[Daygloworange]

sorry to join the thread late...seems like there's a lot of philosophies out there regarding this...but I've always thought that, TO ME...
The most important is the SPEAKERS!!!  no matter how good your source, pre and amps are, if you have a speakers that is not transparent, etc...How will you know what the sound of those components are????

Let's invert your thought: plug SOTA speakers into a very cheap reciever & the sound will make you run from the room.  In this case you will hear EXACTLY "...what is the sound of those components..." & you will not like it one bit.   

Assemble a top quality front end w/ good but moderate quality speakers & decent sound can be had. 

I guess it all depends on perspective.

I used the analogy of the speaker/room interface being "where the rubber meets the road" as being the foundation of building a system. I used it for a very important reason.

Ever see an F1 car on racing slicks when it rains? All the potential horsepower, braking, cornering forces are rendered useless because of the rubber/road interface not being ideal.

To make another analogy. Suppose you were to win the lottery and arrange for a supercar test drive session to pick out which supercar had the best performance. Would you take them to a track on a cold, rainy day where you couldn't get any grip out of the tires? How would you know which one had the best performance?

Same with audio. How can you properly choose components without the proper (playback) conditions to properly evaluate the differences?

All components are critical to SOTA performance, but the expression "you can't put the cart before the horse" holds true IMO.

Cheers

[James Romeyn]

Good points...

Yes, the F1 car on slicks looses performance in the rain, but it's completely harmless (& can actually be fun, even for a novice) as long as power is not overused. 

GP slicks on a '59 Beetle causes a flip or the suspension disintigrates at the first hard turn at speed, even w/o throttle.

   

[TONEPUB]

Jeff Dorgay
This question applies to all your hobby & professional experience.  System criteria: 2-ch, digital sources, those rating by your own personal scale in the top 5-10% in audio/musical performance.

The systems are divided into two groups (randomly listed):

Group 1
2. Digital source employing a fixed analog output
3. Top quality analog preamp

Group 2
1. Digital source employing (any type) variable output
2. No analog preamp
3. Source drives the power amp directly

In percent (sum total 100%) how are systems split between Group 1 & Group 2?   

Thanks.

An inquiring mind wants to know.

So far for me, I'm still leaning in the direction of the good preamp with a
good digital source.  The only thing I've ever heard with a fantastic digital
volume control has been the current Wadia products, of which I own a 521
DAC and their 581i player.   I also own a Meridian 808, which I believe has
its volume control in the analog output stage (not sure)  I still have a Benchmark
DAC-1 Pre too, but I believe that also has the volume control in the analog stage.

I prefer the sound of my Naim 555 with the CJ ACT 2 over anything I've heard
after quite some time.

However, Ive tried going digital device direct with about 30 power amps in
the last two years and the only time I liked going digital direct was when
I was using the McIntosh C2300 preamp and MC275 power amp.  IN that
case, using the Wadia DAC or CD player sounded more open and transparent
 going direct.   With a few amps it was a draw and the rest it was worse,
i.e. sounded more closed in, etc, etc.

This has been my experience with "passive" line stages as well as integrated
amps that are really a power amp with some kind of passive volume control.

There can be some magic if the source component and amp mate perfectly.

However, the good preamps I've owned (the CJ, the Aesthetix Callisto signature
and the Nagra PL-L have all sounded more musical in rather than out....  I know
this is counter intuitive, because you would think that adding another box and associated
cables would diminish things, but it's never been the case here.  Though I have to
admit that these are three pretty good linestages....

I always tell people to try it first though, as there can be some magic combinations
out there....

[Steve]

"I guess it all depends on perspective.

I used the analogy of the speaker/room interface being "where the rubber meets the road" as being the foundation of building a system. I used it for a very important reason.

Ever see an F1 car on racing slicks when it rains? All the potential horsepower, braking, cornering forces are rendered useless because of the rubber/road interface not being ideal.

To make another analogy. Suppose you were to win the lottery and arrange for a supercar test drive session to pick out which supercar had the best performance. Would you take them to a track on a cold, rainy day where you couldn't get any grip out of the tires? How would you know which one had the best performance?

Same with audio. How can you properly choose components without the proper (playback) conditions to properly evaluate the differences?

Cheers"

Hi Gents,

I think I know where you are coming from, and I think we are just viewing things from a different perspective.

Personally, let's say speakers A,B,C,D,E speakers all sound pretty good, even excellent in the room. F,G,H,I speakers aren't so good so we can eliminate them. I think right here is where many are "coming from" in their thoughts.

