Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2019 19:10:49 GMT
Tomorrow, I may make use of the “toy cupboard” and build myself a solid state system, consisting of the following components.
Digital - Audio PC > Majestic DAC > Proprius amps > Electric beach FH3.
Vinyl - Modded Techie > Accession MM > Proprius amps > Electric beach FH3.
I am going to strip it back to basics, and see what a minimalist system does, and then add the Majestic DAC/pre into the vinyl system, and see how it sounds.
As it currently stand, I use a Firebottle KIN and a pair of Firebottle Mono amps. Components I bought to replace my previous system, that consisted of a Reflex M phonostage, Pro-ject RS pre, and Proprius amps. It will be interesting to see if I still think I made the right choice.
I currently have the Majestic plugged in to my system to see if I prefer it to the upgraded Caiman SEG.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2019 20:19:56 GMT
Tomorrow, I may make use of the “toy cupboard” and build myself a solid state system, consisting of the following components. Digital - Audio PC > Majestic DAC > Proprius amps > Electric beach FH3. Vinyl - Modded Techie > Accession MM > Proprius amps > Electric beach FH3. I am going to strip it back to basics, and see what a minimalist system does, and then add the Majestic DAC/pre into the vinyl system, and see how it sounds. As it currently stand, I use a Firebottle KIN and a pair of Firebottle Mono amps. Components I bought to replace my previous system, that consisted of a Reflex M phonostage, Pro-ject RS pre, and Proprius amps. It will be interesting to see if I still think I made the right choice. I currently have the Majestic plugged in to my system to see if I prefer it to the upgraded Caiman SEG. That's quite a bold experiment. You've had the Firebottle combo for some time! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2019 21:17:24 GMT
Yes, but as I have all of the kit available, except the Pro-jest RS pre, then why not?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2019 22:30:09 GMT
Stage one, Audio PC into Majestic DAC, feeding Solo Ultralinear and HiFiman Sundara - loving it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2019 17:44:49 GMT
I got carried away with op amp rolling and DAC comparisons.
I plan to fit the Accession MM soon, and have a listen.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2019 22:14:04 GMT
I got carried away with op amp rolling and DAC comparisons. I plan to fit the Accession MM soon, and have a listen. Haha, easy done. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2019 20:43:21 GMT
Stage 1 is complete.
A vinyl playback system using as few boxes as possible for headphone listening, which comprises of my modified SL1200 using the AT Frankencartridge, the Graham Slee Accession MM loan unit, feeding my Solo UL connected to my HiFiman Sundaras.
It sounds superb. It makes me wonder if I should rethink my system, as you could have a really minimalist system using the Accession to feed the Proprius fitted directly to the back of your speakers. Very few boxes visible, and I am sure it would be an awesome sound. But that would give me a problem integrating digital into it, and I am not yet ready to give up the convenience of digital.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 1, 2019 20:54:39 GMT
Stage 1 is complete. A vinyl playback system using as few boxes as possible for headphone listening, which comprises of my modified SL1200 using the AT Frankencartridge, the Graham Slee Accession MM loan unit, feeding my Solo UL connected to my HiFiman Sundaras. It sounds superb. It makes me wonder if I should rethink my system, as you could have a really minimalist system using the Accession to feed the Proprius fitted directly to the back of your speakers. Very few boxes visible, and I am sure it would be an awesome sound. But that would give me a problem integrating digital into it, and I am not yet ready to give up the convenience of digital. Digital is becoming an increasingly important part of the system here. Not because of convenience either. It's every bit as HiFi as anyone could want and with the recent addition of MusicBee as the system control point and upscaler (24/96) It seems to have unearthed some body to the sound without sacrificing and of the detail. I've also been sat here recently wondering whether any of the items I've "panned" on the way to this configuration would be worth a revised listen. It's great you still have all that gear to go back to. Sounds like you could be in the way to a few long term changes. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2019 21:02:26 GMT
Being the European loan coordinator means I have all the products when they are not out on loan.
It sounds good, but I have yet to plug my FB gear back in, and have a listen to that again. You are not talking massive differences, it is more of a question of what flavour you prefer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2019 21:05:10 GMT
As for upscalers, how do they fill in the blank parts accurately? The data is missing, so what does it actually do, and what is the effect on the sound?
