[Mag]

Another question James,

I use the analog out of the BCD-1 and i let the SP2 redigitilize the analog in (not using the bypass)...in order to get a 2.1 out of the SP2 (need my sub, fronts are THX 80Hz).
I also get better results than if i let the SP2 get a bitstream from the BCD-1... even if it gets AD and then DA convertions...
Am i right doing that way ?

A possible problem as a result of having restored some cd's, is that converting  some recordings back to digital may result in too much sampling as the digital conversion would most likely up convert some more. It would also add some jitter but being that the jitter level is very low out of the BCD-1 you probably won't even notice.

I only see this as a possible problem with some re-mastered recordings. In that it may make the highs too shrill, sharp or ear piercing at loud volume levels.

[MOZ]

Brucek, i believe i have already tried this long time ago and the problem is that you don't have any filtering (you get full range, not just sub info !). My next moove will definitively be on new "full range" speakers..

[brucek]

i have already tried this long time ago and the problem is that you don't have any filtering (you get full range, not just sub info

Yep, I added an external analog crossover before the sub that I switch in and out when I change to bypass. Most subs have an internal low pass filter that you can switch in and out for this duty.... To me, the main reason for the SP2 is the analog bypass..........

brucek

[traveler]

test

[rydenfan]

James, is their any idea of MSRP for each level of player yet? and is there an expected timeframe for release?

[James Tanner]

James, is their any idea of MSRP for each level of player yet? and is there an expected timeframe for release?

Hi,

There is still a ton of software to do so we are saying 6 months out at this point.

No idea on pricing other than I know the video side addition will be in the $2000 to $2500 range over and above the cost of version 2.

james

[MOZ]

Hi James,

I'm being asked about DSD decoding thru HDMI in ?
Is that scheduled for the SP3 ?

[martyc]

hi james, when i saw the photo of the sp3 i was very disappointed. i had expected a larger version of the sp2, larger display etc.. i love the sp2 faceplate, the look of the sp2 buttons with leds above them in the square cutout along the faceplate. i know all things must change.i guess my question is why such a drastic change. i cant speak for anyone else ,but i really like the existing bryston look.when i look at the sp3 photos my eyes are drawn to the groove in the middle then i look up and down like its 2 separate components instead of one solid faceplate, maybe its just me..... also i could not tell if the sp3 had the leds in the middle of the buttons ,but as i said i like the sp2 style buttons and overall faceplate ,,,, and please use green instead of blue for display etc.. this of course is my opinion but i think green is easier to read and easier on the eyes ,and as someone else pointed out it matches our amps. thx, mc.

[gingellr]

Personally i like the look of the sp3 with the grove in the middle as that matches the current design of the power amps, and i think the sp2 looks a little dated compared to the sp3 which has a more modern styling.

I do agree though that the led's/display probably would look better green to also match the current amps.

But as you say, this is only my personal opinion and i am sure we all have different ideas.

Richard

[martyc]

Personally i like the look of the sp3 with the grove in the middle as that matches the current design of the power amps, and i think the sp2 looks a little dated compared to the sp3 which has a more modern styling.

I do agree though that the led's/display probably would look better green to also match the current amps.

But as you say, this is only my personal opinion and i am sure we all have different ideas.

Richard

im not sure what you are comparing the sp2 to call it looking dated.  what equipment are you comparing the sp2 that makes it look dated. i think it looks better than anything else out there . also i want my pre/amp and amps to match but iwant my pre amp to have its own look and stand out

[gingellr]

As I said was comparing the sp2 to the sp3.

The sp2 does look nice, just think the sp3 looks better.
Again just my personal opinion.

[alexone]

 James,

 Bryston will offer at least two instead of three versions of the sp3. correct?

 alex.

[flom]

I would have dreamt to see a Trinnov licence embedded in SP3...

http://www.trinnov-audio.com/news.php

[James Tanner]

 James,

 Bryston will offer at least two instead of three versions of the sp3. correct?

 alex.

