Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 51 to 75 of 75
  1. #51
    Forum Regular luvtolisten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    526

    Thanks Everyone!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajani
    The default encoding for iTunes is AAC (which is better than MP3 for the record). Apple Lossless (or any lossless) is better than AAC, but how much better depends on the individual recordings and the quality of the equipment you're listening to the music on. I'd suggest ripping a few of your favourite albums over in Apple Lossless and then comparing them to the original AAC rips.... If the difference is significant enough then you can dedicate your energy to re-ripping your entire collection asap... If not, then you can either re-rip at your own leisure or not at all...
    Thank you Feanor, AA, and Ajani for your input and helping to educate me. Ajani, that is an excellent suggestion and one I intend to follow. Now I don't know which is worse, finding out that I can't tell the difference on my system (it's an ok system,but not as nice as the rest of you folks have), or having to rerip CD's. Reripping CD's doesn't sound so bad now I may sound like I'm whining, but honestly I'm not. I am eager to learn and love this stuff and do appreciate all of you for taking the time to share your knowledge and enlightening me.

  2. #52
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    Auric didn't post today, I hope he got his unit running and just spending some time enjoying the music.

  3. #53
    Forum Regular luvtolisten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by Auricauricle
    Well, the Tercet arrived this afternoon...So far she seems a bit tempermental: The door reopens after it has been reintroduced into the player: I must hold it gently in place for it to remain shut. Discs are not being read for information, which means,so far, no music is being played. The manual suggests that the presence of condensation may be affecting things, so I am letting the player warm up. As to the first problem, there is mention that the "lock shaft is locked" and may need to be "pulled up to unlock". I don't know where or what a "lock shaft" is, and there seems to be no mention of it elsewhere....Any clues?
    The not reading part sounds like a laser problem (maybe a dirty laser lens?). Hopefully the laser wasn't disconnected or damaged in shipping. Sometimes the rpm speed of the disc is slow, but that's uncommon.

  4. #54
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    Sorry if I left anyone in the lurch around here....

    Over the past couple of days, I have been in the process of tearing the interconnects out of the receiver, rearranging the gear and reconnecting everything to make room and accomodation for the new arrival. Time constraints forbid my ability to publish much now; a more lengthy review will be posted as time permits.

    Suffice it to say, the CAL is in fine fettle. The "locking" mechanism was simply a slightly projecting device found on the bottom of the unit. It has been a long while since I have seen the doo-dad, and while I pondered and fumed, I gave it a decisive tug. Voila! (D-oh!)

    So thanks, guys, for your guidance and support....The baby's home and already she's cranking up. So far, she sounds very, very good; for $200.00 smackers, let's just say pretty damn good, at that!

    Cheers!

    Oh, yeah: There'll be stogies and single malt for those who wish to attend: The door is open for you; just bring yourself and a favorite disc. The rest is "on the house".

  5. #55
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    Good deal, glad to hear all is well.

  6. #56
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    198

    Speaking of new equipment...

    Hi all.

    After reading the last several posts on my thread, I too will be expecting a new Xindak
    Power amp monoblocks over the next 2 to 3 weeks. They haven't arrived yet, part of me
    cannot wait, chasing up lately. They have to be shipped from a different part of
    Australia.

    I "may" need to upgrade my cables, but I am not working with more than 1 metre
    lengths. That means XLR may not be necessary when I get a replacement CD player.
    I have read all the feedback on this site (all 14 reviews) of the Cambridge Audio 840 C,
    no one can really hear much of a noticable difference between balanced and unbalanced.

    Just simply eager to try out my favourite CDs through the new amp, at the store the
    difference was extreme. It will appear as if someone has removed my hands from my
    ears.

    I may end up using my PS3 as an equivalent music server as the playback is reasonable.

    Oh another spanner into the works, I played once again the Dire Straights 20th
    Anniversary release of Brothers in Arms. I compared the CD and SACD layers of the
    same tracks. The SACD layer sounds incredibly much better.

    Current System :

    Xindak XA8800MNE Mono Block Power Amplifier
    Cambridge Audio 840E Pre Amplifier
    Cambridge Audio 840C CD Player and DAC
    Dynaudio Contour 1.8 MK-II
    Pioneer DVR-640H (250 GB HDD)
    Foxtel Digital
    Samsung LCD 40in LA40M81BDX
    Sony PS 3 (source - CD/SACD/DVD/Blu-Ray)
    XLO Interconnects & speaker cables
    Sonos Wireless Music System

    Upgrade Path :

    1. Power regulation system

  7. #57
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    Review of the Tercet now on the Blog....