I guess I am already past this point by having already tested several speakers in the room and the synergy is varied, but pretty good, while others, F,G,H,I are pretty poor. Usually, I find there are several speakers, if not more, that can be considered candidates.

 Now the question is which one is really the best speaker for the room? (May have to do back and forth room treatments, testing speakers etc at this point.)

My feeling is that this is where the best, most accurate electronics comes into play.
If we use so so electronics, we will choose speaker C for the room, instead of the best speaker A. It gives the best synergy, so far.
 
But with the best, most accurate electronics, we will chosen A speaker for even better synergy in the room.

That is why I like to start with the preamp/ICs as they are the only components that can be tested for accuracy. (Again, disclosure for those new to the string, I am a manufacturer and build preamps.)

Cheers.

[JLM]

Darren,

I live with single driver speakers, so take the driver control, coherency, and other advantages for granted.  I’m also trying to not “toot that horn” too often.  There is no perfect speaker, so picking the best one is a matter of determining your sensitivities and finding a speaker that matches up to them.


IMO most audiophiles have way over invested in equipment versus their room.  I went decades without a decent room and now have a quite good one.  For those who can't have a good room, I seriously suggest headphones until you can.

[Daygloworange]

I think I know where you are coming from, and I think we are just viewing things from a different perspective.

I think we are much more similar, than dissimilar, as well, which is why I've always said that all the components are critical.

I speak of the speaker/room interface, but to be more specific, if you are using any SOTA speaker, the room is the Achilles heel to properly evaluating anything. Especially with small rooms, which most audiophiles listen to their audio in.

Being a studio guy who loves ambient room (distance mic'd) drum sounds, I can tell you that unless you treat the room, you can put the highest quality drum kit in an untreated "small" ish room, and without gobos (rigid fiberglass panels) at bare minimum, what you record will sound like you're banging on trash can lids. It's pure noise, and intolerable. Add some gobos (even semi-strategically), and some bass trapping, and it is a night and day difference.

No joke.

I can't stress room treatments enough.

Cheers

[anubisgrau]

room

speakers

preamp

poweramp

source

interconnects

[Steve]

"Being a studio guy who loves ambient room (distance mic'd) drum sounds, I can tell you that unless you treat the room, you can put the highest quality drum kit in an untreated "small" ish room, and without gobos (rigid fiberglass panels) at bare minimum, what you record will sound like you're banging on trash can lids. It's pure noise, and intolerable. Add some gobos (even semi-strategically), and some bass trapping, and it is a night and day difference."

I like drums as well as string bass and other instruments.

I see your point but isn't that room pretty poor to begin with? Just asking. Maybe I am assuming the room is pretty good to begin with as I haven't had that problem, at least not that bad. I try to do some basics to the room, like doing an echo test before doing anything else. I do some minimal treatments (knock on wood) like acoustic tile along the walls, but that is inexpensive. But I still feel that treating the room, speaker to room interface, cannot be optimized without great electronics, esp electronics that is bright or too full (usually the case) as this will give a false impression of what is optimum as far as treating the room. Just my opinion.

Cheers.

[Daygloworange]

I see your point but isn't that room pretty poor to begin with?

Yup. You illustrated my whole point.

I try to do some basics to the room, like doing an echo test before doing anything else. I do some minimal treatments (knock on wood) like acoustic tile along the walls, but that is inexpensive.

as they are the only components that can be tested for accuracy.

Steve, you'll appreciate this,    rooms can be measured to maximize their performance as well. 

Cheers

[James Romeyn]

Jeff Dorgay
This question applies to all your hobby & professional experience.  System criteria: 2-ch, digital sources, those rating by your own personal scale in the top 5-10% in audio/musical performance.

The systems are divided into two groups (randomly listed):

Group 1
2. Digital source employing a fixed analog output
3. Top quality analog preamp

Group 2
1. Digital source employing (any type) variable output
2. No analog preamp
3. Source drives the power amp directly

In percent (sum total 100%) how are systems split between Group 1 & Group 2?...

So far for me, I'm still leaning in the direction of the good preamp with a
good digital source...The only thing I've ever heard with a fantastic digital
volume control has been the current Wadia products, of which I own a 521
DAC and their 581i player.   I also own a Meridian 808, which I believe has
its volume control in the analog output stage (not sure)  I still have a Benchmark
DAC-1 Pre too, but I believe that also has the volume control in the analog stage.

I prefer the sound of my Naim 555 with the CJ ACT 2 over anything I've heard
after quite some time.

