4 Aug 2020, 10:40 am »
 Is there a polarity reverse feature  on the BP-18...thanks  ? :scratch:

James Tanner

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 18441
  • The Demo is Everything!
    • http://www.bryston.com
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #58 on: 4 Aug 2020, 11:42 am »
Is there a polarity reverse feature  on the BP-18...thanks  ? :scratch:

Hi

Yes on the provided remote.

james

James Tanner

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 18441
  • The Demo is Everything!
    • http://www.bryston.com
Re: BRYSTON BP-18
« Reply #59 on: 4 Aug 2020, 01:34 pm »
Hi James,

The diagram in the upper right corner, what does it represent, does it show harmonic distortion and second and third harmonic being at -110dB?
If so, under what conditions was this measurement taken ans does it indicate that BP-18 actually measures better than BDA-3?

Thanks,
Sasha

Hi Sasha - from engineering:

Those are the analog inputs as indicated on the bottom of the picture as well as the conditions.

james