  8. #58
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    blog, what blog, we don't need no stinking blog!

  9. #59
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    Yeah, yeah, yeah...

  10. #60
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    So, this morning, I found myself looking at an Entech 245.2. Never seen the thing before, but from what I see in the few postings here and there on the Web, it is a 24 bit DAC. At around 175 smackers, I'm thinking about jumping. From what I have read on Stereophile, the Entechs are well made, reasonably affordable and very good performers. Any thoughts, anyone?

  11. #61
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    No, I just got a musicdirect newsletter and they have what you need. It's a PS Audio transport and DAC that retail for about $3k each. The transport has a touch screen and apparently some type of storage unit because they say you actually never listen to the actual CD. There were links for more detail but I wasn't extremely interested except for what they already told me. Oh, Auric, if you are interested in picking up this dynamic duo PS Audio is offering a trade up program, give them your current rig and they will give you a discount. You'll have to check www.amusicdirect.com for details.

    I also saw Conrad Johnson has a CD/SACD player out I will have to get more info on. I wouldn't leave my T+A but I'm curious to see the unit.

    I'm not familiar with Entech. $175 is as cheap as most entry level players it would be interesting to see how good this unit is.

  12. #62
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    So, not to be stupid, the CAL is 18 bit....Would the Entech, by definition boost the signal to 24 bit resolution?

  13. #63
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    Don't get caught up in sales buzz words or specs, just because a player is 24 bit does not mean it will sound better than one with 18 bit. Generally, an older high end CD player will still out perform a lower end unit with the latest technology. The digital processing is just one step, there's a lot that goes into the analog stage and filtering technology that also makes the sound. In addition, a lower bit but more expensive player may put more into the digital section like better clocking and buffering, or more to the point handle their fewer bits with better care. As I said, this is a general statement because a lot will depend on the brand of player and how old the higher end one is. It could come down to a trade off of listenability vs amount of detail. An older player may present cymbals with a certain realism and nonabrasive manner where a newer player may give more detail from the disc but the cymbals may be brash. Then one would have to make a decision on what is the most important attribute he wants from his player/system.

    So I wouldn't bet the farm that the Entech would sound any better than your CAL.

  14. #64
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    This is good advice, and I will certainly give it some thought. The CAL is quite impressive--I have commented about it in the Review Section of this site, if anyone is interested--and I wonder if the best course is to lay low for now....Still, mighty tempting!

  15. #65
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127

    No

    Quote Originally Posted by Auricauricle
    So, not to be stupid, the CAL is 18 bit....Would the Entech, by definition boost the signal to 24 bit resolution?
    That is, without knowing the Entech specifically, the fact that a DAC says "24/192" only means necessarily that it can decode an incoming 24/192 signal, not that it upsamples say a 16/44.1 to 24/192 or any higher resolution than the input. If a DAC does upsample, the blurb will usually mention that quite specifically.

  16. #66
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    Thanks: This is an important distinction to make and, admittedly, one that I completely zoned on when I was goin' through all this....Why don't you and the regs start a thread to describe DAC's etc...? Folks like me don't know sheep about 'em, but don't have a clue!
    "The great tragedy of science--the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact."--T. Huxley

  17. #67
    Forum Regular luvtolisten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by Auricauricle
    Thanks: This is an important distinction to make and, admittedly, one that I completely zoned on when I was goin' through all this....Why don't you and the regs start a thread to describe DAC's etc...? Folks like me don't know sheep about 'em, but don't have a clue!
    I second that. I think it would be really cool. I only know enough to be dangerous. I would like to know what justifies the cost between a $400 and $1,000 DAC. which DAC's have a certain sound (do emphasize highs, mids or lows?). I'd like to hear from owners and why they bought the one they did. What percentage should you spend on a DAC relative to your system?