However, Ive tried going digital device direct with about 30 power amps in
the last two years and the only time I liked going digital direct was when
I was using the McIntosh C2300 preamp and MC275 power amp.  IN that
case, using the Wadia DAC or CD player sounded more open and transparent
 going direct.   With a few amps it was a draw and the rest it was worse,
i.e. sounded more closed in, etc, etc.

This has been my experience with "passive" line stages as well as integrated
amps that are really a power amp with some kind of passive volume control.

There can be some magic if the source component and amp mate perfectly.

However, the good preamps I've owned (the CJ, the Aesthetix Callisto signature
and the Nagra PL-L) have all sounded more musical in rather than out....  I know
this is counter intuitive, because you would think that adding another box and associated
cables would diminish things, but it's never been the case here.  Though I have to
admit that these are three pretty good linestages....

I always tell people to try it first though, as there can be some magic combinations
out there....

Toward the goal of assembling a top quality system, IMHO, the more strongly someone promotes the bypassing of a top quality separate analog preamp the more likely that person is to have not auditioned the advantage/benefit of same (they aren't cheap; starting price $7500).  This is an example of listening experience contradicting what is apparently a moderate to significant quantity of electrical "theory".  From a financial point of view it's understandable why someone would prefer to believe the theory, but to say there's no potential performance advantage is false, IMO.  Believe me, I never had a personal desire to confirm that the next jump up in sound quality was going to cost more money; I always wanted to find a way to get better performance w/o spending money, or spending less.      

I might suggest, as evidence, that readers look at the best systems heard at shows & the stores (rare but there are some) that achieve great sound.  The percentage of the best sounding systems bypassing a reference quality analog preamp in favor of adjusting level in some other fashion is very slim to none.

If the reader's experience contradicts this, just ignore it.  Jeff's mention of "magic combinations" that may be an exception is well taken, though it's noteworthy that the best sound he's heard seems to agree w/ my experience.      

[miklorsmith]

Actually, it's the speaker/room interface that can be easily measured to see how good your overall environment is.  You're testing decay times and in-room response.  It's pretty easy to put your finger on a lot of stuff that's happening that way.

[Steve]

I see your point but isn't that room pretty poor to begin with?

Yup. You illustrated my whole point.

I try to do some basics to the room, like doing an echo test before doing anything else. I do some minimal treatments (knock on wood) like acoustic tile along the walls, but that is inexpensive.

as they are the only components that can be tested for accuracy.

Steve, you'll appreciate this,    rooms can be measured to maximize their performance as well. 

Cheers

Just a question, can they? How do you know the room is actually maximized and not too damped or not damped enough? I think one might be able to get close, but not exactly.

[doug s.]

Doug
Would very much appreciate your listing the rest of the system.  What was the room like?  Was an active analog preamp employed or no?  Was the sum total difference using the Reimyo as a stand-alone vs. the DAC being inserted between the Reimyo digital output & the next component?  Absolutely NO other changes?  Digital connector brand/model?  Exact same outputs: Reimyo analog output vs. DAC output?  My personal experience esp at the highest quality levels is that a thoroughly burned-in stereo input can sound better than another previously unused input on the same preamp.   

The above comparison requires some notes, such as: How much of the overall sound quality of the outboard DAC-based system was determined by the $18k Reimyo being employed as a xport?  The comparison seems major flawed IMO because of this factor.  The DAC-based system absolutely should have employed whatever the poster eventually used for his own transport.  My experience is that xports make a considerable difference (incidentally my two favorite digital systems are one-box).  The whole point of the poster's comparison was to determine, by spending LESS, how did the outboard-DAC-based system perform vs. the Reimyo one-box?  A system adding an outboard DAC to the Reimyo (used as a transport) ADDS cost to the Reimyo one-box system; the outboard DAC system costs more than the Reimyo standalone yet the conclusion is that money was saved.  Is this not a major contradiction?  Does it not completely nullify the whole exercise & prove absolutely nothing useful but rather that the poster produced very slightly worse sound by adding complexity & increasing cost?