Hi Alex,

Based on the feedback we got at the recent CEDIA show from our dealers I think we are going to offer 2 models instead of 3 of the SP3.

The Audio Version will have 8 HDMI in and 2 OUT and switch Audio only.

The 2nd version will have the same inputs but switch Audio and Video.

james

[scratch17]

Hi James:

I have a few suggestions, which I'd humbly like to present to you.

1. Most pre/pro marketing is aimed at the video segment of the market. That segment
requires 7.1 audio.

James, you state that the SP3 will be first and foremost a product concerned with audio
performance. SACD and DVD-Audio are either stereo or 5.1 formats. I believe that music
(with and without video) on Blu Ray will primarily remain a 5.1 format, at least for the
next few years. That means a correct 5.1 surround speaker placement must also be supported
by the SP3.

I am not aware of a pre/pro that allows both a complete 5.1 and a 7.1 setup in the same room,
with the correct surround speaker placement required by the surround mode of the source material.
I suggest that Bryston is in an ideal position to rectify this problem with the SP3.

To correctly implement both a 5.1 and a 7.1 setup in one room, the pre/pro must offer
dual outputs for the surround speakers. One set of outputs would be for the 7.1 surrounds
which are placed to the side of the listening position. The second set would be utilized for the 5.1
surrounds, which would be placed in the traditional rear surround speaker position.

The surround back speakers used for 7.1 material should be automatically muted when the pre/pro
has a 5.1 source. And, of course, the unused mode's surrounds should be muted as well, or both
the 5.1 and 7.1 surrounds would play simultaneously. This would ruin the whole purpose of having
both setups in one room.

Since the SP3 has tape loops which have stereo outputs, a pair of these could be
configured for the 5.1 surrounds. Therefore, no additional physical outputs would need to
be added to the SP3. All switching, muting and output configurations could be implemented in
software.

2. Offer an expansion module that has 8 channels of ADAT optical 24/96 inputs
(under S/MUX), 8 balanced TRS inputs, and a Firewire output. You could also
consider a DB-25 connector for the 8 channels of analog audio input.

With these options, the SP3 would then be the ideal front end for a DAW
as an audio interface. It would have audiophile quality conversion, balanced inputs
and outputs, and built in video.

I believe that in a few years, all music will be encoded in Dolby True HD or DTS MA Lossless
format (whether for release on Blu Ray disc or as a download). This will make a pre/pro
with these codecs a mandatory item in all studios.

There is not one audio interface on the small studio market with HDMI audio/video, and
advanced codec support. If Bryston were to release a 'version 4' of the SP3 with these options, I believe
you would grab a huge share of this market.

Should you feel that adding an audio interface module would be too much, there is a
compromise that could still quite easily get the SP3 into the studio market. Simply make
the multiple coaxial and optical inputs configurable in software as a single multichannel input.

This would let a studio with an existing audio audio interface to connect digitally to the SP3
and use it as a front end for its digital audio workstation software.

Steven.

[James Tanner]

Hi Steven,

Thank you for your input. I think there is a lot of misunderstanding about 5.1 and 6.1 or 7.1 speaker placement.

In all the studios I have been in there is no such thing as SIDE speakers. The 'REAR' speakers are placed at 110 degrees from the front and the 'BACK' speakers are placed, depending on one or two speakers, directly behind the head or spead to each side of the head for coverage purposes.

Correct me if I am misinformed but a proper 6.1 or 7.1 setup is simply a matter of adding one or two BACK speakers to an existing 5.1 setup?

james

[scratch17]

James:

You are correct about the great confusion about 5.1, 6.1 and 7.1 speaker placement.

However, I am sorry, but with all due respect, you are incorrect when you state "there is no such thing as SIDE speakers".

Check out this URL:

 http://www.audioholics.com/education/audio-formats-technology/thx-select-and-thx-ultra2-certification-general-questions/thx-select-and-thx-ultra2-certification-general-questions-page-2

THX 7.1 surrounds are supposed to be placed at 90 degrees to the listening position, not at 110 degrees (which is the only correct position for 5.1 music). A pair of surround 'back' speakers are required as well. They can be placed on the back wall together or slightly apart from one another. Their orientation and placement on the back wall depends on whether they are conventional, dipolar or biplolar.