  18. #68
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    The difference between price points would basically be the same principles as any other piece of hi fi gear, better parts, build quality and design. Sometimes it's worth it and some times not. For instance, if a plastic case sounds the same as an aluminum case I wouldn't pay $500.00 more just to have the aluminum. I'm not caught up on looks. Sometimes you will pay a bit more for a certain feature, like a DAC with upsampling may cost more than one without, or if the DAC can accept SACD (DSD) digital signals. Sometimes we even have to pay more for a name, like a Levinson or Krell will demand more than a lesser known brand. On the other hand, the resale value of a Levinson or Krell will hold better as well.

    When listening you have to learn to evaluate and determine what is important to you or impresses you. I like to listen for realism, does a sax sound like a sax, do the cymbals hold and fade naturally etc. Tonal quality has become a pet peeve of mine and made me a bit of a snob in that area. Nothing annoys me more now than to have a pair of headphones or have to listen to something where things sound nasally, or unnatural. Another area I like to evaluate is the frequency response, will the unit provide the lowest of octaves and go up to the highest registers. Not only that but are the bass lines clear, are they free of tubbiness and blurr. Do the instruments sound the way you think one would or does it sound like a sound effect. I mean you know a sax is a sax even on a clock radio but when you hear one on good hi fi gear and you are provided the tonal textures a sax should have it's a different story and those who realize that are those who will appreciate and value their gear. Then there's presentation, do you like to feel as if the band is in your room, or would you like to feel as if you are in a venue? Better digital playback will allow you audible cues. You should be able to hear the difference between recordings as to spacial area, some may seem to have more reverb than others, some may be quite damped, almost dead sounding, some seem to have a live feel to them, some are more intimate than others and this can be heard. Some gear can present the music in a way that you can get a sense of front to back space opposed to just having everything laid across one plain of sound stage. Sometimes you can even get a feeling as if the instruments move. Gear of this quality can also pose a problem as a bad recording will certainly be noticed. Something else I've noticed and it may be more of a total system thing and this is what I call "pace". I really don't think many people even "audiophiles" pick up on. I'm not talking pitch. I really don't know what makes this difference. Here's what I'm talking about, my Krell gear presented music in what I'd consider a neutral/midrange pace, sort of like Spock on Star Trek not much feeling. In contrast my Conrad Johnson doesn't sound slower but it seems to give the music more of a soul or tempo. Like on Krell a good Motown song is technically correct but on CJ it makes you more want to snap your finger or tap a toe if this makes sense. It's like a good actor knows when to pause and add dramatic emphasis I guess. I've taken my CD's and listened to Rotel systems and that gear is pleasant but it made the music sound tired or more laid back. Many people have Rotel but I haven't seen any one comment on noticing this. The difference is there. If you can't hear a difference in pace between Rotel or let's say Arcam, which is the fastest presentation I've ever heard then this may be something only certain people are in tune with, I just don't know. All I know is I can certainly tell.

    I'd recommend going into a "true" high end shop and hanging out, get a feel of what this level of gear can do. Then you have a bit of a reference and can find the closest to what you want that fits your budget. This could be dangerous though to your budget if you become smitten as I did. This may sound odd but I owned Krell gear at the time but one day at the hi fi shop I listened to a $25k Krell preamp/CD player combo into 250 watt monoblocks driving a high series of Dynaudio. This was one of the best sounding systems I've ever heard, not the most expensive, there had to be some special synergy and the system must have fit the room perfect. Any way something about that listening experience made me understand my more modest Krell gear better. It was like something clicked and I all the sudden understood what it was trying to do.

    I also do not buy into this theory that if you listen close or critical that we some how can't enjoy the music. I feel it's just the opposite. I mean as you listen, relaxing, how much effort does it take your brain to tell you if you are enjoying it or for you to pick up on the characteristics I mentioned above? I mean it's like saying you have to concentrate to tell yourself that you don't like liver.

    I don't mean to say that one can't enjoy a modest system and only very expensive gear can do the things that I have been describing. I don't think you will ever hear this level of detail from a receiver but I know you will pick it up on such gear as NAD or Arcam, maybe others, I haven't heard nearly all the products on the market. You listen and tell me. I don't know what prompted this out poor of hi fi according to Peabody but I will stop myself for now.