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 1, 2019 22:28:02 GMT
As for upscalers, how do they fill in the blank parts accurately? The data is missing, so what does it actually do, and what is the effect on the sound? I have no idea how it works and tbf, I haven't even tried to find out but it's definitely a good listen. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2019 0:18:13 GMT
Really fancy an Accession (MM), or more accurately really fancy the thought of one. I know you will have an affinity for them but how do they compare with similarly priced stages and which would you say are its main competitors?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2019 5:18:20 GMT
Last night was the first time I listened to it, as it has been out on loan for most of the year.
I don’t have enough experience of other phono stages to tell you how it sounds in comparison. I like the sound it produces, and the different EQ options make it a good choice. As I have not been looking for a new phono stage, I also have no idea what the competitors are. Sorry.
I suggest you take advantage of the loan scheme and try one for yourself.
Meanwhile, I will go back to my Firebottle gear.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2019 8:15:33 GMT
Thanks and yes I've been meaning to try and sort a loan for quite some time....
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Dec 2, 2019 8:55:43 GMT
As for upscalers, how do they fill in the blank parts accurately? The data is missing, so what does it actually do, and what is the effect on the sound? they use an algorithm, put in the data you've got and then it constructs the missing frequencies from that. Basically it's an educated guess.
Effect on the sound will either be nothing or very minimal since all you are doing is reconstructing frequencies beyond human hearing, but depends on the algorithm being used it might have some audible effect, as might any processing of a signal. Don't see any point in it myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Dec 2, 2019 9:48:35 GMT
I think it also helps hf filtering too, as any possible effects of these filters are moved up and away from folding back to the audio frequencies... I probably have it wrong though (yep, more reading and study required  ). The Chord M-Scaler did seem to make a positive difference when I heard it, but I'd need to listen more. Chord do make some excellent digital gear and it's tragic for 'us' here in the UK that it's so damned expensive. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 2, 2019 12:01:24 GMT
Whatever it does, in listening terms, the sound stage becomes a bit more 3D and it does appear to add a little air to the HF
I like the effect and miss it when it's switched off.
According to those I've spoken to, the Mscaler was instrumental in the Chord Davies performance levels. Without it, the Dave was no where near as good.
I do t understand digital but that means I'm not being over critical too. I like the combo I have.
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Dec 2, 2019 12:16:12 GMT
You could get that effect just by increasing the playback level though. I did have a read up on this a while back and the stuff they say it does that changes the sound, really doesn't/shouldn't change the sound. So what it is actually doing to change the sound remains a mystery. But my guess is that it is something pretty prosaic, like a bit of EQ.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 2, 2019 12:36:13 GMT
You could get that effect just by increasing the playback level though. I did have a read up on this a while back and the stuff they say it does that changes the sound, really doesn't/shouldn't change the sound. So what it is actually doing to change the sound remains a mystery. But my guess is that it is something pretty prosaic, like a bit of EQ. I don't know if raising the playback level would have the same effect. I'd have to demo it because I'm way out of my depth trying to describe digital playback. What was interesting was a recent demo I did for Angus. We listened to a digital file and he commented that it was a bit "too clean", I then played a different file and instantly the foot tapped and he was into it. We then chatted about how the same gear just played the two tracks and how they both sounded vastly different. The second track had all the markers of organic sound etc but the first is a Sh#t recording any way up you play it. I'm starting to strongly believe that digital is far less forgiving of lesser quality recordings, thus being the reason digital demos rarely include such things. Everything sounds good on vinyl, but the recording of Sera Una Noche beats everything in any format. This was noted too. |
|
|
|
Post by firebottle on Dec 2, 2019 12:46:34 GMT
Interesting that Sera una Noche started as a 96kHz digital recording.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2019 13:11:38 GMT
But do you need any more than that? Or is it a question of more.must be better?