The "scam" note seams innapropriate too.  The cost/value of the extra digital connector & the mod is unnacounted for.  I'd imagine no professional performs the mod for a fee & must be DIY only.  Any mod performed by pros for a fee including warranty is COSTLY, has limited warranty & virtually no resale value.  The Reimyo has factory backing & has a listed resale value (though admittedly hugely devalued vs. new).

hi ro,

unfortunately, i don't have any more info re: the rest of the system.  maybe i can get it.  but, as it's my belief that the speaker/amp/room interface will only be improved by insertion of a better source, regardless of whatever speaker/room interface you have, i don't think it's all that relevant.  of course, anyone is free to disagree.   

re: transport, i have not found much difference.  i, too, wondered how much difference would be present if a cheaper transport were being used, other than the remyo.  i suspect possibly some, but not much.  i know i have used my di/o w/any number of transports, widely warying in cost, but none >$2k.  i was yust as happy w/the cheapest as w/the most expensive.  now, if you think transport will make or break a system, i am sure you could find a top-notch transport for <$1k.  the pioneer stable-platter cdp's come to mind...

re: cabling, i get excellent results w/a (now discontinued) $15 radio shack 75 ohm coax spdif cable.  i have tried other "world-beater" cables, admittedly <$250, & couldn't hear any difference...  the $15 rat-shack cable is what i used when comparing my di/o in rim's system yesterday...  i have no idea what the analog out cables were - they were an extra unused pair rim had lying around...

doug s.

[Steve]

Good point, one can get fairly close with measurements, but I am sure we both use the ear as the final determination. That is because although measurements, such as with electronic gear may measure flat, the sound can still be bright, too full, smeary, etched etc. That has been demonstrated many times.

Excellent electronics will help one button things down. If the electronics is accurate, and is a foundation, then one has to worry about the speaker, the room and the interface right. The electronics variable is out of the way.

Take care.

[miklorsmith]

Very true.  The "basic" measurement stuff I'm talking about that the average schmoe can do for a couple hundred bucks isn't sensitive enough to do the kind of speaker design work you refer to.  And, I totally agree the ears are the final arbiter.  What room measurement stuff can do is assign an objective "cause" to what your ears are telling you.

Many times I have thought I had a bass issue but not been able to discern what exactly it is.  When I've followed up with measurements in the room, the cause has been pretty obvious.  Once you know what is going on objectively, it's a lot easier to figure out what to do about it.  I have a bass EQ though, which helps a ton.

Once everything is in proper balance, the true character of the evaluation subject reveals itself naturally.  A side benefit to separately powered/EQ'd bass is that it can be re-balanced to whatever changes in the system rather than being stuck with the results.

[Steve]

That is one good aspect, knowing what a particular problem is in more solid terms. Another simple example is an upper mid resonance problem on a set of speakers. Once one knows the frequency, and severity of the resonance, it is much easier to remedy.

[James Romeyn]

Boy this thread bulked up quick!

[Freo-1]

Good point, one can get fairly close with measurements, but I am sure we both use the ear as the final determination. That is because although measurements, such as with electronic gear may measure flat, the sound can still be bright, too full, smeary, etched etc. That has been demonstrated many times.

Excellent electronics will help one button things down. If the electronics is accurate, and is a foundation, then one has to worry about the speaker, the room and the interface right. The electronics variable is out of the way.

Take care.

I agree, up to a point. The speaker's impedance curve with respect to the frequency domain has a lot to do with the speaker's perceived voicing.  The electronics need to be up to snuff to handle the overall load.

It seems most (not all) of the speakers people agree on as top performers are a bit tough on amps.    They have some pretty wild swings over the audio spectrum. and often provide a low impedance at key points in the audio spectrum.

One of the reasons I think tube amps enjoy support are the output transformers. The ability of transformer to present a steady input to the speaker helps smooth out the sound (especially the 4 ohm nominal speakers). 

[Occam]

..."...I Finally got a chance to put my modded Zhaolu 2.5C up against some
strong competition. This DAC has been modded per post #303 and a few
others here recommended by Kevin. It has the CD DAC chip in it and
the 4562 op amps in the output stage.

I also replaced the power supply filtering with a "Felix" power
conditioner, as described by Paul Kap on many threads at
www.audiocircle.com. In fact, Paul was at this showdown and brought
his Zhaolu 2.0 DAC along to compare also.

So, what did we put it up against? A Remyo CDP-777. We used this as
the transport and just flicked back and forth between the 777 and the
Zhaolu - a very easy compare. Here's a link to a 6-Moons review of
this $17,000 CD player, which some reviewers think Am I picking nits here? Yes, the differences were very subtle and
probably not noticeable at all except that we had a direct A-B
compare via a switch.......

The bottom line, this DAC, which I have maybe $300 into, stood up
incredibly well against a state of the art $17,000 player. Not bad
for this little champ.

The difference between the 2.0 and 2.5C was even more subtle, with a
bit more detail and transparency going to the 2.5C, but I'm sure Paul
will be addressing this in his unit to bring them closer together.

