Again, right from the beginning please......

[John]

Find yourself a good cranial osteopath

[Gordon Steadman]

Find yourself a good cranial osteopath

Well, he/she would also need god like powers in order to reverse the ravages of old age.

My problems are to do with stenosis of the spine which is crushing the spinal chord, I've already had one operation to remove bone but the next might mean a wheelchair.

Don't fancy that much, so I prefer to sit a while and then hope that gentle exercise will ease things up a bit. It lasted a year last time but who knows what will happen as I get older still.

[nat8808]

When people say "space around the instruments" I always take that to mean a precision, a speed of the system so that sounds don't bleed into each other, they start and stop quickly and each instrument is kept tightly within it's own space.

Personally I would attribute much of that to headphones first and foremost.. I like my Shure 530s for their speed (in-ear phones), kind of precision and going back to much cheaper normal types is always a bit disappointing. Over the ear types I have seem much slower with less depth - harder to move your focus around each of the sounds if you know what I mean. In-ears also lower the noise floor - noise around you doesn't interfere with the sound so much - which conributes to more detail and space IMO.

When I say in-ear, I mean proper, stuff them down your lughole "in ear".


When using the CDR770, it will be first digitising the signal then turning it back to analogue again. I can therefore only think that it's the headphone amp inside it that you're getting the benefits from, which could well be to do with impedance matching etc.

There's no reason really that the Project dedicated headamp should be better - it has its own marketing costs, individual construction costs, lack of vast mass production like the Philips and is still probably based on ICs just like the Philips and maybe even a higher mark-up by hifi dealers than Philips does from places like Currys.

A quick google gives some poor opinions of the Project Headbox into low impedance headphones.

If your Mac has the optical out built in, I'd get Stan to match the Bushmaster to your headphones and try that out.

[Gordon Steadman]

When people say "space around the instruments" I always take that to mean a precision, a speed of the system so that sounds don't bleed into each other, they start and stop quickly and each instrument is kept tightly within it's own space.

Personally I would attribute much of that to headphones first and foremost.. I like my Shure 530s for their speed (in-ear phones), kind of precision and going back to much cheaper normal types is always a bit disappointing. Over the ear types I have seem much slower with less depth - harder to move your focus around each of the sounds if you know what I mean. In-ears also lower the noise floor - noise around you doesn't interfere with the sound so much - which conributes to more detail and space IMO.

When I say in-ear, I mean proper, stuff them down your lughole "in ear".


When using the CDR770, it will be first digitising the signal then turning it back to analogue again. I can therefore only think that it's the headphone amp inside it that you're getting the benefits from, which could well be to do with impedance matching etc.

There's no reason really that the Project dedicated headamp should be better - it has its own marketing costs, individual construction costs, lack of vast mass production like the Philips and is still probably based on ICs just like the Philips and maybe even a higher mark-up by hifi dealers than Philips does from places like Currys.

A quick google gives some poor opinions of the Project Headbox into low impedance headphones.

If your Mac has the optical out built in, I'd get Stan to match the Bushmaster to your headphones and try that out.

Hi Nat,

Yup, I'm used to the precision of the Quad 57's, everything hanging in its own space, left right, up and down, back and forth. I know its hard for phones to do that but they get closer through the Philips. There is however, this basic cloud over the whole thing that I would like lifted. I'm quite sure that Optical from the Mac into a good DAC is the way to go but I would like to take it a stage at a time. Funds are tight at the moment, my selling season doesn't really start until April.

It just depends how much better the optical into the Philips is than the analogue.


My phones are only 30ohms so perhaps this is another reason for the poor performance though the Headbox.

[Gordon Steadman]

Well, the Toslink cable arrived this morning and I connected up the Mac to the Philips recorder, actually remembering to set the sound output to Optical,
and sat to listen.

Much lower output than the analogue and for a deaf old git like me, just not enough. So the Head-box promptly get connected to the Philips!! (the thigh bone connected to.......)

Blurry 'ell Someone just opened the curtains.

So, I now know that using an exterior DAC with an optical feed beats the Mac electronics hands down. Also that the Head-box responds to a decent signal

I can live with this, although its a pain having to have a blank disc in the recorder and waiting for it to initialise every time I switch on.

The big question remains, how much better would an even better DAC be and how would I find out without trying one, plus just how good is the Philips and how much would it cost etc etc.. Problems problems. In the meantime, back to Paganini (I might have to re-record it though with the Philips as it was done on the Mac!! ( but what about the other 1000 or so CDs)

[Firebottle]

Someone just opened the curtains.

That's excellent news Gordon. I have been following this thread as a fellow ESL57 user, so I know what you mean about clarity.

Alan

[Gordon Steadman]

That's excellent news Gordon. I have been following this thread as a fellow ESL57 user, so I know what you mean about clarity.

Alan

HI Alan,

Actually, its a bit of a pain!!! I have just managed to put my back out again and am sitting at the Mac catching up on some reading. Can't help myself putting the phones on just to see if it all still works and I just get drawn in and can't concentrate on the book!!!

First time this has really happened with the old digits, so maybe there is hope. I still use the 57's if the wife is out and the neighbours are all at work!! Its surprising how loud a Stereo 20 will make them go

Tried my new Paganini record (thanks Stu) for the first time on the TT through the Quads and it still makes the Digital systems look stupid, even if they are much better now. A total sense of reality.

[wee tee cee]

Berrhinger uca 202 would fit the bill.....usb dac head amp. plumb it into your system for peanuts...i tunes-usb cable-202-phono leads.
I use 63s and kel83 mono blocks and know what you mean!!!

If funds allow a pair of superlux 668b with velvet pads.......let your back heal with the gentle swaying the combo will induce.

dac/head amp when your finances bounce back.....

[Gordon Steadman]

Berrhinger uca 202 would fit the bill.....usb dac head amp. plumb it into your system for peanuts...i tunes-usb cable-202-phono leads.
I use 63s and kel83 mono blocks and know what you mean!!!

If funds allow a pair of superlux 668b with velvet pads.......let your back heal with the gentle swaying the combo will induce.

dac/head amp when your finances bounce back.....

Hi Tony,

Thanks for the advice - it seems er..... sound!!

[icehockeyboy]

Gordon, all very good suggestions. But you could do far worse than giving my own Bushmaster DAC with integrated headphone amp a try. And if you let me know the impedance of your headphones I can even adjust it for an output level suitable for the hard of hearing.

Seconded!