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 2, 2019 13:18:49 GMT
Interesting that Sera una Noche started as a 96kHz digital recording. Not as far as I'm aware Al, I believe its a 24bit/176.4 kHZ recording, which Is what I have here. They have it on rebook CD and LP but the HI Rez file is straight from Todd's two of a kind recording gear. No edit g other than to fade out and in at the end of each track Its exactly what was recorded. No more, no less. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 2, 2019 13:24:16 GMT
But do you need any more than that? Or is it a question of more.must be better? Again Kevin, I just don't know. What I notice when the bit rate and the sampling rate goes up, is that the sound gets leaner. The 16 bit recordings, as ripped from CDs, are definitely chunkier with more body. When upscaled to 24/96 they get a bit lighter, and have a bit more space around the instruments. This is the sweet spot for me and its where most of my playback is done. At 32/96 the HF definitely become more apparent, but not in a harsh way just like they are a bit more prominent. When you go above this, I start to lose attention span and find it all a bit too lean. It may just be me, but that's how it feels. Also, having switched to the Pecan, I don't think I can go that high anymore, which suits me. |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Dec 2, 2019 13:38:50 GMT
if it was a simple recording, live and direct with no multi-tracking or overdubs then they might as well have recorded it in 16/44.1 The only reason they record in higher resolutions is to give a bit more scope for bouncing tracks, overdubbing and so forth without running up the noise floor to audible levels. If you're not doing that then there's no purpose at all to record in 24/192 or whatever. Recording in 16/44.1 is way better than the very best analogue tape machines.
Any differences someone hears between music recordings made/played back at different sample rates is not down to the sample rates. It is like them suggesting that they can jump over a house or leap the Grand Canyon on a unicycle. It's physically impossible to the point of absurdity. Any differences are either due to another factor - or factors, or are imagined.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 2, 2019 16:40:13 GMT
if it was a simple recording, live and direct with no multi-tracking or overdubs then they might as well have recorded it in 16/44.1 The only reason they record in higher resolutions is to give a bit more scope for bouncing tracks, overdubbing and so forth without running up the noise floor to audible levels. If you're not doing that then there's no purpose at all to record in 24/192 or whatever. Recording in 16/44.1 is way better than the very best analogue tape machines. Any differences someone hears between music recordings made/played back at different sample rates is not down to the sample rates. It is like them suggesting that they can jump over a house or leap the Grand Canyon on a unicycle. It's physically impossible to the point of absurdity. Any differences are either due to another factor - or factors, or are imagined. C'mon Macca, you've been around this game long enough to know that nothing is impossible. everything matters. There are a large number of people who also describe exactly what I have heard and a larger number still that prefer 24/96 as the bit & Sample rate. For instance, we both know someone who has just ripped all of their Vinyl (and is selling it) at 24/96 because that's when it sounded it's best in his experience. I don't declare to be a digital guru but and my inexperience of the format allows me to not have any preconceived ideas about what affects what. I tried different sample rates and bit rates and that was the conclusion I came to. When 24/96 is used, I listened for longer and more attentively. 16 bit was second but it was definitely chunkier. |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Dec 2, 2019 18:03:08 GMT
I didn't say they don't sound different. I just said that the sampling rate and bit depth will have nothing to do with them sounding different because it can't. But there are other reasons that they might sound different.
It's like if I said that my new speakers sound different than my old speakers because the new ones were made by Elves. There will be some genuine reasons why they sound different, so the claim that they sound different is true. But it can't be because they were made by Elves because Elves don't exist. I'm right about the effect but I'm wrong about what the cause is. Unquestionably wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2019 19:00:42 GMT
You're wrong about Elves aswell.
If elves don't exist what is Ed Sheeran ?
Hah . 😏
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2019 19:16:22 GMT
Who the feck sang Blue Suede Shoes if Elves don’t exist. Some folk on here......
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Dec 2, 2019 19:19:25 GMT
I didn't say they don't sound different. I just said that the sampling rate and bit depth will have nothing to do with them sounding different because it can't. But there are other reasons that they might sound different. It's like if I said that my new speakers sound different than my old speakers because the new ones were made by Elves. There will be some genuine reasons why they sound different, so the claim that they sound different is true. But it can't be because they were made by Elves because Elves don't exist. I'm right about the effect but I'm wrong about what the cause is. Unquestionably wrong. Well what would cause it if the only two factors I changed aren't the reason?? I'm not going to figure that out by myself lol |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Dec 2, 2019 21:05:12 GMT
You say it sounds 'chunkier' at lower sampling rate that would imply either a bass boost or treble cut, or both, compared to the higher rate. I mean there has to be a frequency response variation, within the audible range, between the two. If the FR has changed, that's not the higher sampling rate. That would only extend the higher frequencies beyond 20Khz, it won't change the amplitude of the frequency response, i.e boost it. So something else must have changed besides the sampling frequency for that to happen.
|
|
). The Chord M-Scaler did seem to make a positive difference when I heard it, but I'd need to listen more. Chord do make some excellent digital gear and it's tragic for 'us' here in the UK that it's so damned expensive.