[Tony1]

Is there a big difference in sound quality between the coax digital output vs the 2-chan IC?  I read all the positive reviews but curious which output people were basing their reviews on.

Thanks

Tony

[jethro]

Tony,

I don't have a BCD-1, but I would assume that the reviews are mostly based on the 2 channel IC because the sound quality using a digital coax output would depend on the external DAC being used which could be any brand and model.

HTH, Steve

[Mag]

Yes, the reviews are based on the analog outs.

When I first got my BCD-1, I listened with toslink to see if I could tell the difference, and I could. The analog is better. 

[denjo]

Yes, the reviews are based on the analog outs.

When I first got my BCD-1, I listened with toslink to see if I could tell the difference, and I could. The analog is better. 

Hi Mag

Just curious with your observation and wonder what TOSLINK you use to copare with the analog out? I have experimented with a cheap TOSLINK and Nordost's top-of-the line White Light GLass and found that the quality of the TOSLINK makes a HUGE diffference to the extent that a blind test between the analog out and TOSLINK would be practically and audibly be indistinguishable!


In another thread, the point was raised that the TOSLINK should never ever be used in favor of analog, I am also curious with such a vehment stand. The advantage of optical out (despite the conversion) is that it is free of RFI and to some (most) systems this is a huge advantage.

Best Regards
Dennis

[Mag]

I just did a quick re-test. Using my Yamaha RX-V2200 for pre-amp. For analog I'm using RCA IC, Cardas Crosslink II

First test was comparing RCA Digital High Performance toslink cable.

 Playing ELP- Tarkus, Show that Never Ends. Slight difference in favor of analog. Bass has more weight.

Second test using Monster interlink Lightspeed 100.

Almost identical, Toslink has just a tad more sharpness.

Note: my comparison 6 months ago I had an equalizer in audio chain, which has since been removed.

 

[James Tanner]

Hi All,

What must be understood here is, as Steve says above, using the Digital outputs on the BCD -1 (Coax -Optical -AES EBU) means your using the CD Player as a Drive only. You are bypassing the internal DAC and the Class A Discrete Analog circuits in the CD Player.

So the quality of the DAC and Analog section in the Receiver or Processor and the sophistication of the Reclocking and Resampling of the DAC in the Receiver or Processor determines the quality level. Not to mention the attention to detail in the power supply sections throughout the Digital and Analog circuits.

One of the things the reviewer in Absolute Sound mentions in his review of the CD Player is " Why you would ever want to bypass the DAC in the Bryston CDPlayer is beyond me".

As for Toshlink it does have the claimed advantage of immunity to noise, ground loops etc. but the conversion process at the sending and recieving end does create more jitter. From someone who is much more of an expert on these things than myself states: "Optical conversion --- Toslink is the worst of the interfaces because the electrical to optical and optical to electrical conversion adds to the jitter. Toslink creates additional stages that the clock must pass through, picking up jitter due to power/ground noise and uncertainty of when the edge (logic change) transitions get detected."


james

[Sasha]

My experience was that Toslink creates much more jitter, very noticeable when compared to other types of digital connection in the same transport and DAC combination, resulting in significant degradation of sound, exactly along the lines of what James stated.
This is true for any transport and DAC I tried, including some 10K+ combinations.
What is to be accomplished by using BCD-1 as transport only, unless you have some extremely good DAC you love?
Why not get just a transport in this case, Bryston one will be coming out I believe?
In regard to BCD-1 on its own and the sound quality, be ready to dish out considerably more to get better performance.

[smerlas]

Tony,

My BCD-1 is interconnected by way of the balanced interconnects in my system.  I never bothered with the "digital output" which is intended to be fed into a separate DAC.  I went directly to balanced over RCA based on the benefits associated with balanced interconnects.

Smerlas

[Tony1]

James

The only reason why I am inquiring about coax is that my system sounds better in surround mode. I have a SP1.7 so using the SP1.7 dac will degrade the sound? Hoping to get the SP3 whenever it comes out, will the sound be compromised if I used the SP3's DAC vs BCD-1?

thanks

Tony

[James Tanner]

James

The only reason why I am inquiring about coax is that my system sounds better in surround mode. I have a SP1.7 so using the SP1.7 dac will degrade the sound? Hoping to get the SP3 whenever it comes out, will the sound be compromised if I used the SP3's DAC vs BCD-1?

thanks

Tony

Hi Tony,

We are currently working on the SP3 but generally Surround Processor are optimized for Surround decoding and use a 'downmix' mode for Stereo. So generally speaking a PCM dedicated Stereo DAC like in the BCD-1 will perform better than a DD/DTS/Surround DAC.

james

[niels]

Any particular reason why the B100 DA has 2 Toslink and 2 coax ? I realize some dvd recorders for instance only has Toslink out though....

[James Tanner]

Any particular reason why the B100 DA has 2 Toslink and 2 coax ? I realize some dvd recorders for instance only has Toslink out though....

Hi Niels,

Yes just to provide the option given some cable boxes and some DVD's only have optical out.

james