Both sets of surround speakers ideally should be placed up on the wall, angled slightly down toward the listeners.

The bottom line is that for movies, surround sound diffusion, not precise imaging is paramount (sorry, I couldn't resist the pun).

Quoting  Practical-Home-Theater-Guide.com,

"Unlike the front speakers, the job of the surrounds in a home theater is to create a cloud of non-localized sound that envelops the viewer. It is this diffused rear sound field, which actually makes you feel like you are in the middle of the movie action."

Note that both sites show side placement of surrounds for 7.1 movies.

For 5.1 music, 110 degree rear surround is the only correct speaker placement.

Yes, you can put the 7.1 surrounds at 110 degrees and compromise on movie surround placement if music is more important to you. Or you can place the surrounds at the correct side position for movies, but this completely ruins the rear image of 5.1 music.

Why should you have to compromise?

If a CE manufacturer expects a consumer to pay $2000 or more for a preamp/processor, he or she should be able to expect to be provided with the ability to correctly play back multichannel music as well as movie soundtracks. So far, there isn't one CE manufacturer that makes a pre/pro with which one can achieve this simple requirement.

James, Bryston is on the right track with the SP3. I believe that if Bryston implemented and properly marketed this simple feature, you'd blow the market away.
 
Steven

[James Tanner]

Hi Steven,

OK I see your point.

I have to say though that THX may have a recommended positioning but in my opinion I feel the Dolby and DTS recommended positions are much more like I see in recoding and film scoring studios.

http://www.dolby.com/consumer/home_entertainment/roomlayout2.html

As for the non directional aspect of surround movie mixes I am not a sound recording engineer but I find more and more movie sound tracks are using discrete sounds to specific speakers to create surround effects. I think the ability to use the surrounds as 'direct' or 'ambient' sources makes a lot of sense. I think in the past where Dolby Pro Logic only allowed for non discrete sources recording engineers were forced to view the surrounds as fill only. Today with discrete sound sources available the ability to play with surround effects has improved substantially.

It is good food for thought though and I will check with a few major music/movie scoring engineers I know and get their feedback.

james
 

[ted_b]

I use both setups:5.1 (in ITU setup, direct radiating identical SP Tech Revelations/Continuums dedicated for hirez music) and 7.1 (with classic 90 degree and 150 degree wall/sloped ceiling mounted dipoles for movies).  It takes up some real estate but gives me the best of each.  7.1 is not just 5.1 with back speakers, as Steven points out.   Yes, the discrete 5.1 and 7.1 movie sound codecs are now full-range.  But I will add that to use direct radiators for 7.1 can be slightly problematic when trying to create a diffuse soundfield for multiple movie viewers.  Direct sides and/or rears can blast out or at least drown out those folks significantly off center.  Not a huge deal, but one worth thinking about.  For 5.1 hirez music...I dont care about off center listeners, it's more about my solo "sweetspot" concern anyway.

[scratch17]

teb_b points out:

to use direct radiators for 7.1 can be slightly problematic when trying to create a diffuse soundfield for multiple movie viewers.

Agreed. That's why I wish I could use four THX Ultra2 certified dipoles for movies and my Apogee ribbons for music playback.

Right now, I have to compromise. Since no one makes a pre/pro that lets me setup both 5.1 and 7.1 properly, I still haven't upgraded my Marantz SR-8500 receiver.

Currently, I have a 5.0 setup that I use for both music and movies. My main speakers are Apogee Mini Grands. They have subs built in to their bases, and use an active crossover. I have Apogee Centaur Minors in the rear and an Apogee Persius LCR center channel speaker.

I run all of my Apogees in full range mode, with no sub in my receiver's speaker setup. I never have bass management issues, in case anyone wonders. The M-Gs subs produce bass down to 25 hz (-3db).

Steven