[kas]

I have a great offer on a SP 1.7 processor and would like to hear from owners who had it for a while. What I am most interested in is:

Do I still need to invest in an external DAC? I will be using a Pioneer elite DVD player as a source.
How does it sound when digital circuitry is bypassed?

I am planning on upgrading the unit to SP2 once I get it. Would the upgrade include a SP2 face place?

Will I need to change it in the next 7 years? I need to know how long will I have to keep it before it becomes obselete.

My system includes a Bryston 9BSST, PMC FB1 for the fronts, PMC TB2C for teh center, PMC DB1s for the rear, and PMC TLE1 subwoofer.

Your input is greatly appreciated since I have to make a decision within a few days.

thanks,

kas

[MOZ]

Hi,

Got a SP1.7 for 2 years now and enjoyed it a lot !
It is a superb 2 channel preamp, very realistic and full of life...
I'm using it both digitaly and the analog way, and even if it sounds much better the analog way, the digital 2 channel is quite something !
In multichannel, it is on par with other processors and i have big hopes on the SP2 version (if James can provide the upgrades ) !

I'm trying a LEXICON MC12 lately, and, even if it's much better in digital multichannel (what a fast calculator !), i find my SP1.7 more inspired with music 2 channel...
You won't regret your SP1.7, Bryston's staff is trying to put upgrades that insure you not having to change...

The SP2 will be upgradable in order to get DOLBY+, True HD and DTS-HD in hard decoding, Bryston will provide an HDMI in/out (or i-link) and they are working on an EQ to use digitally...

My word : just go for it !

[Slingshotx]

I'm guessing on the Bryston forum we may not be entirely impartial, however I've owned several pre-amps including Rotel's and TAG's and the SP1.7 is easily the best pre-amp especially for music.

Interestingly there's another thread about DAC's and on there I've commented on my Pioneer 757 sounding awful when used as a CD player using the SP1.7 DAC, so you may want to think about reserving some money for an external DAC (or possibly a good CD player).

With a reasonable player the SP1.7 DACS in stereo actually seem pretty good to me and I now use them instead of the players DACS.

Cheers

Slingshot

[nicolasb]

The SP1.7 does what it does very well. The question is whether it does enough for you.

With hindsight I really wish I hadn't bought one, but that's largely because I ran out of money when putting my system together and didn't have enough left to be able to install heavy-duty acoustic treatments in my living room. Not being able to do that makes some sort of room-EQ system absolutely critical, and the SP1.7 doesn't have one.

The lack of Dolby Headphone is also a real pain for me, though I dare say it doesn't matter much to most people. Less significant niggles include the lack of video switching and the absence of any on-screen display (unless you fork out for the imminently redundant SPV-1), and lack of Dolby PLIIex (although this is supported on the SP2).

James Tanner says we will "eventually" get some sort of basic parametric EQ system on the SP2 (which could be used for primitive room correction), but he's very reticent about when; given how much time elapsed between Bryston's original announcement of the Aureus DSP upgrade for the SP1.7 and the time when it actually became available, I wouldn't beat all surprised if EQ on the SP2 takes 2 or 3 years to show up.

We also have no idea when any other upgrades for the SP2 might actually become available. We've been promised HDMI audio input, support for high-definition audio formats, etc. but no timetable. Again, they could be years away.

The basic sound quality of the SP1.7 is very good: clear, transparent, and neutral (especially in the front channels). It's not on a par with the Lexicon MC12B, but it beats most cheaper devices, and is comfortably ahead of (say) the Arcam AV8. The quality of the analogue bypass on the SP1.7 isn't quite as good as a high-end dedicated pre-amp, but it's miles ahead of that of any other home cinema processor I've listened to (the MC12B included) - that's probably its strongest feature.

So, basically it comes down to the feature list: if the SP1.7 does everything that you need it to do, you may be sure that it will do everything you need it to do very well.

[nicolasb]

With a reasonable player the SP1.7 DACS in stereo actually seem pretty good to me and I now use them instead of the players DACS.

They're pretty good. I use an Arcam DV27A for CD playback, and it does sound a little better using the player and putting the processor in stereo bypass mode, but not much. The DV27A is probably as good at playing CDs as a dedicated player that costs £800 or so (that's 800 UK pounds). It's certainly a big step up from something like the Pioneer 757.

[MOZ]

Not being able to do that makes some sort of room-EQ system absolutely critical, and the SP1.7 doesn't have one.

EQ is very important in a "living room".
Bryston should REALLY consider this IMPORTANT for the customers like us and, as i told James, i'll be ready to PAY for a decent one (something like the AUDYSSEY MULTI-EQ one (witch is awailable/compatible with the AUREUS chip by the way   )).

Anyway, you can still try an external EQ, like i did with a "Bijou" from AUDIOCONTROL.
This way, it works much much better  

[sikoniko]

I agree on the audessy. that would be a sweet upgrade!

[Slingshotx]

OK I'm probably missing the point here but if EQ is available then it will only be available digitally and not via the bypass. I would have thought the bypass was one of the primary reasons to buy an SP1.7, well it was for me anyway.

So if we get EQ will everyone start using digital inputs so that EQ is available on all inputs ?

Slingshot

P.S. I should have mentioned earlier that I'm more interested in music than movies, if in a movie I can clearly hear the dialog (which the SP seems to do well) and the sub booms in somewhere about the right place I'm fairly happy, I don't need video switching, PLIIx 7.1 etc, so the SP1.7 suits me fine.

[MOZ]

OK I'm probably missing the point here but if EQ is available then it will only be available digitally and not via the bypass. I would have thought the bypass was one of the primary reasons to buy an SP1.7, well it was for me anyway.

So if we get EQ will everyone start using digital inputs so that EQ is available on all inputs ?

Hi,

The bypass thing is really a MAJOR point for the Bryston preamp, but you won't be able to use a digital EQ on an analog way.
You could do it externaly with a 2 channel EQ... that's the only way !

[georgev]

I agree with James Tanner that Room EQ is not the be all and end all to a great HT.  I think proper speaker placement would give you the best sound.  It takes a little work but the results are noticeable.  I for one hope that if Bryston includes Room EQ that it can be disabled.

I think the analog bypass is the strongest feature of the SP1.7 and what separates it from the competition.  In multi-channel mode it's comparable to other processors in it's price range.

[Phil A]

I agree with James Tanner that Room EQ is not the be all and end all to a great HT.  I think proper speaker placement would give you the best sound.  It takes a little work but the results are noticeable.  I for one hope that if Bryston includes Room EQ that it can be disabled.

I think the analog bypass is the strongest feature of the SP1.7 and what separates it from the competition.  In multi-channel mode it's comparable to the processor in it's price range.

I agree - analyzed multiple rooms with my RTA, including my own.  Placement and treatments to tame the bad problems are the best way to go.  Almost all of the EQs I've heard introduce some other problem.  I've owned a parametric EQ in the past and played around a great deal.  Like anything else, too much of anything in the way of circuitry is too much.

[MOZ]

EQ has to be done, in you room, by professionnal people that will know what to do or not to do !
I agree with you, if you can avoid EQ it's better, but in a living room, you can't do whatever you want and most of the HT are in living rooms, so it's a good point to give the choice to the consummer.
Like LEXICON, you might be able to get or not the EQ thing (like the V4EQ for the MC12) !
If you want/need it, you buy it, if not... you just stay like you're !

Regarding what is done by others, LEXICON, MERIDIAN, KRELL, ANTHEM... it could be a good point to offer that opportunity, if not, the competition will be harder for Bryston.

See ANTHEM that choosed to put a great scaler (VXP Gennum) on board of is last D2... and they are certainly working on an EQ !

[nicolasb]

I agree with James Tanner that Room EQ is not the be all and end all to a great HT.  I think proper speaker placement would give you the best sound.

No, come on, I was being serious. Speaker placement plus professionally installed acoustic treatments costing thousands of dollars is the best solution, sure. Simply moving the speakers around barely scratches the surface of the problem.

[sikoniko]

EQ has to be done, in you room, by professionnal people that will know what to do or not to do !
I agree with you, if you can avoid EQ it's better, but in a living room, you can't do whatever you want and most of the HT are in living rooms, so it's a good point to give the choice to the consummer.
Like LEXICON, you might be able to get or not the EQ thing (like the V4EQ for the MC12) !
If you want/need it, you buy it, if not... you just stay like you're !

Regarding what is done by others, LEXICON, MER ...

I agree here. Whether it works or not for each situation, the option should be available. If one can afford to do 50k in treatments, then EQ won't be needed, but if only minimal treatment can be done, it might actually help.

Look at all the people who love the velodyne DD's and the BFD's! there is some fact to its benefits.