Audiophiles hifi appreciation thread old and new

shiny knobs perfect for those yoghurt coated fingers and reflectoporn

Ha - jokes on you. It’s on a shelf at chest height

Boom

1 Attachment

Where do you get the perspex childproofing box - I need one of those!

https://www.thompsonplastics.com

I’ve had all my Hi-Fi covers made here over the years, reliable last time I used them.

I can see a way a child can climb that.

Obviously, I've got experience

You can have that one if you like.

It’s not in perfect nick, mind

The amp, cover and wooden unit are going too

If it's going, that would be ace - it is exactly what I need as i can't currently play my amp without my 11m/o whacking the volume up to full!

I'll PM you

Have just picked up a new system: Rega P6, elixir-r, Apollo-r and Harbeth M30.1. Absolutely loving it – many thanks to @BRM for recommending Radlett audio, Dave is really knowledgeable and lovely guy.

The only thing I’m missing from the system is a streamer/DAC. Previously I’ve had a chromecast audio feeding into a cheap DAC then into an amp. I’ve then cast from Spotify or BubbleUpnP/my NAS from the phone when I’ve needed.

Is it better to get a decent DAC (like the Benchmark DAC3) then a cheapish streamer I use via a phone/tablet, or whether it’s worth getting a combined DAC/streamer (like the Cambridge audio CZN V2) that supports Spotify connect? Looking at prices, I can’t stretch to both a decent DAC and high-end streamer.

I guess it boils down to me not really understanding the importance of the streamer quality. Is it a bit like HDMI cables, that as long as the signal gets to the DAC it’s fine, or does a higher quality streamer offer better sound quality?

It's the analogue side of a DAC that can substantially alter the sound quality. There are so many options on the market at the moment, it's both a good time to be buying and a very complicated choice to make.

A decent DAC is always useful to have around. I've not regretted having a few Lavry convertors, they are available for a fraction of the original price these days. If you can settle for 96/24 conversion then lots of good options exist.

On the other hand I'm streaming through a Marantz unit too (SACD unit) and the sound is superb.

good work!

Thanks, it makes sense the DAC would have the greatest effect on quality.

I don't have anything on the NAS at a particularly high Res (basically a lot of ripped CDs and torrented MP3s from the early 00's), but I'd like to future proof myself against Spotify, or similar, offering higher quality streaming at some point.

I might try to get into Richer Sounds to have a listen to the CA streamer to get a feel for an all in one

It's so complex these days. The argument regarding Nyquist and 96/24 audio used to seem pretty solid. There was no need to go further than that as solid clocking becomes more difficult to achieve but now we're in an age of streaming 192k and ripped SACD's at DSD resolution.

I am impressed by the Marantz though, lots of high end components, attention paid to isolation and power supplies. It certainly pays off in the analogue domain. The only thing that puts me off a dedicated streamer at the moment is the developments in software, ir convolution and more extreme dsp is starting to become the norm for a lot of digital hi-fi rigs.

I honestly don’t see the point of hi-res streaming - most of the stuff will have been recorded and mixed at a much lower resolution. It’s not like video where the ‘bandwidth’ of film/pro digital is noticeably higher than consumers can display.

but I'd like to future proof myself against Spotify, or similar, offering higher quality streaming at some point.

@itsbruce from epic fail

MySpace still exists, people still use it. A lot of those people store
music up there, in some cases their own/group's creation. About a year
ago, people found they couldn't play music they uploaded before 2015.

Turns out it's all gone. All the music from 2003 to 2015.

I want a multi room set up for my new house. Speakers in the lounge , kitchen and possibly bedroom too.

Want to be able to stream from phones, laptop etc, and connect hifi kit. I want wired speakers in the lounge. Not sure about the kitchen, bur something unobtrusive looking.

I've been looking at both the Sonos connect , though I'd need another amp, and the Yamaha musicast rn602. Any other suggestions or thoughts?

Audio pro looks good and they do a thing that is much cheaper than the Sonos connect.

It all helps to muddy the waters! I'm not sure your argument holds much water though.

Analog tape would be the medium until the early eighties, that has a resolution arguably higher than CD. Most digital studios are recording at 96/24 which is the baseline for a definition of hi-res. There are audible advantages over 44/16 (cd quality) as harmonics from the filters used in DACs can affect the audible band at 44/16 but are far less present at 96/24. There are also arguments for using the native clock speed of a DAC. 24 bit also increases the s/n ratio.

192+, DSD, MQA wrappers etc. all make things more complex and may not be an improvement on 96/24 but it's not true to say that most of the 'stuff' is recorded and mixed at a lower resolution.

Studios now are at 96/24, I suspect plenty weren’t at the crossover point from tape. Tape itself has a theoretical fidelity and the real world use of imperfectly set machines and deliberate overloading for effect etc.
I get that CDs were a compromise but there are so many bigger things to worry about before 96/24 and I think above that is into the world of woo - certainly for listening (internal DAW mixing at 32bit fp makes a lot of sense).

Studios have been at 96/24 for a long time. 64bit internal busses are pretty standard for DAWs. Early digital recording used stuff like converted betamax machines (Cowboy Junkies - Trinity Sessions). Donald Fagan - The Nightfly is a good example of early digital, they had tried to record Gaucho digitally but stuck with tape. The Nightfly was 16bit the system had just been updated from 8 bit.

I do understand the way tape works but the compression that any analog recording system can create due to the way it overloads has nothing to do with the bit rate you are using to digitally represent the files.

Tape has a theoretical dynamic range which is far lower than the theoretical dynamic range of a 96/24 recording but again the reason to record at 96/24 is not to increase the dynamic range but to reduce the problems caused by aliasing harmonics appearing in the audible spectrum.

I understand you have a different viewpoint. From my side of things 96/24 is a baseline, it's actually easier to maintain that as a standard throughout my system. I would say that there are many things to worry about before DSD or MQA becomes a thing to worry about but I've been and done worried about the other stuff. Last weekend I was recording a band, 16 tracks of 96/24 to an iPad from my PA mixer, it's not a massive overhead these days.

As far as MP3 etc is concerned there are times when I don't notice the difference and times when I do, the main thing that annoys me is overly compressed music, even if it's 96/24 it will annoy me if there's not enough dynamic range. So in that way we can agree, there are bigger fish to fry.

Thank you, that's a very informative post. I didn't know Steely Dan tried to record Gaucho digitally but abandoned the experiment — still sounds mighty fine to me! I seem to recall Ry Cooder's Bop Till You Drop was bruited as an all-digital recording, and that was 1979.

The early digital recordings were incredibly expensive from the sound of the machines they were creating. I've lived through a fair bit of computer audio starting with the BBC B. That was when a tape player recorded and played back your programs. That was early 80's so I've no idea what the big studios were up to before that, there must have been some cool systems around though.

Whenever the conversation turns to digital rates I recommend reading Dan Lavrys' white paper on the subject.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj_gPOh7o7hAhVBA2MBHQ-6CEIQFjAAegQIChAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lavryengineering.com%2Fpdfs%2Flavry-white-paper-the_optimal_sample_rate_for_quality_audio.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1N2QN1hm4H3L9begHvxDJQ

Interesting posts and arguments all.