  19. #69
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    There is no question to the fact that, cost considerations aside, the enjoyment of high-fidelity music listening takes into consideration all the things you speak of, Mr. P. Whether those pertain to realism, tonal quality, frequency response, presentation or "pace" (nice term, that), the enjoyment of these things is an acquired skill that comes from careful listening to actual sources and using that template to compare the sounds emanating from our speakers and to our brains. The canny audiophile is aware of the nuances of sound that not only distinguish an oboe from an english horn, say, but also playback of an instrument that is presented adequately and that which is presented in startlingly realism. To most folks, who have been conditioned by mediocre equipment and only casual acquaintance with instruments, the search for good sound is an inconsequential one; yet, to the audiophile, the search is, sometimes, never ending.

    To us, knowing the difference between what is "great" and what is "phenomenal" inspires us to look for solutions that drive us to spend much time and resources--sometimes even as we know that what we has satisfied us still. Having lived with and loved music all my life, I have a fairly keen sense of what sounds right and what doesn't. I can articulate fairly well why one CD player's performance is only adequate and why another's sounds much, much better (I think). More importantly, I can tell what I like, and while I may not have the vocabulary or even the knowledge many here have, that knowledge has served me well so far.

    Like many around here, however, I am not very pecuniarily able to justify spending much on certain things. I must look for bargains here and there, and look for ways to find the sound I love without much extravagance. I like the hunt, for I have learned that while I can easily spend a small fortune on very beautifully performing gear, I can spend a fraction of the amount on gear that is still pleasing. I have no doubt that some will snub my purchases, but so far I like what I hear and that is good enough. Later, as resources avail themselves or as my ears become tired, adjustments will be made. But that is later....

    I will still call upon you and everyone else here to help me along the way. I am not so smug to think that I know as much as you, and I respect your counsel very highly. In this forum, I have found like-minded lovers of music, who drink as I drink, the sounds coming from their stereos and gear like rare wine. I hope that I have not presented myself as anything but such a person, and when I bid you to give me your counsel I will await your reply with eager and avid anticipation.

  20. #70
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    Auric, do you do HT with your receiver? If you only do 2 channel let me know if you ever want to upgrade your amp I think I have something that might fit your bill.

  21. #71
    Sure, sure... Auricauricle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    2,886
    Yes, I do....The system is 2.1, thank you very much! (Newcastle R-525)
    "The great tragedy of science--the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact."--T. Huxley

  22. #72
    AR Newbie Registered Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1

    CD player required also to complete puzzle-Newbie

    It's been quite some time since I've had a dedicated CD player and I'm now looking to rectify that. I'm currently using a Sony Blu-ray player (BDP-S550) for my CD play back but I am firmly of the opinion that you can't beat a dedicated source. The 2 players I've been thinking about will give you all a rough idea of the budget I'm playing with.

    *Yamaha CD700 (I've had my heart set on this one but read an average review today from
    What HiFi)
    *Marantz CD5003

    Reading nice things about Arcam & Cambridge but they're creeping up $'s.

    Any feedback (particularly on the Yamaha) or other suggestions most appreciated.

    __________________________________________________ ____________________________

    Current Equipment:

    Sony BDP-S550 B/R Player
    Yamaha RX-V3900 Receiver
    Krix Pheonix (Main Speakers)
    Jamo Centre 200
    Jamo Surround 300
    Yamaha YST-SW300 Sub Woofer
    LG 42" Plasma Panel

    Still to upgrade/acquire:

    Plasma/LCD 50" 1080P
    CD Player
    Sub Woofer (additional, sick of moving my current one around the room!)
    Headphones (Current Sennheiser HD445, want something closed with more bass)

  23. #73
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    198

    Smile Great feedback

    Auricauricle : thankyou for your profound response.

    A bit of a history lesson, I haven't done many upgrades in my 20+ years of listening to
    music (on a system that I own), however the upgrades have been significant, and
    towards the next level.

    I spent at least 6 months, 30 shops, auditioned many brands, prices ranges just to find
    a speaker upgrade. What I originally planned for the same brand yes, but the next
    series up, filled in the missing void I had all those years. I was trained in how to listen
    to music, how to pick up the subtleties that were always there, but all those years I
    simply never noticed before.

    Even trial and error you'd be suprised what you'll find, something you never realized
    existed before, comes into your world and you respond where has this been all your
    life ?

    Since I got my power amp 2 days ago, I've simply been drunk on music. I feel dazed,
    chilled out, cloud nine really. I cannot wait to take my system to the next level, get
    a better source.