All in all, both of us were very happy with the outcome, and the
owner of the Reimyo was glad that there were differences, but with a
$16,700 difference in price I think I'll stick with the Zhaolu for
now.....

Doug
Would very much appreciate your listing the rest of the system.  What was the room like?  Was an active analog preamp employed or no?  Was the sum total difference using the Reimyo as a stand-alone vs. the DAC being inserted between the Reimyo digital output & the next component?  Absolutely NO other changes?  Digital connector brand/model?  Exact same outputs: Reimyo analog output vs. DAC output?  My personal experience esp at the highest quality levels is that a thoroughly burned-in stereo input can sound better than another previously unused input on the same preamp.   

The above comparison requires some notes, such as: How much of the overall sound quality of the outboard DAC-based system was determined by the $18k Reimyo being employed as a xport?  The comparison seems major flawed IMO because of this factor.  The DAC-based system absolutely should have employed whatever the poster eventually used for his own transport.  My experience is that xports make a considerable difference (incidentally my two favorite digital systems are one-box).  The whole point of the poster's comparison was to determine, by spending LESS, how did the outboard-DAC-based system perform vs. the Reimyo one-box?  A system adding an outboard DAC to the Reimyo (used as a transport) ADDS cost to the Reimyo one-box system; the outboard DAC system costs more than the Reimyo standalone yet the conclusion is that money was saved.  Is this not a major contradiction?  Does it not completely nullify the whole exercise & prove absolutely nothing useful but rather that the poster produced very slightly worse sound by adding complexity & increasing cost?

ro,

I'm not Doug, but it was my modded Zhaolu 2.0c that came in third in the comparisons. The rest of the system was a CAT SL1 Ultimate Mk 2 Preamplifier feeding a prototype Innersound tube amp (unobtainium) feeding Hansen Prince speakers. The cabling, room and its treatments were similarly 'adequate' to say the least. The cabling alone cost more than my whole system. The digital cable used was my Stereovox original model. IMO, the comparisons were quite valid, as both the dacs and the Reimyo analog outputs fed to the CAT (the Reimyo to the constantly used inputs) and were spot on level matched, using the same interconnects. A simple flip of the CAT's toggle changed source. I've no disagreement with BobM's (also a poster here) assessment. The ONLY thing done to my Zhaolu was the coupling caps between dac chip and opamp filters were jumpered and the opamps changed to OPA2107s and a LM4562. In its defense, I left my external Felix at home, and I've been too complacent to upgrade the RCA jacks and put in a BNC for the SPDIF output. (no doubt someone will chime in that an Orimodded or  a Zapfiltered output stage would be better). Certainly the transport quality is very important, but a SB3 with its output inductor chips removed make a very excellent transport.
The Reimyo is a GREAT cdp, but the point I'd like to emphasize is that the cost benefit (depending on ones individual metrics) is amazingly steep, if you know what you're doing and benefited by the many mistakes one has made along the way. Yup, mods from the pros can be expensive, but mods posted right here (like GBB's SB3 mods) can be downright cheap and simple.

As a postscript I'll add that I use an ancient CAT pre, and Bob uses an AudioPrism Mantissa?; all tubular and 'superfluous'.

FWIW,
Paul

[Steve]

Good point, one can get fairly close with measurements, but I am sure we both use the ear as the final determination. That is because although measurements, such as with electronic gear may measure flat, the sound can still be bright, too full, smeary, etched etc. That has been demonstrated many times.

Excellent electronics will help one button things down. If the electronics is accurate, and is a foundation, then one has to worry about the speaker, the room and the interface right. The electronics variable is out of the way.

Take care.

I agree, up to a point. The speaker's impedance curve with respect to the frequency domain has a lot to do with the speaker's perceived voicing.  The electronics need to be up to snuff to handle the overall load.

It seems most (not all) of the speakers people agree on as top performers are a bit tough on amps.    They have some pretty wild swings over the audio spectrum. and often provide a low impedance at key points in the audio spectrum.

One of the reasons I think tube amps enjoy support are the output transformers. The ability of transformer to present a steady input to the speaker helps smooth out the sound (especially the 4 ohm nominal speakers). 

Hi Freo,

     Yes, the amp and source are variables and cannot be a "foundation" by themselves. The only way to find the best is the old fashioned method normally employed; going zigzag between source, amp, speaker, room treatments. That is about all one can do.

As mentioned earlier, only the preamp and ICs can be checked vs wire or "nothing". At least a couple of variables can be eliminated, so fewer components to match, making things easier.

Take care.