    Scatley : I would audition as many components as you can, your own ears will help
    you decide what would be a worthwhile addition to your system. I was always impressed
    with the Cambridge Audio 740C then 840. Ok if it happens to be out of your price range.
    One thing you must also consider, what you're looking for, just how long would you
    be satisfied with it ? Do you see yourself keeping it for 2 years ? or less ? Or 3 ?
    Maybe if you see the more expensive option is something you would keep for at least
    5 years, maybe it's a worthwhile investment.

    I purcahsed my Dyn Audio Contours for the last 5 years, and it was clearly the strongest
    component in my system, until 2 days ago. I'm nearly convinced I'll never have to buy
    another pair of fronts for at least another 5, or another power amp for another 5.
    I must now build the rest of my system to those standards, it's not a cheap upgrade
    path, but every 5 years is easier to budget for than every 2 to 3.

    I have no idea what your budget is, or if the more expensive options are way beyond
    what you can afford, nothing wrong with waiting either. I waited more than 7 years to
    upgrade my amp, it was worth the wait after being tempted many times.
    Current System :

    Xindak XA8800MNE Mono Block Power Amplifier
    Cambridge Audio 840E Pre Amplifier
    Cambridge Audio 840C CD Player and DAC
    Dynaudio Contour 1.8 MK-II
    Pioneer DVR-640H (250 GB HDD)
    Foxtel Digital
    Samsung LCD 40in LA40M81BDX
    Sony PS 3 (source - CD/SACD/DVD/Blu-Ray)
    XLO Interconnects & speaker cables
    Sonos Wireless Music System

    Upgrade Path :

    1. Power regulation system

  24. #74
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    198

    Smile

    I believe the Cambridge Audio 840C sounds like a winner. It has an inbuild DAC for 2
    inputs. In a way I could set it up like a pre-amp. It is fully balanced so I would need to
    get a pair of balanced cables.

    Trouble is, do this ?

    A. Set up the CA-840C as a pre-amp ? and hook that up directly to my
    Xindak monoblocks, then my yamaha receiver into the input of the 840C ?

    Or

    B. do I plug in the 840C into the receiver and my other 2 components into the inputs of
    the 840C ?

    If I opt for option B, then I won't have to buy Balanced cables.

    I have the following sources :

    1. PS3 as a CD/DVD, and Blu Ray player (highest quality cables in this unit - Optical
    for sound, my receiver does not support HDMI)

    2. PC (my PC and some of my music can play through the soundblaster sound card)

    3. Pioneer DVR (which has my Foxtel satellite cable tv) - connects via RCA

    Advice would be highly appreciated

    P.S. I am still considering worthy cable upgrades.
    Current System :

    Xindak XA8800MNE Mono Block Power Amplifier
    Cambridge Audio 840E Pre Amplifier
    Cambridge Audio 840C CD Player and DAC
    Dynaudio Contour 1.8 MK-II
    Pioneer DVR-640H (250 GB HDD)
    Foxtel Digital
    Samsung LCD 40in LA40M81BDX
    Sony PS 3 (source - CD/SACD/DVD/Blu-Ray)
    XLO Interconnects & speaker cables
    Sonos Wireless Music System

    Upgrade Path :

    1. Power regulation system

  25. #75
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    Ozzie don't do either if I'm understanding what you are saying. If the 840 has an input it is a digital input and you can not hook your receiver into that. I have heard of some receivers or processors having a digital out but you'd be basically making a loop if this is your intention.

    If your receiver is one that has the "bypass" or "music direct" feature as many Yamaha receiver do, then just run your 840 into the receiver using analog cables and run it "direct" to bypass all the receiver's internal processing.

    To use the 840 as a preamp you would have to make some kind of provision for two preamps, your receiver and your 840. If wanting to use the 840 direct to amp then you'd have to unhook the 840 and plug the receiver back into them when watching a movie. Your best and simplest method would be just to hook the 840 into the receiver. It's great if it has XLR but unless your receiver will accept them you are out of luck.

    Scatley, if you can afford an entry level Arcam I feel they would prove to be a better player than any on your list. Many here have used and seem to like the 5003 pretty well. If you aren't opposed to used you may be able to find a good deal on an Arcam at Audiogon.com Just to be sure we are on the same page, you do know to get any benefit from an upgraded CD player you will use the analog outs? If going to your receiver with a digital hook up you will hear none to very little difference because you are still using the receiver's internal DAC.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •