View Full Version : Jimbos Audio ramblings
Never heard or seen one in the flesh. Never had any Amstrad gear either but I expect there is a fetish for it on some forum somewhere?:lol:
You'd think so - I mean there's a Morris Marina owner's club so crappiness is not a barrier per se. But I've never seen any Amstrad love on any forum.
Maybe it's underground. Dark web stuff.
Had a pair of their speakers, left here by a mate who lodged with me for a few months, along with a load of faulty CRT monitors. Must have been stored in a garage or shed at one point as mice had nibbled at the corners.
Three ways, with the shiny dustcaps ofc. I used them as the surrounds for my dolby pro logic system for a while during my poverty era. I sealed up the mouse holes with blu-tak.
I remember going into Comet in the 80s and looking at Amstrad gear with amusement and would open the tape deck door mechanism and lift the lid on the odd turntable to gauge the quality. Sometimes the cassette door didn't open. Enough said!
IIRC you could do worse than Amstrad back in the 1980s. Binatone and Saisho made some right junk that was even cheaper than Amstrad.
Listening to the system tonight and the midrange sounds turbo charged. Very full and lush. Bass is also deeper and more extended. The only difference I can think of is the warm weather has all the components sitting at 210C optimal temperature. I can almost lean into the recording as the depth is more apparent and everything seems to have a transparent ethereal quality.
When anyone mentions analogue warmth. This is it!:)
Listening to the system tonight and the midrange sounds turbo charged. Very full and lush. Bass is also deeper and more extended. The only difference I can think of is the warm weather has all the components sitting at 210C optimal temperature. I can almost lean into the recording as the depth is more apparent and everything seems to have a transparent ethereal quality.
When anyone mentions analogue warmth. This is it!:)
210 degrees Celsius?!!!
But otherwise speaker and cartridge compliance will increase with temperature, which may account for your findings.
Myself, I have never found much variation in the performance of my system, regardless of temperature, time of day, etc.
funny, I had a session earlier today and thought the sound was a bit different, maybe slightly brighter and with a bit more impact. Not better but marginally different.
I too thought about the heat but then remembered that there had been a big pile of clothing and towels immediately to the left of my chair, which had been there for weeks and which I had cleared away since my last session...
210 degrees Celsius?!!!
But otherwise speaker and cartridge compliance will increase with temperature, which may account for your findings.
Myself, I have never found much variation in the performance of my system, regardless of temperature, time of day, etc.
Yes the system would be melting at that temp!:lol:
funny, I had a session earlier today and thought the sound was a bit different, maybe slightly brighter and with a bit more impact. Not better but marginally different.
I too thought about the heat but then remembered that there had been a big pile of clothing and towels immediately to the left of my chair, which had been there for weeks and which I had cleared away since my last session...
Sure that was being used as acoustic treatment!:)
Sure that was being used as acoustic treatment!:)
Apparently so!
Somewhere in Northumberland.......
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52991045613_f4fca6aadb_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2oJCXFt)09546CD3-CB60-4B77-9D97-321D01F77132 (https://flic.kr/p/2oJCXFt) by [/url], on Flickr
[url=https://flic.kr/p/2oJBiSL]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52990723324_2891dfb9a7_k.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/162281319@N03/)2A4C6C25-7B58-4C34-BE6F-2BB96A4D48D5 (https://flic.kr/p/2oJBiSL) by J (https://www.flickr.com/photos/162281319@N03/), on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52990953095_6c58d4c9e0_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2oJCubk)FAC6B9B9-6667-4F0A-B75F-25DCB6193858 (https://flic.kr/p/2oJCubk) by Jy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/162281319@N03/), on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52990589601_a71a7fc9b7_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2oJAC8c)0FDFA706-A69E-47EB-A9E4-4605D7F475EE (https://flic.kr/p/2oJAC8c) by Jsy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/162281319@N03/), on Flickr
brian2957
21-06-2023, 09:20
Been there many times mate. Beautiful part of the world :)
You guys are lucky to live so near. It is a very beautiful place.
Scotland next.
Any recommendations ?:)
well most of the highlands are great if weather is decent. further south, the trossachs, loch lomond, stirling etc are pretty good. stirling jail is really interesting and has a real high wall lol. its an old jail of course and quite central. the castle there is good as is edinburghs'.
lots of distillery tours which are great if your not driving.. up the A9 there are lots of interesting and beautiful spots. the falkirk wheel is worth a visit too.
pitlochry is a nice spot too, and not far up...
well most of the highlands are great if weather is decent. further south, the trossachs, loch lomond, stirling etc are pretty good. stirling jail is really interesting and has a real high wall lol. its an old jail of course and quite central. the castle there is good as is edinburghs'.
lots of distillery tours which are great if your not driving.. up the A9 there are lots of interesting and beautiful spots. the falkirk wheel is worth a visit too.
pitlochry is a nice spot too, and not far up...
Thanks Grant I will check them out for a future tour.
Pigmy Pony
21-06-2023, 15:43
well most of the highlands are great if weather is decent. further south, the trossachs, loch lomond, stirling etc are pretty good. stirling jail is really interesting and has a real high wall lol. its an old jail of course and quite central. the castle there is good as is edinburghs'.
lots of distillery tours which are great if your not driving.. up the A9 there are lots of interesting and beautiful spots. the falkirk wheel is worth a visit too.
pitlochry is a nice spot too, and not far up...
And if spectacular scenery is your thing, I'd recommend starting at Loch Lomond, up through The Trossachs National Park to Tyndrum for an expensive brew and a butty at the Green Welly Stop, before heading to Fort William via Glencoe. Just fantastic :)
And if spectacular scenery is your thing, I'd recommend starting at Loch Lomond, up through The Trossachs National Park to Tyndrum for an expensive brew and a butty at the Green Welly Stop, before heading to Fort William via Glencoe. Just fantastic :)
Great part of the world. I have been to Glencoe many years ago, small hotel with very old fashioned service - lovely.
You guys are lucky to live so near. It is a very beautiful place.
Scotland next.
Any recommendations ?:)
Pack warm clothes and a waterproof.
Great pics btw.
Pack warm clothes and a waterproof.
Great pics btw.
Haha yes definitely warm clothes and may not camp as my friend tried this and had their tent completely destroyed. But I must say with Climate change upon us it maybe the perfect place to go now if you don't like roasting to death.
Some of the beaches in Northumberland made you feel you were in the Bahamas...
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52990973682_9630c582a2_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2oJCAih)62D183F0-41E7-45E0-93F2-7C9E265E590B (https://flic.kr/p/2oJCAih) by Jy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/162281319@N03/), on Flickr
Haha yes definitely warm clothes and may not camp as my friend tried this and had their tent completely destroyed. But I must say with Climate change upon us it maybe the perfect place to go now if you don't like roasting to death.
well I was only there for a week but based on that experience climate change has got it's work cut out if it's even going to make a dent.
Had the system unplugged and all disconnected for the past two weeks as I toured the North East on holiday. So tonight was the first listen after reconnecting everything. I had made particular efforts to make sure whilst I was away nothing could be destroyed in a lightening strike as we had so many thunderstorms down here - paranoia Yes.:)
Anyhow tonights first listen after two weeks away confirms that making new connections and giving the system a rest does have a positive effect. Listening tonight has unravelled a level of micro detail I have not heard in my recordings before. Subtle aspects and details that I had not noticed before. I know when you have a break from your system for sometime and come back fresh you do seem to notice things in a different way? But I would say plugging everything back in has its significance too.
None of it is night and day stuff but whatever is going on is noticeable and for the better. Maybe our brains switch off slightly when we listen very regularly but when you have had a break you may be more sensitive to sound? I bit like not drinking for a month and then downing your favourite tipple. The pleasure and effects always seem more intense?:)
Pigmy Pony
22-06-2023, 07:06
I have heard it said that unplugging leads and plugging them back in again can improve their electrical connection, and I suppose it is possible. Whether that would translate to better conduction of information I don't know. I imagine the difference would be subtle, and probably beyond my hearing's ability though.
More likely though is that having two weeks of putting up with the car stereo has given your ears a new found appreciation of how proper audio should sound :) And perhaps your system is feeling rested after a two week break from your music choices :ner:
Had the system unplugged and all disconnected for the past two weeks as I toured the North East on holiday. So tonight was the first listen after reconnecting everything. I had made particular efforts to make sure whilst I was away nothing could be destroyed in a lightening strike as we had so many thunderstorms down here - paranoia Yes.:)
Anyhow tonights first listen after two weeks away confirms that making new connections and giving the system a rest does have a positive effect. Listening tonight has unravelled a level of micro detail I have not heard in my recordings before. Subtle aspects and details that I had not noticed before. I know when you have a break from your system for sometime and come back fresh you do seem to notice things in a different way? But I would say plugging everything back in has its significance too.
None of it is night and day stuff but whatever is going on is noticeable and for the better. Maybe our brains switch off slightly when we listen very regularly but when you have had a break you may be more sensitive to sound? I bit like not drinking for a month and then downing your favourite tipple. The pleasure and effects always seem more intense?:)
its called 'getting used to the sound'. dare i say its how burn in works:sofa::D
I have heard it said that unplugging leads and plugging them back in again can improve their electrical connection, and I suppose it is possible. Whether that would translate to better conduction of information I don't know. I imagine the difference would be subtle, and probably beyond my hearing's ability though.
More likely though is that having two weeks of putting up with the car stereo has given your ears a new found appreciation of how proper audio should sound :) And perhaps your system is feeling rested after a two week break from your music choices :ner:
:lol:your probably right.
its called 'getting used to the sound'. dare i say its how burn in works:sofa::D
You mean burn in is not waiting for all the electrons in the components/cables to align themselves in a magical configuration!?:lol:
It probably depends on the type and quality of the connectors. RCA phono plugs are a lousy design and no amount of rhodium or gold is going to "turn a sows ear into a silk purse" - even DIN connectors are better. In my experience, the best connectors are XLR (as used by every recording studio and radio broadcaster in the world), and CAMAC (as used in safety-critical installations) as once used on Mark Levinson gear, but sadly no longer.
But actually I like Steve's theory best! ;)
Pigmy Pony
22-06-2023, 15:19
Thanks Barry, that's twice this week I've said something that makes sense! I can't remember what the other one was.
Tried to watch a fair bit of Glastonbury and I must say the BBC have done a fantastic production job. Sound and Pictures are absolutely first class, probably better than any previous year although I am watching most of it via player on an OLED TV and some of the content is HDR 4K. This quality is outstanding. Sound seems way better than some of the BBC broadcasts of other stuff they have done this year so they have got this right too.
Favourite sets so far have been Sparks, Tinariwen and Rick Astley who seems to have put out the best performance of the festival. Usually not my cup of tea but was a complete surprise especially when he played the drums and did ACDC Highway to Hell!
Just had a look through the line up - quite a few acts I thought had finished years ago. Mica Paris is on tonight, used to like her. Doubt they'll put that on the telly though.
Pigmy Pony
26-06-2023, 14:16
Saw a little bit of some bird called Raye, who looked to me a bit like a chubby Amy Winehouse. Sounded pretty good, and Anita's ordered her CD already. I'll be looking on the iPlayer for Goldfrapp because I like her, not sure what else is on it, haven't looked yet.
Did anyone see Elton John being interviewed at his home before the gig at Glastonbury ? He was in a large room with wall to wall vinyl and I think he had a pair of PMC floor stander speakers. In the middle of the room he had a turntable and low and behold it was a classic Technics SL1200. He even mentioned how he really enjoyed listening to vinyl.....
Tried to watch a fair bit of Glastonbury and I must say the BBC have done a fantastic production job. Sound and Pictures are absolutely first class, probably better than any previous year although I am watching most of it via player on an OLED TV and some of the content is HDR 4K. This quality is outstanding. Sound seems way better than some of the BBC broadcasts of other stuff they have done this year so they have got this right too.
Not sure I would agree.
I have not watched as much of Glastonbury as I had intended - in fact I only watched Tinariawen, Yusef Islam (Cat Stevens), and Elton John. Even so I can't say the sound relayed by the BBC was any better than at other times. My TV is a Sony with the audio fed into a Quad 520f power amplifier and thence into a pair of B&W DM2a speakers.
I assume the sound feed is taken from the mixing desk, which I assume is not under BBC control, so what you hear is down to the whim of the mixer. For both the Tinariwen and Yusef Islam sets the sound was reasonably balanced, but I found the balance throughout Elton John's performance annoying. The emphasis seemed to be solely on piano, voice (understandably) and percussion; the latter of which I found particularly irritating.
Not sure I would agree.
I have not watched as much of Glastonbury as I had intended - in fact I only watched Tinariawen, Yusef Islam (Cat Stevens), and Elton John. Even so I can't say the sound relayed by the BBC was any better than at other times. My TV is a Sony with the audio fed into a Quad 520f power amplifier and thence into a pair of B&W DM2a speakers.
I assume the sound feed is taken from the mixing desk, which I assume is not under BBC control, so what you hear is down to the whim of the mixer. For both the Tinariwen and Yusef Islam sets the sound was reasonably balanced, but I found the balance throughout Elton John's performance annoying. The emphasis seemed to be solely on piano, voice (understandably) and percussion; the latter of which I found particularly irritating.
Compared to their Coronation concert broadcast Glastonbury was way better!
I was out of the country during the coronation, so can't comment.
Back to listening to the system last night after the disruption of watching a lot of Glastonbury which left me feeling generally very underwhelmed. Nice to choose some decent music and play it back at an infinitely higher quality level than the TV!
I had noticed that after spending two weeks away from the system on holidays, on my return the system had sounded better and this was the case again last night. When it reached the golden hour ( 9pm) it sounded substantially more open and transparent than I can ever remember. Listening to a few records and the space in the soundstage and ambient information was very apparent. I would say it was quite euphonic which maybe would suggest my valves are adding in bit of their special distortion;)
Then I remember I had fitted a new stylus that had now hit 50 plus hours which probably means it is operating at its optimal level. So I am betting the improved sound quality I am getting is mainly down to this?:scratch:
Pigmy Pony
29-06-2023, 20:30
Watched about four hours of Glastonbury on iPlayer tonight. I wouldn't say the sound was generally bad, just with some acts. I found the Foo Fighters and G 'n' R coverage (what's happened to Axel Rose? He looks and sounds knackered) to be a piss-poor mash on my set up, but Third World I liked, also Generation Sex!
I thought Alison Goldfrapp was great, easily my favourite - good sound, that got the 5.1 working, while she and her two dancers were a visual treat. (she's fifty bloody seven!) And quite trippy too, which is my taste :)
Watched about four hours of Glastonbury on iPlayer tonight. I wouldn't say the sound was generally bad, just with some acts. I found the Foo Fighters and G 'n' R coverage (what's happened to Axel Rose? He looks and sounds knackered) to be a piss-poor mash on my set up, but Third World I liked, also Generation Sex!
I thought Alison Goldfrapp was great, easily my favourite - good sound, that got the 5.1 working, while she and her two dancers were a visual treat. (she's fifty bloody seven!) And quite trippy too, which is my taste :)
The Foos turned everything up to 11 so it sounded a bit OTT. Guns and Roses Ok on quieter numbers where you could actually here axels voice.
I agree Goldfrapp quite good. Seen her live and very decent show.
This was the only cartridge that I felt came close to my 2M Black. The M55e with Nico SAS Boron Micro ridge stylus. One of my big regrets selling it but I may find a different route with another Shure cartridge and Jico SAS stylus?
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53020092538_27472991e1_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2oMcQjw)64CA8797-724E-4F47-A882-28F5803F560E (https://flic.kr/p/2oMcQjw) by y (https://www.flickr.com/photos/162281319@N03/), on Flickr
brian2957
10-07-2023, 08:08
Thought Jico didn't do that stylus any more mate.
Wakefield Turntables
10-07-2023, 08:11
My combo which we have discussed isn't going anywhere ;). The only thing letting it down is poor resolution through my IMF speakers. It's a pity my ATC's are active and not passive I'd been able to really see what they could do. The only other thing you need to watch out for is high gain in your phonostage, careful capacitance matching and making sure your tonearm mass matches the generally accpeted Shure wisdom, then you'll have something which not only matches the M55e/Neo SAS combo but also betters it (albeit with a slightly newer feel to the sound).
PS JICO have not replied re: M55 JICO/SAS
Wakefield Turntables
10-07-2023, 08:12
Thought Jico didn't do that stylus any more mate.
They don't, Brian.
brian2957
10-07-2023, 08:38
They don't, Brian.
Thought so mate.
Wakefield Turntables
10-07-2023, 10:28
JICO emailed me back saying they don’t supply the m55e with the sas stylii. We knew this already. They didn’t say that they wouldn’t make one. I’ll mail back again
If you don't get anywhere with Jico SAS /M55e then I will look at other Shure cartridges where they do manufacture an SAS stylus for those particular cartridges.
Looking on their website there appears to be a big list of possible candidates. It would be good to know which combos work the best so this will need careful consideration and some internet trawling!:)
I have managed to put together a fairly comprehensive list of Shure cartridges that may well be good candidates for a JICO SAS stylus combo. Considering the output I would say the V15, M97, SC35C, M91 and M92 maybe good candidates.
V15 iii HE. - 3.5mV
V15 Type IV 4.0mV
V15 MR or VXMR - 3.0 mVM97 4.0mV
M91 5.0mV
M92 5.0mV
M44G 6.2mV
M44 -5 9.5mV
M44-7 9.5mV
SC35C 5.0mV
M55e 6.2mV
My Ortofon 2M black puts out 5.0mV and this plays nicely with the Croft preamp so I am basing my assumption that any of the Shure cartridges with 5.0mV or less would be suitable for capatibilty. Compliance is another issue which I will have to consider. So I will investigate further if I can recommendations of SAS Sure combos and put this all into Jimbos random cartridge selector and see what comes out!:)
If anyone has had a good experience with any of the Shure cartridges listed above please share your comments.
I started with an M55E, then an M75ED, before trying out the V15 range. Worked my way up to the Mk.III, before I transferred my allegiance to Ortofon moving coil cartridges, and the 'singular' and temperamental Deccas.
I briefly owned a Shure SC35, but had no use for it, so gave it away.
Still have a couple of M55Es, so it would be these that I would like to try with a Jaco stylus.
But I would have thought any of the Shure cartridges you list would be suitable. Is the output voltage that critical?
Wakefield Turntables
10-07-2023, 14:18
M91 / M92 or SC35C all outut @ 5.0mv. The SC35C + JICO SAS/R is supposed & reported to be a pretty perfect replica in terms of performance to the last V15 carts VXMR (? if memory serves correct). I don't think the SC35C and VXMR have the same internal workings.
I started with an M55E, then an M75ED, before trying out the V15 range. Worked my way up to the Mk.III, before I transferred my allegiance to Ortofon moving coil cartridges, and the 'singular' and temperamental Deccas.
I briefly owned a Shure SC35, but had no use for it, so gave it away.
Still have a couple of M55Es, so it would be these that I would like to try with a Jaco stylus.
But I would have thought any of the Shure cartridges you list would be suitable. Is the output voltage that critical?
The output of the M55e is a bit too high with the gain on my preamp. I have tried it and it sounds a bit overblown.
M91 / M92 or SC35C all outut @ 5.0mv. The SC35C + JICO SAS/R is supposed & reported to be a pretty perfect replica in terms of performance to the last V15 carts VXMR (? if memory serves correct). I don't think the SC35C and VXMR have the same internal workings.
The SC35R + Jico SAS/R sounds like it could be a killer combo.
Wakefield Turntables
10-07-2023, 14:48
So in total, if I'm correct you have 2mv of gain with the Croft ( I could be wrong) and then 6.2mV with the M55e, 8.2mV output in total :scratch:. So, the SC35C, M91/2+ the croft would pump out 7mV and the high ranking V15 around 6mV. The Shure later model V15's go for silly money and then you've got to buy the JICO, you'd be looking at £700 ish, and that's on a cartridge which is probably kicking around 40 years old. The SC35C is cheaper buy a few hundred quid and would I think give pretty much the same performance but slightly brighter in soundstage performance due to the extra output.
I wouldn't consider the V15 because of the high price so SC35C looks a better option and as you say Andy probably give similar performance with Jico SAS?
Wakefield Turntables
10-07-2023, 15:56
The SC35C does come with some quirks. Some people believe that USA made SC35C's are better than Mexican versions, I've a Mexican version and it sounds very very good. Some people add one of these https://paradoxpulse.com/universal-cartridge-body I own one and the modification is a simple five minute job. I also have a Panzerholz cartridge body on order which I have yet to evaluate. The SC35C is still in production (I think) so you'll get something that is new and can be quite easily sold on if you don't like it.
The SC35C does come with some quirks. Some people believe that USA made SC35C's are better than Mexican versions, I've a Mexican version and it sounds very very good. Some people add one of these https://paradoxpulse.com/universal-cartridge-body I own one and the modification is a simple five minute job. I also have a Panzerholz cartridge body on order which I have yet to evaluate. The SC35C is still in production (I think) so you'll get something that is new and can be quite easily sold on if you don't like it.
Yes It is available new still for about £120 so not expensive.
The output of the M55e is a bit too high with the gain on my preamp. I have tried it and it sounds a bit overblown.
The difference compared with the SC35 is less than 2dB.
Just turn the volume down a little.
The difference compared with the SC35 is less than 2dB.
Just turn the volume down a little.
:thumbsup:
Wakefield Turntables
10-07-2023, 17:19
The difference compared with the SC35 is less than 2dB.
Just turn the volume down a little.
These Shure carts can seem to have a bright presentation, I've had my moments with the M55e/JICO combo where I thought I saw blood coming from my ears on high treble based passages on some heavy metal based vinyl that had been recorded hot. I think there is more to turning down the volume with these Shure carts. Perhaps some of the higher output carts could do with damping elsewhere in an individuals system to tame them a little? Just thinking aloud and I'm probably speaking a load of cobblers.
These Shure carts can seem to have a bright presentation, I've had my moments with the M55e/JICO combo where I thought I saw blood coming from my ears on high treble based passages on some heavy metal based vinyl that had been recorded hot. I think there is more to turning down the volume with these Shure carts. Perhaps some of the higher output carts could do with damping elsewhere in an individuals system to tame them a little? Just thinking aloud and I'm probably speaking a load of cobblers.
have to say i preferred an original m55 stylus to the jico, which cost a fortune.. maybe im a savage but i loved the m55e all original. i picked mine up nos
have to say i preferred an original m55 stylus to the jico, which cost a fortune.. maybe im a savage but i loved the m55e all original. i picked mine up nos
The M55e NOS is a great cartridge but replacement Jico standard stylus I felt was better. (Not talking about the SAS Jico here).
The M55e NOS is a great cartridge but replacement Jico standard stylus I felt was better. (Not talking about the SAS Jico here).Was the sas one I had
As classy as it was the original as no's was better for me
Was the sas one I had
As classy as it was the original as no's was better for me
I agree the original is a great stylus. The SAS stylus changes the cartridge completely.
Earliest photo of my first CD player Philips CD104 along with Quad 33 and 405. Speakers were B&W DM10.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53250947338_a23e506047_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2p8B2pG)73A4452C-7655-4E0A-BCA9-7A227E9D7E00 (https://flic.kr/p/2p8B2pG) by , on Flickr
Sadly this was how my system was set up in my bedroom back in 1984. Really didn't have a clue back then although I had loads of nice equipment. Quad played a big part as I sold their gear in a local shop and got a good discount along with Technics, Philips, Sony, Panasonic and Bang and Olufsen.
I moved onto the Quad 606 after owning 405 and 405/2.
Wish I had taken more photos back then but it was not really a big thing in early 1980s.
Wakefield Turntables
12-10-2023, 07:24
I took no photos at all if my earlier kit. :(
Earliest photo of my first CD player Philips CD104 along with Quad 33 and 405. Speakers were B&W DM10.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53250947338_a23e506047_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2p8B2pG)73A4452C-7655-4E0A-BCA9-7A227E9D7E00 (https://flic.kr/p/2p8B2pG) by , on Flickr
Sadly this was how my system was set up in my bedroom back in 1984. Really didn't have a clue back then although I had loads of nice equipment. Quad played a big part as I sold their gear in a local shop and got a good discount along with Technics, Philips, Sony, Panasonic and Bang and Olufsen.
I moved onto the Quad 606 after owning 405 and 405/2.
Wish I had taken more photos back then but it was not really a big thing in early 1980s.
Not familiar with the B&W speakers, but at some time I have had and used the Philips 104 CDP (my first) and a Quad 33/405.
(BTW the preamp shown is the 34, not the 33. The 34 is one of the few pieces of Quad gear I have not used, and I don't know if it had a dedicated input for CD, so my previous comment regarding the need to modify older Quad preamps may now be irrelevant. )
For a first system that is one you could be proud of. :)
Not familiar with the B&W speakers, but at some time I have had and used the Philips 104 CDP (my first) and a Quad 33/405.
(BTW the preamp shown is the 34, not the 33. The 34 is one of the few pieces of Quad gear I have not used, and I don't know if it had a dedicated input for CD, so my previous comment regarding the need to modify older Quad preamps may now be irrelevant. )
For a first system that is one you could be proud of. :)
I forgot the numbering of the Quad preamps and so thanks for correcting me on that. I did not own any more Quad preamps after this one but moved to a Croft micro which worked well with the Quad 405. The DM10 speakers were rather nice at the time too but these were moved on and replaced with Spender SP2s which were much more refined and detailed.
walpurgis
12-10-2023, 09:17
I seem to recall that earlier Quad 34 preamplifiers did not have a dedicated CD input, but later ones had a button on the front panel to select CD.
Seeing that old photo got me thinking of amplifiers I have had in my system since I first started in hifi and before I forget :wheniwasaboy:
Prinzsound SA1001 - Integrated early solid state ( 1975- 1978)
JVC A-X2 Integrated ( 1980-1981)
Quad 405 ( 1981- 1983)
Quad 34 (1981 -1983)
Quad 405/2 ( 1983 -1985)
Leek Stereo 20 (Croft modified) ( 1985-1986)
Croft Micro - Preamp (1985 - 1986)
Croft Dakshini - Power ( 1986)
Quad 606 (1987 -2015)
Croft 25R (2015- present)
Croft Series 7 ( 2015- present)
Croft 7R monos ( 2019)
Other amplifiers used in my systems over the years.
Creek CAS 4040
Musical Fidelity Synthesis
Musical Fidelity A1
NAD 3020
Audiolab 8000A
Technics SU-A700
A&R Cambridge A60
Sony ST- 2950
Pioneer SX-590
Croft Charisma
Croft super micro
Croft Cypher mono blocks
Croft Epoch
Croft Vitale
Croft Integrated
Various Firebottle amps
Neurochrome 686
These are the ones I remember but there may have been more. Believe it or not the one amplifier that stood out was the Musical Fidelity Synthesis, that really was a great sounding amp. Class A if I remember. There were a few classics on the list and lots of Croft gear of course. The Cypher monos were unbelievable but also had an unbelievable price (£10,000) so these were not purchased! Plenty of British gear and probably stands up well even today.
Over the years I had the opportunity to listen to many more amps in friends systems and indeed at some group gatherings. I have heard amplifiers from the following manufacturers elsewhere.
Krell
Conrad Johnson
Other Croft amplifiers both power and preamps
Simaudio
Chord
Naim
Linn
Vincent Audio
McIntosh
Audio Research
Counterpoint
Luxman
Exposure
Bang and Olufsen
Rega
Arcam
Albarry
Voyager monoblocks
Paradise phono stage
NVA
Tim Paravicini
Gold Note
PS Audio
From the list above that I remember the amps that really came across well were the Voyager mono blocks but I think they were a DIY project. I have probably forgotten a fair few amplifiers from other manufactures that I may have heard over the years as I was not always taking particular attention to all the equipment I was listening too at the time.
I do look back over the past but always have an eye on the future but having listened to so much gear over the past 40 years not much impresses me now although I am sure there are some great sounding amplifiers probably with eye watering price tags that may wet my appetite.
Amplification is a funny thing as it is probably the least sexy part of your hifi system and differences can be small. However through a process of slow evaluation and lots of listening I find valve gear more to my liking. Although Solid State can sound great and highly revealing it never really engages me as much. Job done yes but musical involvement and long term listening...not so sure. I think we all gravitate towards what makes us tick and certainly what we think sounds great even if it is coloured or far from the ideal neutral sound that is theoretically how our system should sound.
you became a croft fanboy jim.. i count about 10 crofts
you became a croft fanboy jim.. i count about 10 crofts
Think your right, there is a bit of a theme running through all those amps!:lol:
Wow - that's quite a list! I expect that might be because you worked in an audio dealer's shop.
My amplifier history is somewhat shorter in manufacturer's names but do show a loyal Quad following . In rough chronological order they are:
Mullard 5-10
Quad 22 + 2 x Quad II
Sugden C51 + A51
Quad 33/303
Quad 44/405 Mk.I (modified)
Quad 44/405 Mk.II
Quad 520
Radford STA15 Mk.III
Quad 510 monoblocks
Mark Levinson ML-2 monoblocks
Quad 50E monblocks
Quad 303K
Cambridge P50 integrated amp
Quad 405, monoblocked and upgraded to Keith Snook level 3, and with improved power supplies
and finally a
Crown (Amcron) D50.
Wow - that's quite a list! I expect that might be because you worked in an audio dealer's shop.
My amplifier history is somewhat shorter in manufacturer's names but do show a loyal Quad following . In rough chronological order they are:
Mullard 5-10
Quad 22 + 2 x Quad II
Sugden C51 + A51
Quad 33/303
Quad 44/405 Mk.I (modified)
Quad 44/405 Mk.II
Quad 520
Radford STA15 Mk.III
Quad 510 monoblocks
Mark Levinson ML-2 monoblocks
Quad 50E monblocks
Quad 303K
Cambridge P50 integrated amp
Quad 405, monoblocked and upgraded to Keith Snook level 3, and with improved power supplies
and finally a
Crown (Amcron) D50.
A Quad fanboy :lol: I bought Quad because I remember a trip to the BBC studio at Pebble Mill in Birmingham and they were using them there so I though if its good enough for the BBC they would be good enough for me. I also got a good discount at the dealers I worked for!:)
A Quad fanboy :lol: I bought Quad because I remember a trip to the BBC studio at Pebble Mill in Birmingham and they were using them there so I though if its good enough for the BBC they would be good enough for me. I also got a good discount at the dealers I worked for!:)
pebble mill site was originally a fulling mill, for making felt
pebble mill site was originally a fulling mill, for making felt
Had to look Fulling mill up as I had never heard of one.
Had to look Fulling mill up as I had never heard of one.
think it came from sweden originally. the cloth was 'felted up'. the swedish name is vadmalsstamp .. the mill dated back to the 16th c
Standing outside Earls Court waiting for Pink Floyd "The Wall" concert 1979. I am pictured with my back facing the camera with denim jacket and some artwork of my own on the back. Wish I had kept it.
When I went too the concert I had read one review and did not know what to expect. As it turns out it was by far the best concert I ever went too over the past 50 years. I was just 16 at the time and it blew my mind. The sound and visuals were truly extraordinary even way back then!
[https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53259052546_079ffc4ae3_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2p9jyNE)A6B59C56-E4E9-4AD1-9800-900394765EB1 (https://flic.kr/p/2p9jyNE) by J
(https://www.flickr.com/photos/162281319@N03/), on Flickr
Firebottle
15-10-2023, 08:54
I saw Pink Floyd a couple of times at Mothers in Erdington, fabulous gigs.
A few years later I saw them at De Monfort Hall in Leicester, the set had come on a lot.
I didn't realise it had been demolished.
I didn't realise it had been demolished.
I was surprised too when I head it was gone. Saw Floyd there twice.
I've only seen Pink Floyd twice: the first time in the late '60s when Syd Barratt was with them, and the second time was at the Bath Festival when they performed Atom Heart Mother.
I've only seen Pink Floyd twice: the first time in the late '60s when Syd Barratt was with them, and the second time was at the Bath Festival when they performed Atom Heart Mother.
Epic stuff.
Wakefield Turntables
15-10-2023, 19:30
WOW! I've never seen them so you guys have been to some EPIC gigs.
WOW! I've never seen them so you guys have been to some EPIC gigs.
Such a long time ago but the memory is still fresh in my mind.
I have not posted here for a good while as I have been too distracted by upgrading my mountain bike and this years decorating which turned out to be a mammoth job on the Hall, stairs and landing. Nearly finished after 3 months work!
My attention has now once again returned to my system and possible upgrades which are in the pipeline both regarding the analogue system and maybe a new DAC. I did have a mess about with a few DACs and tried some CDP and streaming but soon got bored and abandoned the digital side of my system again. Whatever I do and which ever way I slice and dice it unfortunately I am left with a simple conclusion digital sounds errr digital and I want it to sound analogue which I find more satisfying on nearly every level apart from the effort involved. I suppose its like wishing an apple tastes like an orange and that is never going to happen.
However I have not given up entirely and plan to improve the FBA with a new DAC fairly soon just for fun and to quell the audio fool upgrade disease!:). That will also tick the box swapping box.:)
Turning back to my analogue system I have been looking at possible alternative cartridges that may perform at the level of the 2M black or possibly better and the only one I am considering is the Nagaoka MP500. This cartridge by all accounts may be a worthy contender and give me a big slice of analogue satisfaction with a slightly different take to the 2M Black. I have considered MC cartridges - AGAIN:rolleyes: but the cost out weighs the desire as I would have to spend a few thousand bucks to get a slam dunk improvement over the Black.
In my younger days I was a massive box swapper and indeed I see many folk are still battling with this disease but I cured myself by going cold turkey many years ago and now I don't have quite the urge as I did. Much of the hifi and gear I have heard over the last few years I can put into two categories. 1. Different. 2. Too expensive. As far as improving the sound I have, well that's tricky. In the past 8 years most bits of kit I have tried have led me to a dead end or one step forwards and 2 steps backward, so I have stuck where I am. Quite often I have actually found myself going round in circles but I am sure I am not the only one.;)
The room acoustic work I have done has bought about big improvements and just shows how fickle our hearing is when we try and change the sound with bits of wire, glowing glass bottles and new mysterious black boxes. All that we hear can be turned upside down very easily by room treatment or should I say trying to get out system to play nicely with our listening room or is it the other way round?:eek:
So now the autumn nights are drawing in I am playing a lot more music again and I will shine the spotlight on my system. I have bought a fair bit of music this year and have been astonished by some of it and how it sounds on the system. One album in particular an original analogue pressing of Kraftwerk Trans Europe Express is simply stunning. Comparing this to any remaster or re release on vinyl or digital shows a huge gulf between the original and all other issues. It has led me to dive down some very expensive rabbit holes.
In the 90s I had all the Nags up to the MP30 - which was superb. Then went MC for a bit, then went to the Ortofon 540 Mk2 which is what the Black used to be called.
Used that for a long time but never thought it was quite as good as the MP30. The MP30 seemed to have a little bit of an extra 'something' especially for rock music.
Much later I got an MP50 used and fitted the MP500 stylus. It's outstanding all-rounder, although I still think the MP30 had the edge with rock.
MP500 is a bit pricey but not heard any better all rounder. To put cost in perspective the most expensive cartridge I ever heard cost £15K and it wasn't as good.
Still have the MP50 and an MP15 although all vinyl paraphernalia is now mothballed.
Some of the reviews of the Nag MP500 suggest it actually sounds like a very good MC but with some of the benefits of an MM. It is probably the only MM cartridge that I feel could replace the 2M black. The last cartridge that actually got anywhere near the 2M was a M55e with an SAS boron cantilevered micro ridge Jico stylus.
I better start saving the pennies as the MP500 is not cheap. I wouldn't mind trying an MP30 though or MP50. May have a look around see what is available?
Ali Tait
11-11-2023, 16:25
Be interested in what you think of the 500, been thinking of getting one too. Trashing my Gullwing put me off pricey MC’s.
Be interested in what you think of the 500, been thinking of getting one too. Trashing my Gullwing put me off pricey MC’s.
I remember hearing that Gullwing on I think it was your Mission 774 tonearm sometime back Ali.
Very nice but ouch very expensive!
Wakefield Turntables
11-11-2023, 19:07
£800 for the mp500, that's about 2M ball park? I've never ever heard a Nag! Can you believe that? I'm looking forward to hearing what you've got to say about that one when (if) you get one.
£800 for the mp500, that's about 2M ball park? I've never ever heard a Nag! Can you believe that? I'm looking forward to hearing what you've got to say about that one when (if) you get one.
Looking at £500 for a Nag MP500 imported from Japan.
Yes I heard that combination of Ali's at the one and only (so far) AoS get together that Martin had arranged.
The Mission 774 arm is quite versatile; offering a stable and inert platform for both fixed and moving coil cartridges.
My complaint is with those cartridges that have a long exposed and vulnerable cantilever. Especially those that have a boron cantilever, which are particularly brittle and easily snapped. :doh:
I think the MP500 has a boron cantilever!:eek:
I don't know how clumsy you would need to be for it to be a problem. Somewhere between 'Very' and 'Clouseau'.
I'm pretty cack handed and never wrecked mine. Even after a few ales.
Ali Tait
11-11-2023, 22:31
I remember hearing that Gullwing on I think it was your Mission 774 tonearm sometime back Ali.
Very nice but ouch very expensive!
Yeah used a 774. Still can’t believe I trashed it lol.
I have about 30 cartridges, many of which have a boron cantilever but I confess I have broken one. Not by doing something stupid with cleaning the stylus, or 'back-cueing', but putting the cartridge/headshell back in its box. The cantilever was very long and I caught the stylus on the edge of the polystyrene box. An aluminium cantilever would have bent, but boron is brittle and the cantilever snapped.
I think another potential contender is the VM760SLC.
The price of the Stylus puts me off trying one, but I think it is cheaper than the MP500 stylus.
I will also add a left field suggestion - the Vertere Sabre. Another high end MM.
I think another potential contender is the VM760SLC.
The price of the Stylus puts me off trying one, but I think it is cheaper than the MP500 stylus.
I will also add a left field suggestion - the Vertere Sabre. Another high end MM.
Have you heard the VM760SLC Kevin? My only concern would be that it may not have the heft of an MP500. AT cartridges seem to excel at the top end and I have yet to hear one with a rich, full bass.
I have not heard the SLC, but do run several other cartridges similar.
If you are finding that AT do not give you a rich, full bass, you may have a capacitance loading issue, so you can cross my suggestion off the list.
HiFi world said this in December 2017:
They track well, produce far less distortion than all rivals and sound sparklingly clean, clear and forthright. Differences between them are, surprisingly, minimal – being only tip profile, which in use introduces subtle sound quality differences best spotted by aficionados. That makes the least expensive ’740ML easily best value. The ’750SH had a tad more ability and would be my choice, whilst the ’760SLC is more for those that want its top end brightness – but it doesn't justify its price differential.
So please ignore the suggestion of the SLC.
HiFi world said this in December 2017:
They track well, produce far less distortion than all rivals and sound sparklingly clean, clear and forthright. Differences between them are, surprisingly, minimal – being only tip profile, which in use introduces subtle sound quality differences best spotted by aficionados. That makes the least expensive ’740ML easily best value. The ’750SH had a tad more ability and would be my choice, whilst the ’760SLC is more for those that want its top end brightness – but it doesn't justify its price differential.
So please ignore the suggestion of the SLC.
Thanks for that Kev, saves me trawling round the net.
Just whilst your there, can I ask do you use a valve preamp with your 686?
I use either the Kin or the Topping Pre90.
I did some light modifications to the Kin for things that annoyed me yesterday. Just minor things, so the topping is back in the system today.
I built my 686 to take either single ended or balanced inputs.
Eventually I want to add a 2nd TT and then use the Kin stage for casual listening, and the BB3 through the Kin for proper listening sessions.
I use either the Kin or the Topping Pre90.
I did some light modifications to the Kin for things that annoyed me yesterday. Just minor things, so the topping is back in the system today.
Two nice pieces of kit there. I know you had a 686 so wondered what you were using. Valve preamps work well with the 686 which I presume includes the KIN? If you are using the BB3 when playing vinyl then I suppose your getting some benefit there too?
Are you tempted to try Class D? Interesting Neurochrome now sell a Purifi kit albeit with SMPS, however I thing this maybe to do with cost?
I am not interested in trying Class D. I am happy with Class AB, either with the 686 or Graham Slee Proprius.
How many amplifiers do we actually need?
I also have:
Kenwood KA3020SE
Arcam Alpha 8R
Arcam Alpha 9P
Arcam Alpha 10P
I think that is enough?
I am waiting for thé day my daughter wants a system in her bedroom.
It will be based on the Arcam 8R, 9P and the Cyrus CLS70 I have in storage.
Two nice pieces of kit there. I know you had a 686 so wondered what you were using. Valve preamps work well with the 686 which I presume includes the KIN? If you are using the BB3 when playing vinyl then I suppose your getting some benefit there too?
Are you tempted to try Class D? Interesting Neurochrome now sell a Purifi kit albeit with SMPS, however I thing this maybe to do with cost?
I don't think Neurochrome sell a Purifi kit? It's not on their website anyway.
This is a good and affordable option for Class D (Hypex rather than Purifi) https://apollonaudio.com/product/apollon-ncmp400-amplifier/
Purifi is a brand name, so I think Martin is correct.
I don't think Neurochrome sell a Purifi kit? It's not on their website anyway.
This is a good and affordable option for Class D (Hypex rather than Purifi) https://apollonaudio.com/product/apollon-ncmp400-amplifier/
Your correct Martin, they just sell a Purifi buffer.
I must have been mistaken watching this video. Basically its just how to build a Purifi amp with a few Neurochrome bits used in the construction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eahh4Czp-ko
I have now been informed something is now on its way from the Amazon empire.
Will it transform my listening experience?;)
This?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hearing-Aid-Big-Ears-Over/dp/B009YXOMBM/ref=mp_s_a_1_3?crid=PJYQF4304ZL9&keywords=hearing+aid+big+ears&qid=1700151545&sprefix=hearing+aid+big+ears%2Caps%2C138&sr=8-3
It might come to that!:lol:
Wakefield Turntables
16-11-2023, 19:58
Looks like Ortofon are doing something new with the 2M range of things.
Looks like Ortofon are doing something new with the 2M range of things.
What have you heard?
Wakefield Turntables
16-11-2023, 20:29
Heres a link https://www.analogplanet.com/content/ortofon-2mr-series-mm-cartridges
Thanks mate just liked at the Ortofon site too. Not sure if it is just a different mounting design or they have changed internals a little?
R stands for reduced as in height so it is a design change to accommodate a wider range of tonearms.
After a long period without any change to my digital system I thought it was time to upgrade the sound quality with another DAC. My current device has started to have a few issues with connectivity and the inputs are a getting a bit fragile so time to move on. What should I expect from a £30 DAC?
But what should I buy as there are trillions of DACs now available all carving out a sonic niche at every price level from £20 - £40,000. So I decided to noodle the net and search for something universally regarded, decent sounding and maybe a “Giant killer” .
Amusingly I followed every YouTuber, Internet review site and forum warrior to gauge opinion on devices at all prices and funnily enough the world of digital audio ranges from comments like “Dacs are all the same, its just ones and noughts” too extreme views about particular DACs having magical insights and incredible detail retrieval able to recreate a sonic image and soundscape far beyond anything analogue can do - yeah right.
Luckily I have been able to listen too numerous DACs over the years at every price level including some of the most highly regarded in the industry but none have made me feel I wanted to open my wallet and shell any money especially as DACs have evolved at an exponential rate over the past 10 years or so. Who wants to buy yesterdays technology when there is something far more exciting just round the corner? Ok some folk like yesterdays technology - err vinyl?
One factor I have noticed is that many DACs sound the same and differences are small, I think speakers and amplifiers contribute a far greater difference to your listening experience than any DAC in your system at least from my experience.
Anyhoo I feel we reached some sort of plateau with digital audio and I really don’t see or read anything that suggests it is advancing very fast at all nowadays. What is really great is that because of the competitive market place for DAC sales manufacturers have developed products that perform at a very high level indeed now, at a very low price and as can be seen on a famous technical review site they measure phenomenally well.
In fact having done some research it is interesting how many very cheap DACs now measure incredibly well and indeed measure better than some very expensive high end gear. Not that measurements tell you everything and I personally don’t buy gear based purely on measurements but at least you can be sure the device is performing well technically if that is your thing. Great performance is now available at every decreasing prices!
So after much consideration and consultation and a quick look at my bank account I have decided to buy another DAC. After five years I have gone bonkers and decided to double the amount I spent on my last DAC. Will I regret it, will this improve my digital listening, we will see?
SMSL SU-1.
I decided to buy the SMSL SU-1 as it seemed to tick most of the boxes I had in mind. It is well made and it has all the features I am looking for and very cheap. I am not paying for an expensive Bling Box, an expensive PSU or features I will not use.The SU-1 is minimalist product, DACs do not get much more basic than this. It has USB, Coax and Toslink inputs and RCA outputs and that’s it. No volume control but it does have lights letting you know what input is being used and an on/off switch.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53342218859_e8c9cf0c2b_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2pgEPfB)A36EEBD2-6BCB-497A-8727-B0FFC0C1343E (https://flic.kr/p/2pgEPfB) by /url], on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53341891441_3e049a8427_k.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/162281319@N03/)41915167-0837-469C-BA28-01440EE818DA (https://flic.kr/p/2pgD8Vt) by [url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/162281319@N03/], on Flickr
I am in the process of evaluating the DAC at the moment as I can configure it a number of ways in my system so I am trying to find the best implementation however this is my first listening experience of the SMSL SU-1 DAC. My initial listening was via USB output from my MacBook Air Laptop via a USB to Coax convertor and using Audirvana. I hooked up the tiny box, the SMSL is very small, and the Su-1 was recognised by Audirvana as a DSD DAC and everything worked straight away without any problems or glitches. The SU-1 is then connected to my Croft preamp using RCA input.
So how does it sound?
Based on the measurements it should have no sound of its own. Noise and distortion below 130dB right across the board, jitter below 140dB. Perfect linearity, FR only 0.3dB down at 20Khz.
I think the only Achilles heel might be reliability - and credibility, in some circles :D
Based on the measurements it should have no sound of its own. Noise and distortion below 130dB right across the board, jitter below 140dB. Perfect linearity, FR only 0.3dB down at 20Khz.
I think the only Achilles heel might be reliability - and credibility, in some circles :D
Yes it has superlative measurements and would embarrass some very high end DACS. It may even embarrass some of those who have spent gazillions on expensive DACS / PSU and Clocking. But when you have gone to that trouble and expense would you want to admit it?:D
What is absurd is the cost and how tiny this device is. Amazon are selling it for £67!
walpurgis
21-11-2023, 08:38
One of these would do the trick for many: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/225836643924?_trkparms=amclksrc%3DITM%26aid%3D1110 025%26algo%3DHOMESPLICE.COMPOSITELISTINGS%26ao%3D1 %26asc%3D256561%26meid%3Dcbc85e494b994dbfb8d8f8343 02647bd%26pid%3D101506%26rk%3D3%26rkt%3D25%26sd%3D 355159265212%26itm%3D225836643924%26pmt%3D1%26noa% 3D1%26pg%3D3458402%26algv%3DAlgoIndex5SimRanker%26 brand%3DUnbranded&_trksid=p3458402.c101506.m1851
I have a couple and they sound just fine, cost me less than a fiver each a couple of years ago.
Yes it has superlative measurements and would embarrass some very high end DACS. It may even embarrass some of those who have spent gazillions on expensive DACS / PSU and Clocking. But when you have gone to that trouble and expense would you want to admit it?:D
What is absurd is the cost and how tiny this device is. Amazon are selling it for £67!
I paid twice that for mine! But it does have a cool orange and blue display screen. And can be used as a pre-amp. (Although I don't, I'm too paranoid that it will glitch and go to full output. Plus I like a proper rotary volume control).
Come on then James, are you now getting Pure, Perfect Sound Forever?
Haha not quite but very close. It probably is pure and perfect but I miss the distortion I get from vinyl:lol:
Haha not quite but very close. It probably is pure and perfect but I miss the distortion I get from vinyl:lol:
try pulling your interconnects out so they're barely making contact ;)
Really though, is it any different from that boom bang a lang thing you had before?
try pulling your interconnects out so they're barely making contact ;)
Really though, is it any different from that boom bang a lang thing you had before?
It is different but not night and day. I will pop some listening impressions on my blog later. What I can say for certain is I think you are right about digital audio in that you can’t tell a great deal of difference between DACs.
This should be more concerning for folk who have thrown lots of money them. I had a Chord Qutest here in my system some time back and it was definitely no better or marginally poorer sounding to this SMSL SU-1.
Reading round the net I saw an amusing post where a chap did a blind listening session with his mate who had a DCS DAC and they both scored the SMSL SU-1 higher!
Haha not quite but very close. It probably is pure and perfect but I miss the distortion I get from vinyl:lol:
Get a tube buffer on the output?
It is different but not night and day. I will pop some listening impressions on my blog later. What I can say for certain is I think you are right about digital audio in that you can’t tell a great deal of difference between DACs.
This should be more concerning for folk who have thrown lots of money them. I had a Chord Qutest here in my system some time back and it was definitely no better or marginally poorer sounding to this SMSL SU-1.
Reading round the net I saw an amusing post where a chap did a blind listening session with his mate who had a DCS DAC and they both scored the SMSL SU-1 higher!
I read on another forum someone saying that DACs are like different flavours of ice cream. For me the recordings should be the different flavours of ice cream, the DAC is just the scoop.
Get a tube buffer on the output?
Got plenty of tubes on the output!;)
The SU-1 is minimalist product, DACs do not get much more basic than this. It has USB, Coax and Toslink inputs and RCA outputs and that’s it. No volume control but it does have lights letting you know what input is being used and an on/off switch.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53342218859_e8c9cf0c2b_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2pgEPfB)A36EEBD2-6BCB-497A-8727-B0FFC0C1343E (https://flic.kr/p/2pgEPfB) by /url], on Flickr
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53341891441_3e049a8427_k.jpg (https://www.flickr.com/photos/162281319@N03/)41915167-0837-469C-BA28-01440EE818DA (https://flic.kr/p/2pgD8Vt) by [url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/162281319@N03/], on Flickr
How is the SU1 powered? I can't see a power socket.
I read on another forum someone saying that DACs are like different flavours of ice cream. For me the recordings should be the different flavours of ice cream, the DAC is just the scoop.
Nicely put. :)
How is the SU1 powered? I can't see a power socket.
USB
willbewill
21-11-2023, 17:59
How is the SU1 powered? I can't see a power socket.
it's labelled USB
It is powered via the USB C socket - with 5v charger or LPS or directly from your computer. The USB socket also doubles as a data input aswell so you can play music and power it through the same socket.
Although the USB input is used to power the DAC it does not contribute any significant noise. This DAC is very well designed and gone are the days when the USB input resulted in lots of noise pollution. ASR have run tests on this and it shows excellent results concerning noise and distortion when using USB input. No need for galvanic isolation here or proprietary USB input technology.
However in real terms I believe the USB input is very slightly more noisy than Coax and Toslink.
It is powered via the USB C socket - with 5v charger or LPS or directly from your computer. The USB socket also doubles as a data input aswell so you can play music and power it through the same socket.
Thanks.
So we're I to try one out as an external DAC for a CDT, I would need a 5v power supply with a USB plug?
Thanks.
So we're I to try one out as an external DAC for a CDT, I would need a 5v power supply with a USB plug?
Yes that is all you will need. I have used it with a CDP with this set up and It works well.
and a lead i guess.
Yes just a coax cable from CDP or CDT to DAC.
The amount of plugs and connectors I have had to find to use with my LPS is ridiculous as everything I plug it into has a different plug socket. Luckily eBay and amazon are your friend and almost any combination can be found. Latest plug adapter I had to find was a Type C USB Male to DC 5.5x2.1mm Female Connector Charge Barrel Jack Power Adapter Type C USB 5V Connector for Type C USB Charging Device :rolleyes:
It's not just digital and computer audio.
With my purely analogue system, I have at times needed to use the following connectors:
1/4" Jack plugs
XLR connectors
DIN connectors
RCA 'phono' connectors
and
CAMAC connectors.
That is why I make up my own leads.
It's not just digital and computer audio.
With my purely analogue system, I have at times needed to use the following connectors:
1/4" Jack plugs
XLR connectors
DIN connectors
RCA 'phono' connectors
and
CAMAC connectors.
That is why I make up my own leads.
Drives me nuts. Every time I buy a device it needs a different connection!
Thanks.
So we're I to try one out as an external DAC for a CDT, I would need a 5v power supply with a USB plug?
just use a mobile phone charger, that's what I do.
Yes I have several mobile phone chargers, but I would still need an adapter to a USB type plug. Do such things exist?
Yes I have several mobile phone chargers, but I would still need an adapter to a USB type plug. Do such things exist?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07XZ7Q2N7/ref=pe_27063361_487055811_TE_dp_1?th=1
SMSL SU-1 DAC Listening and Sound Quality.
Albums and tracks used for evaluation.
Ballake Sissoko - Album Tomora - Track-Berekoy
Sera una Noche - Album La Segunda - Tracks La Roca
Agnes Obel - Album - Philharmonics - Track - Close Watch
Horror Inc - Album Briefly Eternal - Track-Phowa
John Campbell - Album Howlin Mercy - Track - Down in the hole ( Yes that old chestnut)
Set up 1.
SMSL SU-1 DAC -USB - MacBook Air -(Audirvana )- USB/SPDIF convertor -Dual 5v LPS (DAC and Convertor powered independently by LPS)- Croft 25R+ - Croft 7
Running through a diverse selection of tracks with large dynamic range and top notch recordings this tiny DAC delivers an astonishing performance. The most noticeable aspects of the sound I could observe straight off were tonal quality and texture especially through the midrange. I am not a detail and resolution freak and I would say although all the information in the upper frequencies was very clean,detailed and pure it was really the midrange that delighted the ear. This DAC paints lush broad strokes and therefore it is both engaging and masterful in how it presents recordings. It's not all about the detail but the big picture.
On Ballake Sissoke the string texture of the Kora sounded perfect with full harmonics and layering, no twanging thin sound here but just beautiful texture and palpable organic natural sounding notes.
Horror Inc is extreme electronic and huge dynamics. The Track Phowa has a massive presence in the room and you are left gobsmacked by the huge dynamic impact.
Agnes Obel is a fav of mine ( bedtime music). I listen too this album a lot on vinyl and the track Close Watch is a mesmerising palette of vocal manipulation and minimalist instrumentation . The SU-1 nails it and absolutely controls the different aspects of the stereo imaging to perfection. Here I notice the difference in precise clarity the vocal imaging sounds in comparison to vinyl.
John Campbell - "Down in the hole" once again defied belief when heard through the SU-1. Huge, controlled and liquid. Cavernous soundstage and dynamics. I have heard this on a Chord DAVE and the only area I felt the SU-1 looses out is in stage depth and imaging. The Su-1 has a very wide soundstage but not the greatest depth.
Finally an album that has been recorded and mastered at the highest level. Sera una Noche. I particularly like the track La Roca. This is basically an Argentinian group with traditional instruments playing in a great ambient space. The SU-1 captures and controls it beautifully. What I heard was impressive and made me forget for a moment I was listening to digital! This DAC lands somewhere in between digital and analogue in its sound. I did not hear any glassy strange artefacts or a digital glare. It actually sounded quite natural and certainly involving. All the music I played had great tone and texture and many of the aspects I look for when listening to vinyl came across without fatigue.
The lack of distortion, precision and very clean sound that this DAC has may have finally broken through my listening pain barrier with digital audio. Maybe some of those technical measured aspects really do matter here and contributed to what I was hearing?
So this tiny device was ticking a lot of boxes, I was impressed but there was more to come!
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07XZ7Q2N7/ref=pe_27063361_487055811_TE_dp_1?th=1
Thanks Jim, but it has just dawned on me that I am being a complete numpty! I was thinking of chargers for the old Nokia style phones, whereas of course 'smartphones' use a charger which has a USB socket, as does the phone. So all I need is a readily available USB to USB lead.
:doh:
Thanks Jim, but it has just dawned on me that I am being a complete numpty! I was thinking of chargers for the old Nokia style phones, whereas of course 'smartphones' use a charger which has a USB socket, as does the phone. So all I need is a readily available USB to USB lead.
:doh:
Excellent Barry then its nice and straight forward. Powering the DAC via USB and using the Coaxial input is my preferred route.
Brilliant James, result!
Cheers Gary, this one is quite an eye opener or should I say ear opener for many reasons not least it has got me listening to digital music again!
After watching several “back to back test” videos on YouTube (yes, not the best source) I came to the conclusion that the DAC does not make a big difference, as long as it performs. I gave up looking for a new DAC at that point.
After watching several “back to back test” videos on YouTube (yes, not the best source) I came to the conclusion that the DAC does not make a big difference, as long as it performs. I gave up looking for a new DAC at that point.
You are probably right and that is one of the main reasons I did not want to spend a large amount of cash on one when as I have found you can get superb for performance at a reasonable cost.
Good work James.
One of the reasons AoS was created, was partly to discover and announce to the membership, those items of audio hardware which not only sounded good, but also offered exceptional value for money. Your examination of the SU-1 DAC is a continuation of this pursuit.
It has always puzzled me why manufacturers are charging more and more for 'new improved' iterations, when the degree of improvement tends to a vanishingly small limit. :scratch:
Good work James.
One of the reasons AoS was created, was partly to discover and announce to the membership, those items of audio hardware which not only sounded good, but also offered exceptional value for money. Your examination of the SU-1 DAC is a continuation of this pursuit.
It has always puzzled me why manufacturers are charging more and more for 'new improved' iterations, when the degree of improvement tends to a vanishingly small limit. :scratch:
I am not the biggest fan of digital audio so to find something this great and for a ridiculous price is a big plus. It has also encouraged me to listen to more digital which means it must be doing something right.
Manufacturers are always coming up with usually ever increasingly complex and expensive DACs as they are really only interested in making money. This DAC breaks the rules and goes the other way. I would be surprised if anyone is making much money out of this DAC at all.
Its a HIFI gift to us all.
Now you've cracked digital James,
Have a play with a Roon free trial with Qobuz,
SO much good music out there, if you can do digital!
Lawrence001
22-11-2023, 18:55
I've got an SMSL Sanskrit DAC put away, I must check out if it has the same chip etc as the SU-1 (I think it's an AKM) as it might work nicely in my system if it's that good. I used to use it with my RPi/headphone amp set up but never tried it in the hi-fi.
Lawrence001
22-11-2023, 18:59
Just looked it up, I think I've got the 10th anniversary MK2 which has the same AK4493 chip, result [emoji16]
Just looked it up, I think I've got the 10th anniversary MK2 which has the same AK4493 chip, result [emoji16]
Nearly the same Lawrence - SMSL Su-1 has AK4493S chip.:)
Lawrence001
22-11-2023, 19:53
I can't imagine there's much difference, I wonder what the S denotes.
I can't imagine there's much difference, I wonder what the S denotes.
A bit of bedtime reading:lol:
https://www.akm.com/us/en/about-us/news/2022/20220207-ak4493sak4490r/
SMSL SU-1 DAC with CDP
Albums and tracks used for evaluation.
Ballake Sissoko - Album Tomora - Track-Berekoy
Sera una Noche - Album La Segunda - Tracks La Roca and Tauigto Militar
Agnes Obel - Album - Philharmonics - Track - Close Watch
Horror Inc - Album Briefly Eternal - Track-Phowa
John Campbell - Album Howlin Mercy - Track - Down in the hole ( Yes that old chestnut)
Set up 2
SMSL SU-1 DAC -USB - Rotel RCD 965BX - Croft 25R+ - Croft 7
Having had great results with File based audio I thought it would be good to give the SMSL SU-1 a try with a CDP using it as an off board DAC. My old Rotel still manages to spin those shiny discs so I lashed it all up via coaxial output from CDP to coax input on DAC. What I was to then hear was a surprise as in previous sessions my File based audio had always been my preferred route for listening to digital audio but this time the tables turned in favour of the CDP. What I heard on this first listening session with the SMSL SU-1 hooked up to the CDP was some of the very best digital performance I have heard in my system.
On the track Berekoy by Ballake Sissoke the string texture of the Kora not only improved but took on more weight and tangibility. It moved one step forward closer to reality and had greater transparency than previously heard via the MacBook Air. I held my breath as I wondered if this was just a one off with this particular track but it wasn’t.
Horror Inc - The Track Phowa took on more weight and even larger presence in the room and I noticed the bass performance of my speakers were now exciting the floor with huge impact and power.
Agnes Obel the track Close Watch had a more solid feel to it even though it has an ethereal sound. Imaging went up a notch and dynamics improved.
John Campbell - Down in the hole. I noticed on this track his vocal quality and imaging was noticeably better locked dead central and more 3D. The recorded ambient sound of this track sounded even more cavernous/spacious. There was a lush almost luxurious tone to the whole track, rich and very analogue in its sound. Very impressive but my final track got the goose pimps up.
Sera una Noche. The track La Roca starts off fairly slow and stays that way with brass instruments , an accordion and some drums. It is recorded in a fabulous natural ambient space and at first you think it sounds a bit of dreary until you hear the first drum beat then your interest is captured. What I heard via the SMSL SU-1 DAC was stunning. The huge soundstage and massive weight captured in this recording defy belief. For a moment it felt like my system had disappeared and I had reached complete transparency, nothing between me and the music. The sound was huge, controlled and spine tingling.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53348664550_05ca88c373_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2pheRkd)ECE029ED-9351-4D22-A10F-D174FDB0C9EF (https://flic.kr/p/2pheRkd) by , on Flickr
So did the SMSL SU-1 convert me to digital - err not quite….?:)
Having listened to SMSL Su-1 extensively now for the past week there are a number of factors that influenced the sound I heard from this DAC. First of all, and forgive me if this is obvious, I listened to this DAC in my system which is based on tube amplifiers and a fair bit of what I heard was influenced by the amps.
The SMSL Su-1 is I believe a neutral sounding DAC and therefore may sound quite different with Solid State amps especially those leaning to the more neutral or analytical side. For me using valve amplification with the SMSL Su-1 was a perfect marriage and it suited this DAC and my system very well. As always system synergy is what you hope for but don't always get. It also allowed me to hear my amps with a very neutral source unlike my vinyl which err maybe not quite as neutral!. :)
I get a large soundstage and great dynamics using the Croft set up so for that to be heard with the SMSL DAC is a big plus. Maybe the amplification was adding a bit of richness / juiciness to the proceedings but I like those 2nd order harmonics and distortion. I am not one for a completely neutral, zero distortion and hyper detailed forensic system. This leaves me cold and just gets you chasing detail and pixel peeping. Impressive maybe at first but not really conducive to long listening sessions and an enjoyable musical experience.
So I would suggest choice of amplification and speakers plus room interaction is critical and I feel I had all by ducks in a row when plugging the SMSL SU-1 into my system. It actually allowed me to hear the rest of my system and its performance for what it was which was very interesting and informative. With a turntable and cartridge there are so many variables that can skew the sound one way or another.
The SMSL DAC was a joy to listen too and blurred some of the distinct lines I have always heard between vinyl and digital. As I have mentioned it sounded neither particularly digital or completely analogue and probably was doing as Martin (Macca) has suggested which was to not throw any sound of its own into the mix. This therefore would suggest I was listening to a reconstruction of the digital recording without any embellishment from the DAC.
But even though I accept all that and agree with it I never the less still feel that digital audio does have a sound of its own, like vinyl has a sound of its own. The only way I can describe this is the perception of a "processing" of the sound. It does not sound completely natural like an all analogue system. This is how I hear digital. OK no more nasty harshness or clinical etching unless your system has these aspects already but there is still the awareness that digital audio has this processed nature.
The SMSL SU-1 allowed me to hear a smooth presentation with great presence and dynamics that on occasion could do some things my vinyl system can’t .But towards the end of last nights session I did some A-B comparisons of some of my favourite music which I know intimately. When I put the vinyl version back on it simply burst the digital bubble and I was bought back down to earth again and this was witnessed by other listeners in the room too. Where my vinyl beat the SMSL SU-1 was in two key areas. Natural sounding and realism.
Anyway that is the end of my review of this fantastic little DAC. I can’t remember enjoying listening to any other DAC more in my system and it let me listen to music for long periods without any fatigue. At £67 this must be the best value audio device I have ever owned and has gone a long way to improve the listening experience of my digital set up.
If its brought your digital closer to your Vinyl James that's a brilliant thing, especially for under £100.
Great write up mate, an enjoyable read.
brian2957
24-11-2023, 08:29
Great review James. I may treat myself to one of these :)
Firebottle
24-11-2023, 08:38
The only way I can describe this is the perception of a "processing" of the sound.
At £67 this must be the best value audio device I have ever owned.
Excellent find and write up James. I know what you mean with the 'processing', I put that down to the DeltaSigma conversion unfortunately which is par for the course.
However the price/performance now is astounding, as you allude to.
Great review James. I may treat myself to one of these :)
It would make a good stocking filler!:)
Excellent find and write up James. I know what you mean with the 'processing', I put that down to the DeltaSigma conversion unfortunately which is par for the course.
However the price/performance now is astounding, as you allude to.
Cheers Alan I am glad I am not the only one who hears this.
We are living it great times when you can buy products that have excellent price/performance.
If its brought your digital closer to your Vinyl James that's a brilliant thing, especially for under £100.
Great write up mate, an enjoyable read.
A true audio bargain mate, :lol:
Wakefield Turntables
24-11-2023, 10:06
Great experimentation, as ever, Jim!
Great experimentation, as ever, Jim!
I keep trying.:)
Stryder5
24-11-2023, 10:57
I keep trying.:)
I could be tempted to bring my Soekris R2R DAC.
Would take the DeltaSigma out the equation.
Gary
I could be tempted to bring my Soekris R2R DAC.
Would take the DeltaSigma out the equation.
Gary
I have had a Soekris in the system thanks Gary. Also had a few Chord DACs (FPGA). My last DAC had Burr brown chips and I have had Sabre DACs, they all sounded digital unfortunately, that's just the nature of the beast. Maybe R2Rs have a magic sauce?
No matter which way you slice and dice it digital has so far always had a slightly processed sound in my experience. Sounds great otherwise.
Pretty much like all vinyl sounds like vinyl.:)
Never got on with Sabre based Dacs, all sounded too ‘etched’ for my taste.
Never got on with Sabre based Dacs, all sounded too ‘etched’ for my taste.
I have heard examples I think of most of the chips out there and I agree the Sabre can be a bit aggressive. Problem with all DACs is that whatever chip they use it all comes down to the implementation in the finished product. PSU and analogue output can completely change the sound.
I have heard examples I think of most of the chips out there and I agree the Sabre can be a bit aggressive. Problem with all DACs is that whatever chip they use it all comes down to the implementation in the finished product. PSU and analogue output can completely change the sound.
exactly right.
same Dac chip in a different Dac won’t sound the same.
worth getting Psu and output stage right, more influence (imo) than choice of Dac chip, unless you go FPGA like Chord, DCS and PS Audio, then it's down to Software.
even with that uber solution, if the PSU and analogue output stage isn't done right, the Dacs sound will take a big hit.
all a bit of a tangled weave this digital stuff.
the 1’s and 0’s part was done a while ago, it’s all the other stuff where innovation comes from I think?
In another thread I was asking for help understanding what was going on with the Spotify feed to my Dacs when using Spotify. I have 2 Dacs that take DSD processing a Topping D30 (up to 24bit/192 khz and an ifi Zen Dac v2 which takes up to 32bit/384khz. It shows a different coloured LED according to what it is processing.
It tells me that it is processing/giving out DSD. I understand that ASIO which windows uses converts this to PCM at 32bits and streams a "native" signal. I have the option to select a whole menu of different bit and sampling rates which I am now wondering if I am being tricked into thinking that the higher the rate the better the sound, or is the case that regardless of what I input, ASIO and DSD will put out what it receives? Sorry if this sounds a bit mixed up, but I am.
Link to ifi explanation here :-
https://ifi-audio.com/faqs/dop-versus-asio-native-what-are-the-differences-similarities/
exactly right.
same Dac chip in a different Dac won’t sound the same.
worth getting Psu and output stage right, more influence (imo) than choice of Dac chip, unless you go FPGA like Chord, DCS and PS Audio.
even then if that’s not done right, the Dacs sound will take a big hit.
all a bit of a tangled weave this digital stuff.
the 1’s and 0’s part was done a while ago, it’s all the other stuff where innovation comes from I think?
Totally agree Gary.
So much of the gear we use depends on top notch power supply, get that right and everything else has a good chance of sounding decent. I think amps more than DACs are dependant on great PSU and as I have found the better the PSU the better the sound. I use a Linear PSU at 5v with the SMSL Su-1 DAC and the USB /SPDIF convertor and it helps out a fair bit. Sound is definitely more spacious and effortless.
In another thread I was asking for help understanding what was going on with the Spotify feed to my Dacs when using Spotify. I have 2 Dacs that take DSD processing a Topping D30 (up to 24bit/192 khz and an ifi Zen Dac v2 which takes up to 32bit/384khz. It shows a different coloured LED according to what it is processing.
It tells me that it is processing/giving out DSD. I understand that ASIO which windows uses converts this to PCM at 32bits and streams a "native" signal. I have the option to select a whole menu of different bit and sampling rates which I am now wondering if I am being tricked into thinking that the higher the rate the better the sound, or is the case that regardless of what I input, ASIO and DSD will put out what it receives? Sorry if this sounds a bit mixed up, but I am.
Link to ifi explanation here :-
https://ifi-audio.com/faqs/dop-versus-asio-native-what-are-the-differences-similarities/
none of this will make any difference, you can't add what is not there to begin with whether you upsample, convert to DSD, whatever.
Always telling that people need the little lights to tell them what 'resolution' they are listening to.
I'd just switch it all off. Spotify premium is a long way below CD (320Kbit/s compared to 1411kbit/s) and tests show most people cannot distinguish between them and those who can don't find it easy. So doing all sorts of magic tricks with it is certainly pointless.
none of this will make any difference, you can't add what is not there to begin with whether you upsample, convert to DSD, whatever.
Always telling that people need the little lights to tell them what 'resolution' they are listening to.
I'd just switch it all off. Spotify premium is a long way below CD (320Kbit/s compared to 1411kbit/s) and tests show most people cannot distinguish between them and those who can don't find it easy. So doing all sorts of magic tricks with it is certainly pointless.
Thanks for your thoughts. I have no problem with the way it sounds.
none of this will make any difference, you can't add what is not there to begin with whether you upsample, convert to DSD, whatever.
Always telling that people need the little lights to tell them what 'resolution' they are listening to.
I'd just switch it all off. Spotify premium is a long way below CD (320Kbit/s compared to 1411kbit/s) and tests show most people cannot distinguish between them and those who can don't find it easy. So doing all sorts of magic tricks with it is certainly pointless.
Mibbay a bit harsh Mate? :scratch:
Digitals not as simple as some make out, sure, it WORKS but it's not always optimised to be its best.
I say you gotta try oversampling filters, upsampling, DSP and all that stuff, because even though its 'Digital', it still is privy to the rules of Synergy in your system.
Even in the mico universe of your Digital playback chain, Hell even your Dac or digital transport Topology.
This Games subjective,
Ones room/noise profile/ preferred system flavour ain't anyone elses, so there's no "one size fits all" outside of pedantic hifi dogma
I enjoy listening to Spotify through my Apple TV, it sounds great.
No one size fits all Amigo, it's all good.
(I enjoy other ways to play my music too, all equally enjoyable, or I wouldn't be doing em :) )
Mibbay a bit harsh Mate? :scratch:
Digitals not as simple as some make out, sure, it WORKS but it's not always optimised to be its best.
I say you gotta try oversampling filters, upsampling, DSP and all that stuff, because even though its 'Digital', it still is privy to the rules of Synergy in your system.
Even in the mico universe of your Digital playback chain, Hell even your Dac or digital transport Topology.
This Games subjective,
Ones room/noise profile/ preferred system flavour ain't anyone elses, so there's no "one size fits all" outside of pedantic hifi dogma
I enjoy listening to Spotify through my Apple TV, it sounds great.
No one size fits all Amigo, it's all good.
(I enjoy other ways to play my music too, all equally enjoyable, or I wouldn't be doing em :) )
Think I am being misunderstood here, There's nothing wrong with Spotify, that's what I'm saying.
There's nothing wrong with Spotify, yeah.
All singing from the same Hymn Sheet. :)
I spent today messing with room acoustics again! My room is not acoustically symmetrical as my furniture does not allow this currently and although I thought I had sorted first reflection points I have had a re think as I discovered an imbalance from my speakers. Luckily I can use the dual volume controls on the Croft to balance things somewhat but I think a more effect solution will be some more room treatment.
I need to build at least another panel or maybe a larger panel for the left hand side of the room so as soon as I can get some more materials I will get building again. It is very strange how sound imaging from your speakers is located by your hearing as obviously the speakers bounce the high frequencies off any reflective surface they can. And as I have found out room treatment can untangle the crazy reflections and produce much better imaging and depth from the speakers.
So I will be back to the staple gun asap!
The SMSL -Su1 DAC is still surprising me with its fabulous performance and is definitely the best bang for buck device I have bought and used in my system. It would be highly amusing to compare this DAC against some "High End" DACs out there as I am sure in a blind listening test it would whop a fair few. I have been reading a number of other folk around the audio community have indeed found this to be the case.
This got me thinking, are DACs at the upper end of the market just either overcomplicated, overpriced or both as indeed the job they have to do is mainly done by the DAC chip which costs peanuts. The rest of of the DACs design is really where the costs ramp up especially complicated PSU and clocking and not least features and Casework. But at the end of the day I am sure this all has marginal gains and like expensive cables there is a good sprinkling of snake oil.
Of course proof of all this is in the listening and as I have found from personal experience some of the more expensive DACs out there are very ordinary sounding and only marginally superior to very cheap DACs in SQ. Their features, casework and complexity and build maybe superior but the actual listening experience quite often does not justify the price. Again I liken this to my experience with cables where I have had some extremely expensive cables in my system and they have sounded no better or actually worse than some cheap cables.
To put things into perspective I have found far greater differences between cartridges and turntables than I have ever between DACs and there is certainly a massive difference in listening experience between speakers but maybe less so with amplifiers, however even these have greater impact on listening experience than different DACs.
All the rest of the mumbo jumbo around DACs ie R2R vs Delta Sigma vs FPGA , multiple power supplies, ultra clocking, topology, connection capabilities, Hi Rez etc etc just dances around the head of a pin. It begs the question just how many ways does digital audio need to try and resolve something that was meant to have been 'perfect sound forever". Apparently if you have followed digital audio for the last 40 years there have been unbelievable amounts of change which have resolved this perfect sound for ever. Digital was meant to have been sorted 40 years ago but if you have followed every twist and turn there has been always been something else discovered that has resulted in better digital sound.
In my experience it never was perfect and never will be.....?
A pic of the inside my SMSL - SU1 showing the AKM4493S velvet sound technology chip and some nice Japanese Rubicon caps.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53383614528_aab4386212_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/2pkjYK3)617778A3-022C-4634-83D4-88FB02C235A7 (https://flic.kr/p/2pkjYK3) by Jurl], on Flickr
AKM data sheet on the chip used. It has some fantastic digital resolving capabilities.
[url]https://www.akm.com/us/en/products/audio/audio-dac/ak4493seq/ (https://www.flickr.com/photos/162281319@N03/)
I bought a behringer Ultramatch Pro some years ago mainly as it had an upsampling facility and I was interested to see what that brought the table. It is a real swiss army knife type of thing which is really for the pro user but at £100 I thought it was worth a punt. It uses the AKM4393VF Dac chip. I have not been able to find any info as to how this compares with the AKM 4493SEQ. However it was clearly good enough for Mr Lampizator to use his talents to improve on the Ultramatch (see link) and I found details on Audio Science Review where 2 versions of the RME-ADI-2 Dac were tested one with the 4393VF and the other an ESS Sabre chip. Neither showed much difference in the tests carried out.
The Behringer has AES/EBU digital input as well as all the usual digital inputs except USB. It has Balanced digital outs and balanced analogue outs. It is a really good performer and my most used or "go to" Dac, probably because I know its performance inside out having used it for several years.
So if your experience is similar to mine then there is nothing shabby about a lot of Dacs in the £100 bracket. I recently bought an ifi Zen Dac v2 as it was £115 at Richer Sounds. This is a USB only Dac using a Burr Brown Dac chip. There is RCA and balanced outs and the ability to uses one of 6 different filters including DSD and MQA. I use this in DSD mode and it is pretty good, a bit more in your face than the Behringer but nicely musical.
http://lampizator.eu/lampizator/transport/behringer/behringer.html
Firebottle
08-12-2023, 12:34
The AK4493 seems to be the 'go to' chip for reasonably priced high performance Dacs, the Topping E30 II uses it too.
The AK4493 seems to be the 'go to' chip for reasonably priced high performance Dacs, the Topping E30 II uses it too.
Think it is one of the newer DAC chips AK produced after the factory fire. It certainly packs a high specification and it is used in their velvet sound DACs - whatever that maybe...???
Lawrence001
08-12-2023, 19:51
The AK4493 seems to be the 'go to' chip for reasonably priced high performance Dacs, the Topping E30 II uses it too.I'm not sure it's the SEQ Velvet chip though?
I bought a behringer Ultramatch Pro some years ago mainly as it had an upsampling facility and I was interested to see what that brought the table. It is a real swiss army knife type of thing which is really for the pro user but at £100 I thought it was worth a punt. It uses the AKM4393VF Dac chip. I have not been able to find any info as to how this compares with the AKM 4493SEQ. However it was clearly good enough for Mr Lampizator to use his talents to improve on the Ultramatch (see link) and I found details on Audio Science Review where 2 versions of the RME-ADI-2 Dac were tested one with the 4393VF and the other an ESS Sabre chip. Neither showed much difference in the tests carried out.
The Behringer has AES/EBU digital input as well as all the usual digital inputs except USB. It has Balanced digital outs and balanced analogue outs. It is a really good performer and my most used or "go to" Dac, probably because I know its performance inside out having used it for several years.
So if your experience is similar to mine then there is nothing shabby about a lot of Dacs in the £100 bracket. I recently bought an ifi Zen Dac v2 as it was £115 at Richer Sounds. This is a USB only Dac using a Burr Brown Dac chip. There is RCA and balanced outs and the ability to uses one of 6 different filters including DSD and MQA. I use this in DSD mode and it is pretty good, a bit more in your face than the Behringer but nicely musical.
http://lampizator.eu/lampizator/transport/behringer/behringer.html
Interesting Rob. I would certainly like to hear a Lampizator but I have a feeling the soundstage on them maybe a bit too big by all accounts?
Interesting Rob. I would certainly like to hear a Lampizator but I have a feeling the soundstage on them maybe a bit too big by all accounts?
I would not be put off by what is said about the soundstage. I have 8 Dacs all of different vintage and different Dac chips and the Behringer does not stand out in that respect. You may have a problem getting hold of one as I am not sure they are made any more. There are 2nd hand ones for sale on ebay but if they have been used in a pro set up may be a bit battered. It could also be a sideways step for you unless you are intending to "Lamp" it. I modified loads of stuff over many years, but those mods seemed a bit of a step too far for me.
I would not be put off by what is said about the soundstage. I have 8 Dacs all of different vintage and different Dac chips and the Behringer does not stand out in that respect. You may have a problem getting hold of one as I am not sure they are made any more. There are 2nd hand ones for sale on ebay but if they have been used in a pro set up may be a bit battered. It could also be a sideways step for you unless you are intending to "Lamp" it. I modified loads of stuff over many years, but those mods seemed a bit of a step too far for me.
Interestingly there is going to be a review coming up of a Lampizator DAC build which was I think made available freely from one of his earlier DAC designs.
It will have 3 separate power supplies and is doable as a DIY project so I will be keen to see how that goes. I will post it up on here when its available.
Pointlessly complicated and pointlessly expensive.
I can see lots of reasons for not wanting a cheap Chinese DAC like Topping or SMSL - don't like the looks, the build quality, concerns over reliability/longevity, doesn't have some feature that is required, ethical issues with buying Chinese products, no bragging rights on forums or with hi-fi cronies.
But it's a fact that they do the task of digital to analogue conversion perfectly (or as perfectly as is possible).
Pointlessly complicated and pointlessly expensive.
I can see lots of reasons for not wanting a cheap Chinese DAC like Topping or SMSL - don't like the looks, the build quality, concerns over reliability/longevity, doesn't have some feature that is required, ethical issues with buying Chinese products, no bragging rights on forums or with hi-fi cronies.
But it's a fact that they do the task of digital to analogue conversion perfectly (or as perfectly as is possible).
I actually think a lot of the cheap Chinese DACs look great, unobtrusive and discreet. The larger more expensive bling DAC cases look gaudy and excessive to me. I would want to hide them away as many of them just look OTT.
I agree with you regarding the cheap Chinese DACs ability to convert almost perfectly;) however what I am not sure about is the influence power supplies and analogue output stage has on the sound. My bet would be it does manipulate the sound somewhat but whether that is accurate or veering away from the "truth" or not is a guess. I think much of the extra stuff on higher end DACs is just there to make the sound more "palatable"?:) ( analogue??)
I actually think a lot of the cheap Chinese DACs look great, unobtrusive and discreet. The larger more expensive bling DAC cases look gaudy and excessive to me. I would want to hide them away as many of them just look OTT.
I agree with you regarding the cheap Chinese DACs ability to convert almost perfectly;) however what I am not sure about is the influence power supplies and analogue output stage has on the sound. My bet would be it does manipulate the sound somewhat but whether that is accurate or veering away from the "truth" or not is a guess. I think much of the extra stuff on higher end DACs is just there to make the sound more "palatable"?:) ( analogue??)
well you can see from measurements taken from the analogue outputs (so that includes power supply, analogue output stage, in fact everything) that noise and distortion is negligible at all audible frequencies. So it's not a guess, by those parameters performance is indeed as perfect as it needs to be. The signal going to pre or power amp is accurate to the source.
I was listening to my Topping D30 today which was gifted to me recently out of the blue by a mate in exchange for some Pass Amp boards I gifted to him. Nice performer and is "up my street". Googled what is inside it and it is a CS4398. Years ago there was a thread on here about modding a cheap Dac board with a CS4397 in it. I only dug it out the other day and thought that I should give this more air time:)
well you can see from measurements taken from the analogue outputs (so that includes power supply, analogue output stage, in fact everything) that noise and distortion is negligible at all audible frequencies. So it's not a guess, by those parameters performance is indeed as perfect as it needs to be. The signal going to pre or power amp is accurate to the source.
So in fact all the additional "clean" power supplies and analogue output stage (op amps) actually count for nothing when analysed?
That's the difference between being "objective" and being "subjective". ;)
So in fact all the additional "clean" power supplies and analogue output stage (op amps) actually count for nothing when analysed?
There are some DACs with internal power supplies that bleed noise into the signal. So it's possible that sometimes a better power supply will help
Better just to buy one that's been designed with some care to such things in the first place though.
I know op amp 'rolling' is a thing but then so is astrology. Maybe in some circumstances improvements can be had, but again, just get something that doesn't need improving to work optimally.
There’s a saying.
“Music is just squiggly air”
In Hifi terms I'd add to that and say music is squiggly VOLTAGE.
Voltage being analogue,
It’s privy to noise, variances in impedance and all the other electrical stuff.
Digitals never been just about 1s and 0s, or what type of Dac chip you have fitted.
it’s a SYSTEM, and as such it’s down to implementation and synergy even at a component level.
Its easy (relatively speaking) to throw together a Dac that “works” (or measures well :eyebrows:) but getting one to play music that can move you is another thing I think?
I’ve owned a fair few dacs over they years, all different price points and heard differences in them all.
As James alludes to,
what is it that makes a good Dac sound the way it does?
Its a system, everything depends on everything else.
In my experience there are three main aspects.
Assuming 'good enough' case dampening and no leaky RFI/EMI,
Its the quality of the Power Supply, Analogue output stage and competancy of the digital design.
In that order.
Power supply is the big ticket item for me, I've upgraded PSU's and improved the quality of incoming AC in a fair few bits of kit now and always a significant step up.
The latest is with a separate linear PSU powering separately the analogue output stage of my Dac.
Also upgraded the Dacs output transformers on the analogue board - I.e. better quality power - to great effect.
The Music that hits our ears is “wiggly voltage”, and it terms of the Dac if power supply quality and quality of the analogue output bit isn't done right the music suffers - far more (imo) than what conversion chip in in your Dac may or may not do.
Anyways
As always, its just a thought.
voltage isn't analogue it's just voltage. Digital information is represented by a varying voltage, as is an analogue waveform.
A DAC just converts one to the other.
Yes there's lots of ways that can get screwed up. But the analogue output of the DAC is the end point of that process. We can see at that point if anything got screwed up or not.
voltage isn't analogue it's just voltage. Digital information is represented by a varying voltage, as is an analogue waveform.
A DAC just converts one to the other.
Yes there's lots of ways that can get screwed up. But the analogue output of the DAC is the end point of that process. We can see at that point if anything got screwed up or not.
Your right Martin.
Though voltage is also a varying voltage.
Its analogue...conceptually speaking (which wot I waz)
I.e. its not 'on' or 'off'
Its ALL analogue.
It's a waveform.
My point was that voltage (of any flavour) is subject to external factors, electrically speaking.
And yup,
The output stage just reflects what's came before, kinda like Ivor Tefunbruns's 'garbage in garbage out' analogy...
(i'll get my coat) :)
I always run my DACs with a linear power supply as I have found it is generally good practice to use the best power supply you have with a DAC as it prevents most unwanted electrical noise polluting the digital circuits.
It is a measurable and quantifiable thing that noise can be generated from the PSU and feed into whatever piece of kit you are using and corrupt the overall sound quality to some extent. Now I don't have the ability to run my current DACs analogue stage separately with a LPS but at least the digital section should be OK.
Whatever theories of other peoples experiences maybe with DACs I can appreciate they may not hear any difference but my own listening experience is such that running a DAC with a LPS brings about a more fluid and smoother sound which also has slightly more ability to show imaging and spaciousness in the sound stage. Conversely removing an LPS and using a SMPS brings about a slight coarsening/hardening of the sound and flattening of the soundstage.
It does not bring about anymore detail or transform the DAC massively but I can hear the difference none the less. Why it does this and how maybe a complicated theoretical but measurable actuality. I presume that electrical noise somehow alters some electrical components so they are adversely affected. I am not sure about how it affects the actually digital signal as such as I think the PLL circuit compensates for any corruption of data and so the packets of data are always reconstructed accurately in order to produce the final audible sound. However something is going on and power supply has a big influence somewhere in the chain.
Regarding a DACs performance I think as Gary has mentioned it is system dependant and therefore any given DAC can sound and perform quite differently depending on what it is hooked up to. The higher performing and resolving your system is maybe the more noticeable the differences maybe between different DACs.
It must also be recognised that the person listening subjectively hears the DACs performance or not as the case maybe. Some people maybe very sensitive to the sound a DAC produces where as some cannot hear any difference at all. This is purely down to their listening/ aural ability, their system and their subjective opinion.
So I don't dispute there are differences between DACs, however I have a highly resolving system and bat like ears and notice incredibly small changes in whatever I am listening too but my experience in listening to all the DACs I have heard would suggest there is not a massive night and day difference between any competently designed DAC just marginal differences in presentation and detail retrieval. Again this may come down to system synergy and how you hear a DAC in your room. This often gets blown out of proportion I feel and is not as significant as differences in other components.
I use linear PSs with all my Dacs all made by me. I was a member of many fora years ago where the DIY threads were very busy. On EDIT there was interest in well designed regulators for critical low noise use and 2 types of reg were designed by Teddy Pardo the Teddy Reg and the Power Reg for amplifier circuits and were the subject of a group buy.
"Teddy Pardo Audio is the world leading provider of high quality linear power supplies for audio equipment. Our vast experience in modding and building high-end audio equipment, taught us a major lesson: always start with the power supply!"
https://teddypardo.com/#:~:text=Teddy%20Pardo%20Audio%20is%20the,start%20 with%20the%20power%20supply!
Another group buy was for a JLH Ripple Eater (John Linsley Hood) on the Rock Grotto forum
https://www.rock-grotto.co.uk/rock-grotto-ripple-eater.pdf
EDIT Pink Fish Media - not Wigwam! https://pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/howto-teddyreg.39990/
If these are any interest to you I still have a board or two and some of the 2SA1930's and 2SC5171's the other transistors are readily available.
2SA1930's and 2SC5171's are for current limiting but if you don't need them they can be left. Details are in the build guide.
I put one of these in a separate box with DC connectors at both ends so that I can insert it between the PS and what ever I am powering, some others are built in.
I use linear PSs with all my Dacs all made by me. I was a member of many fora years ago where the DIY threads were very busy. On EDIT there was interest in well designed regulators for critical low noise use and 2 types of reg were designed by Teddy Pardo the Teddy Reg and the Power Reg for amplifier circuits and were the subject of a group buy.
"Teddy Pardo Audio is the world leading provider of high quality linear power supplies for audio equipment. Our vast experience in modding and building high-end audio equipment, taught us a major lesson: always start with the power supply!"
https://teddypardo.com/#:~:text=Teddy%20Pardo%20Audio%20is%20the,start%20 with%20the%20power%20supply!
Another group buy was for a JLH Ripple Eater (John Linsley Hood) on the Rock Grotto forum
https://www.rock-grotto.co.uk/rock-grotto-ripple-eater.pdf
EDIT Pink Fish Media - not Wigwam! https://pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/howto-teddyreg.39990/
If these are any interest to you I still have a board or two and some of the 2SA1930's and 2SC5171's the other transistors are readily available.
2SA1930's and 2SC5171's are for current limiting but if you don't need them they can be left. Details are in the build guide.
I put one of these in a separate box with DC connectors at both ends so that I can insert it between the PS and what ever I am powering, some others are built in.
Good to get another confirmation LPS is a worthwhile upgrade to use with a DAC. I know from amplifier design it also one of the most crucial aspects in their construction.
I was watching an interesting review of a number of power supplies recently used to power a DAC, these include SMPS and Linear and the results were similar to what I experience. It also may explain why I am getting such good results with my SMSL SU-1 DAC which relies totally on an off board PSU to power it.
Your right Martin.
Though voltage is also a varying voltage.
Its analogue...conceptually speaking (which wot I waz)
I.e. its not 'on' or 'off'
Its ALL analogue.
It's a waveform.
My point was that voltage (of any flavour) is subject to external factors, electrically speaking.
And yup,
The output stage just reflects what's came before, kinda like Ivor Tefunbruns's 'garbage in garbage out' analogy...
(i'll get my coat) :)
yes you are right, voltage is analogue.
Good to get another confirmation LPS is a worthwhile upgrade to use with a DAC. I know from amplifier design it also one of the most crucial aspects in their construction.
I was watching an interesting review of a number of power supplies recently used to power a DAC, these include SMPS and Linear and the results were similar to what I experience. It also may explain why I am getting such good results with my SMSL SU-1 DAC which relies totally on an off board PSU to power it.
I have two DACs one uses a mobile phone charger (SMPS) the other has two built in linear power supplies, one for digital side, one for the analogue. I can't differentiate between them
Is my system not resolving enough? Well, I use very good speaker in a large room with good acoustics and the room is passively treated. I can't 'know' but I suspect that's not the problem.
Am I not discerning enough? Maybe.
Of course you can't extrapolate one person's experience with two DACs to everyone's experience with all DACs.
I would say that IME of listening to systems using very fancy and expensive DACs which were not, overall, delivering sound quality that was as good as I get at home, that if someone is looking to improve their system the DAC is not the place I would start. I'd put it bottom of the component list in terms of importance.
I have two DACs one uses a mobile phone charger (SMPS) the other has two built in linear power supplies, one for digital side, one for the analogue. I can't differentiate between them
Is my system not resolving enough? Well, I use very good speaker in a large room with good acoustics and the room is passively treated. I can't 'know' but I suspect that's not the problem.
Am I not discerning enough? Maybe.
Of course you can't extrapolate one person's experience with two DACs to everyone's experience with all DACs.
I would say that IME of listening to systems using very fancy and expensive DACs which were not, overall, delivering sound quality that was as good as I get at home, that if someone is looking to improve their system the DAC is not the place I would start. I'd put it bottom of the component list in terms of importance.
Yeah individual listening experience definitely will determine what you think a DAC is contributing to the system. Of course some folk think they may hear a massive difference between DACs where as others perceive the difference as minor or none at all.
I agree that DACs would definitely be at the bottom of my component list in terms of importance when trying to improve the Sound Quality of your system.
All things being equal,
for a digital based system I’d focus on the Dac myself?
opinions vary!
All things being equal,
for a digital based system I’d focus on the Dac myself?
opinions vary!
But an expensive DAC won't salvage rubbish speakers in a bad acoustic. Whereas a cheap DAC will sound fantastic with good speakers in a good acoustic.
I had a listen to a system with a Chord DAVE which is about 11K and Chord amps which were also very expensive. But the loudspeakers were not very good so the sound was not very good
If all that budget had been devoted to the speakers instead of the DAC there's no question that it would have been an order of magnitude better.
Likewise another system with full DCS stack - hundreds of thousands just for the digital front end. It was unlistenable. Ripping distortion in the top end.
Nothing to do with the DCS or the speakers, there was some other issue going on, but the mega money DAC/reclocker/power supplies couldn't salvage it.
I always like to go speaker first unless I'm very attached to an amp. Those are the 2 'must get rights'
Hear ya,
Few shows I’ve been to and I’m like, Is that it?
The DCS room at the Bristol show a couple of years was a major wtf.
All about it being a system and having good synergy.
The bottleneck will always make other gear, no matter how good, drag the final product down I reckon.
From the mix of components in a box to the way it all hangs together.
Including the room I reckon.
not looked into room treatment myself, though stuck a table with a big Yukka palnt behind one of my speakers and had to give the other one a bit more toe-in to get it balanced again.
Paraphrasing Dad’s Army… that too is on zee list.
need to add tho,
with a resolving system and setup, anything that is “better’ should show off what it can do, all things being equal.
you’d like to think so anyway?
I think I agree with you Grant - work back from the speakers. So important to find the right speakers that are the right size for your room and work with its. Also it is critical the tonality and resolution you want is achievable from the speakers. I think working backwards everything else is a notch down until you get to source and then unless you have something really crap on the front end it should sound great.
`Obviously it is far easier to do this with digital rather than analogue where it is generally much more expensive and labour intensive. I can see why digital has so many attractions.:)
It is always so difficult to try and get a decent sound in your room if you don't get the right speakers and then you try and adjust everything else to compensate. You certainly will never do this with a DAC or a turntable!
But an expensive DAC won't salvage rubbish speakers in a bad acoustic. Whereas a cheap DAC will sound fantastic with good speakers in a good acoustic.
I had a listen to a system with a Chord DAVE which is about 11K and Chord amps which were also very expensive. But the loudspeakers were not very good so the sound was not very good
If all that budget had been devoted to the speakers instead of the DAC there's no question that it would have been an order of magnitude better.
Likewise another system with full DCS stack - hundreds of thousands just for the digital front end. It was unlistenable. Ripping distortion in the top end.
Nothing to do with the DCS or the speakers, there was some other issue going on, but the mega money DAC/reclocker/power supplies couldn't salvage it.
I could never understand why dCS gear costs as much as it does. Maybe it's the cost of sculpting the ridiculously thick front panel. :scratch:
I think I agree with you Grant - work back from the speakers. So important to find the right speakers that are the right size for your room and work with its. Also it is critical the tonality and resolution you want is achievable from the speakers. I think working backwards everything else is a notch down until you get to source and then unless you have something really crap on the front end it should sound great.
`Obviously it is far easier to do this with digital rather than analogue where it is generally much more expensive and labour intensive. I can see why digital has so many attractions.:)
It is always so difficult to try and get a decent sound in your room if you don't get the right speakers and then you try and adjust everything else to compensate. You certainly will never do this with a DAC or a turntable!
This is the complete opposite of Linn's mantra "Source first", and "Garbage in - garbage out". But then I didn’t believe anything Linn said, or the sycophantic reviewers.
This is the complete opposite of Linn's mantra "Source first", and "Garbage in - garbage out". But then I didn’t believe anything Linn said, or the sycophantic reviewers.
Haha yes I remember Linn and their mantra but I thought it was fundamentally wrong, but of course they made they made their name from the source end!
I could never understand why dCS gear costs as much as it does. Maybe it's the cost of sculpting the ridiculously thick front panel. :scratch:
The market is there I suppose. I don't like the look personally. It's over-styled.
This is the complete opposite of Linn's mantra "Source first", and "Garbage in - garbage out". But then I didn’t believe anything Linn said, or the sycophantic reviewers.
'Source first' does make some sense with vinyl or tape where you need some serious mechanical engineering to get optimal results. But it makes no sense with digital sources.
Interesting how some DAC manufacturers have gone overboard to set the look of their DACS apart from the boring Chinese black boxes.
I suppose it gets them noticed but there is no accounting for taste. I also don't like DACs that look like a scientific piece of equipment with rows and rows of buttons and little lights but there again I am a minimalist.:)
Ok had an afternoon listening to tunes via the DAC but now on the vinyl - what a relief!
'Source first' does make some sense with vinyl or tape where you need some serious mechanical engineering to get optimal results. But it makes no sense with digital sources.
Yes - the first 'half-decent' bit of kit I bought was a Garrard SP25 (Mk.II). It was all I could afford at the time, but knew I needed something better on which to play my 'valuable' vinyl records.
Yes - the first 'half-decent' bit of kit I bought was a Garrard SP25 (Mk.II). It was all I could afford at the time, but knew I needed something better on which to play my 'valuable' vinyl records.
Some of those SP25 series of turntables were difficult to get a high quality level of sound from. I had a few including the Garrard SP25 IV. Lots of plastic involved and lacking in adjustability.
A move away from the crystal pickup to a Shure MM was a big step up. The only mod I did on my Mk.II was to remove the the arm return link.
The Garrard lasted a year before I acquired a Collaro 2010 (a sort of poor man's Garrard 301), removed the indifferent arm and replaced it with an SME and a Shure M55E.
A move away from the crystal pickup to a Shure MM was a big step up. The only mod I did on my Mk.II was to remove the the arm return link.
The Garrard lasted a year before I acquired a Collaro 2010 (a sort of poor man's Garrard 301), removed the indifferent arm and replaced it with an SME and a Shure M55E.
Ah the Shure M55e - great cartridge. I had some Garrard Turntables in the early 1980s but by then they had gone very plasticky and light years away from 301 and 401. I went back in time and bought a 301 - what beast by comparison. Agricultural build quality and lovely engineering as we all know. Used that with a Decca Blue as recommended by the great Glenn Croft.
Wakefield Turntables
10-12-2023, 18:21
Nice to see you've returned back to the dark side!
Nice to see you've returned back to the dark side!
I only play with DACs mate, the serious music listening is all on the TT.:)
Lawrence001
10-12-2023, 22:45
I've been thinking about buying a good vintage DAC to see if it's more musical than the modern ones. Will report back when I have one.
I did buy a PT DaCapo a few years ago and it sounded beautiful but it had dodgy caps and didn't last long so I had to send it back.
I've been thinking about buying a good vintage DAC to see if it's more musical than the modern ones. Will report back when I have one.
I did buy a PT DaCapo a few years ago and it sounded beautiful but it had dodgy caps and didn't last long so I had to send it back.
Good idea Lawrence, would be interesting to hear how different older DACs stack up against modern products. I found the DAC in my CD player sounded better than a few modern DACs and it is 30 years old!
Get hold of a Philips CD100 or CD101 player, then you will hear how poor early DACs were.
walpurgis
11-12-2023, 07:45
My Monarchy Audio M22B still sounds wonderful to me.
Get hold of a Philips CD100 or CD101 player, then you will hear how poor early DACs were.
Haha Barry I had a CD101 and I know how bad it was. Like listening to breaking glass!
Haha Barry I had a CD101 and I know how bad it was. Like listening to breaking glass!
not a nick lowe fan then ;)
not a nick lowe fan then ;)
Wasn't it Hazel O'Connor?:)
Think she was in the film breaking glass but it was a different breaking glass I think. Might have been the Bowie one
Think she was in the film breaking glass but it was a different breaking glass I think. Might have been the Bowie one
AH yes...think your right:doh:
AH yes...think your right:doh:
nick lowe never played 'i love the sound of breaking glass' live apparently as he said id sounded really shit without a studio adding stuff etc..
was a fan of him back in day. very talented and wrote stuff for a few big stars
Haha Barry I had a CD101 and I know how bad it was. Like listening to breaking glass!
Myth
I actually have a CD 54 from 1983 it's sweet as a nut
How did CD ever catch on if the early players sounded so bad? And according to some the early CDs were all bad transfers too. Got loads of them, they are in fact superior to later remasters. Another myth.
CD sounding bad was almost exclusively a UK thing - all those Naim people with their 15 watt amps and dreadful speakers - their systems couldn't cope with a source that was flat out to 20Khz and actually had some dynamic range.
I keep challenging peiople to get an early CD player and try for themselves but of course no-one ever does
Lawrence001
11-12-2023, 10:18
Myth
I actually have a CD 54 from 1983 it's sweet as a nut
How did CD ever catch on if the early players sounded so bad? And according to some the early CDs were all bad transfers too. Got loads of them, they are in fact superior to later remasters. Another myth.
CD sounding bad was almost exclusively a UK thing - all those Naim people with their 15 watt amps and dreadful speakers - their systems couldn't cope with a source that was flat out to 20Khz and actually had some dynamic range.
I keep challenging peiople to get an early CD player and try for themselves but of course no-one ever doesActually I got a CD104 when you said that. The mid range stood out as being particularly vivid but it seemed to be rolled off at both ends. Could have been aging caps? I sold it anyway as I was just starting my streaming journey then.
"Breaking Glass" was an album released by Hazel O'Connor, containing the songs she sang in the film of the same name in which she also starred.
I ought to add that, IMO, it's an excellental album - especially the poignant and heartfelt track 'Will you?'.
Actually I got a CD104 when you said that. The mid range stood out as being particularly vivid but it seemed to be rolled off at both ends. Could have been aging caps? I sold it anyway as I was just starting my streaming journey then.
Don't get me wrong I don't think the CD54 is comparable to today's state of the art. It's not much worse but it is noticeably 'Not as good'.
But it doesn't sound 'bad'. It doesn't sound harsh, or hard, it doesn't have a top end 'like breaking glass'. That's all myth.
My user experience with CD back in late 80s was not good, as a result I didn't get a CD player until 1996. I now know it was not the CD player that had the problem, it was a combination of poor loudspeakers and amplifiers that were not designed for a 2 volt input, and which did not have enough power to cope with the higher dynamic range.
If the amp is constantly clipping, it's not going to sound good. It's going to sound grey, mushy, compressed, harsh, hard etc - i.e all those things some people still attribute as the characteristics of early CD players.
And if the crappy two way speaker has a big midrange hump (Linn Kan) what's that going to sound like with a flat signal run through it, and not the big midrange droop from your MM cartridge and turntable?
Bad. Shreeky, shouty, fatiguing.
Myth
I actually have a CD 54 from 1983 it's sweet as a nut
How did CD ever catch on if the early players sounded so bad? And according to some the early CDs were all bad transfers too. Got loads of them, they are in fact superior to later remasters. Another myth.
CD sounding bad was almost exclusively a UK thing - all those Naim people with their 15 watt amps and dreadful speakers - their systems couldn't cope with a source that was flat out to 20Khz and actually had some dynamic range.
I keep challenging peiople to get an early CD player and try for themselves but of course no-one ever does
The sound stage presented by both the CD100 and CD101 was as flat as a board, with no depth whatsoever. Whether this was a fault of the disc, or of the player, I don't know. All I will say is that I was able to put on a disc and cue up an LP of the same title, and switch between the two in real time. The difference was shocking.
It wasn't until the advent of the CD104, which to my ears was a player I could live with - and did for a few years (actually it was the CD104B).
The sound stage presented by both the CD100 and CD101 was as flat as a board, with no depth whatsoever. Whether this was a fault of the disc, or of the player, I don't know. All I will say is that I was able to put on a disc and cue up an LP of the same title, and switch between the two in real time. The difference was shocking.
It wasn't until the advent of the CD104, which to my ears was a player I could live with - and did for a few years (actually it was the CD104B).
This could be attributed to mastering, or some other quirk of LP reproduction. It's been suggested that uncorrelated noise, which LP has a ton of, gives a sense of 'air and space'.
Too many variables to definitely attribute that to some aspect of the CD player. Even just failing to level match when switching between sources could cause that impression.
Don't get me wrong I don't think the CD54 is comparable to today's state of the art. It's not much worse but it is noticeably 'Not as good'.
But it doesn't sound 'bad'. It doesn't sound harsh, or hard, it doesn't have a top end 'like breaking glass'. That's all myth.
My user experience with CD back in late 80s was not good, as a result I didn't get a CD player until 1996. I now know it was not the CD player that had the problem, it was a combination of poor loudspeakers and amplifiers that were not designed for a 2 volt input, and which did not have enough power to cope with the higher dynamic range.
If the amp is constantly clipping, it's not going to sound good. It's going to sound grey, mushy, compressed, harsh, hard etc - i.e all those things some people still attribute as the characteristics of early CD players.
And if the crappy two way speaker has a big midrange hump (Linn Kan) what's that going to sound like with a flat signal run through it, and not the big midrange droop from your MM cartridge and turntable?
Bad. Shreeky, shouty, fatiguing.
Yes - many of the amplifiers of the time did not have a dedicated 'CD' input. People plugged the players into the 'Aux' socket which had a typical sensitivity of 100mV.
It could well be that the comparison I made was done using an inappropriate input on my preamp (a Quad 44 at the time). I did get the correct input card later; certainly by the time I bought the 104B.
So it could well be that, in retrospect, I did not give the early Philips players a fair hearing; but in my defence the need for an amplifier input with high overload capability was not then common knowledge.
This could be attributed to mastering, or some other quirk of LP reproduction. It's been suggested that uncorrelated noise, which LP has a ton of, gives a sense of 'air and space'.
Too many variables to definitely attribute that to some aspect of the CD player. Even just failing to level match when switching between sources could cause that impression.
The first LP to have been digitally recorded was Ry Cooder's "Bop Till You Drop". I have it and the soundstage is flat - with the performers popping up like the flags on an old-fashioned cash register, or the ducks in shooting gallery. Tonally it's fine, but the soundstaging is flat.
The first LP to have been digitally recorded was Ry Cooder's "Bop Till You Drop". I have it and the soundstage is flat - with the performers popping up like the flags on an old-fashioned cash register, or the ducks in shooting gallery. Tonally it's fine, but the soundstaging is flat.
Heard that said before but I don't have the album, not that keen on Ry Cooder. If I come across it I'll pick it up and see if I hear the same thing.
Ofc a lot of stuff happens in production and post production so that effect isn't necessarily anything to do with it being an early digital recording - although I'm not saying it isn't.
The first LP to have been digitally recorded was Ry Cooder's "Bop Till You Drop". I have it and the soundstage is flat - with the performers popping up like the flags on an old-fashioned cash register, or the ducks in shooting gallery. Tonally it's fine, but the soundstaging is flat.
I have this album too and 100% agree. Buy Paris Texas on vinyl and it will blow your mind.
I have this album too and 100% agree. Buy Paris Texas on vinyl and it will blow your mind.
its a good soundtrack; good film too
its a good soundtrack; good film too
Would love to see it again but its been sometime since its been round on the telly.?
Having thought about it some more I can't see any reason why the soundstaging 'issues' on 'Bop Til You Drop' can have anything to do with it being a digital recording.
Wikipedia has this to say
Cooder and his excellent band, which includes the rhythm section of Tim Drummond and Jim Keltner along with guitarist David Lindley, understand the material and are more than capable of laying down a decent groove, but something must have gotten lost in translation from what was played to what came across on the recording. There's a thinness to the tracks that undermines the performances, which according to Cooder is due to the digital recording.[8]
So seems to be Cooder himself who first put the idea out there - although the reviewer seems to think the problem is that it sounds 'thin' rather than anything to do with soundstage.
I can think of a few analogue recordings which might be described the same way. But this is a production choice and therefore intrinsically part of the art.
There's no reason why it would sound thin due to digital recording either. Although it's possible that with the tech being fairly new they didn't use it right I suppose.
With digital recording the one thing you don't want to do is exceed 0db and clip it - so with early digital recordings (and transfers done from tape to digital for the first CDs) there was a tendency to overcompensate for this by keeping levels low in mastering. (Now we have the opposite issue where they ram it all the way up, even into clipping aka 'The Loudness Wars)
The solution with these 'thin' CDs is just to turn it up a lot more on playback - assuming the playback system is capable of this - which many are not even to this day.
Having thought about it some more I can't see any reason why the soundstaging 'issues' on 'Bop Til You Drop' can have anything to do with it being a digital recording.
Wikipedia has this to say
Cooder and his excellent band, which includes the rhythm section of Tim Drummond and Jim Keltner along with guitarist David Lindley, understand the material and are more than capable of laying down a decent groove, but something must have gotten lost in translation from what was played to what came across on the recording. There's a thinness to the tracks that undermines the performances, which according to Cooder is due to the digital recording.[8]
So seems to be Cooder himself who first put the idea out there - although the reviewer seems to think the problem is that it sounds 'thin' rather than anything to do with soundstage.
I can think of a few analogue recordings which might be described the same way. But this is a production choice and therefore intrinsically part of the art.
There's no reason why it would sound thin due to digital recording either. Although it's possible that with the tech being fairly new they didn't use it right I suppose.
With digital recording the one thing you don't want to do is exceed 0db and clip it - so with early digital recordings (and transfers done from tape to digital for the first CDs) there was a tendency to overcompensate for this by keeping levels low in mastering. (Now we have the opposite issue where they ram it all the way up, even into clipping aka 'The Loudness Wars)
The solution with these 'thin' CDs is just to turn it up a lot more on playback - assuming the playback system is capable of this - which many are not even to this day.
I think it was the first album to be digitally recorded and they were getting to grips with the technology and didnt get it quite right. I have the album on vinyl and it sounds not only thin and washed out but very processed. The fact it comes across like this on vinyl means something was definitely amiss as I have hundreds of albums on vinyl taken from digital masters but they don't sound digital unlike their counterparts on CD!
walpurgis
11-12-2023, 16:04
I have the album on vinyl and it sounds not only thin and washed out but very processed.
As does mine. I always wondered if it was deliberately made to sound unlike analogue productions.
As does mine. I always wondered if it was deliberately made to sound unlike analogue productions.
I am a big fan of Ry Cooder and there were some decent tracks on this album but unfortunately I find it unlistenable on vinyl. Maybe it came off better on digital?
rmcin626
11-12-2023, 16:24
I am a big fan of Ry Cooder and there were some decent tracks on this album but unfortunately I find it unlistenable on vinyl. Maybe it came off better on digital?
I have it on vinyl, sadly not played very often, in fact not listened to it for years , once I’ve found which box its in I’ll give it a spin.
I have it on vinyl, sadly not played very often, in fact not listened to it for years , once I’ve found which box its in I’ll give it a spin.
Your system will reveal all very clearly. I am sure you will wonder where or the guts went too in the recording?:)
I think it was the first album to be digitally recorded and they were getting to grips with the technology and didnt get it quite right. !
According to Wikipedia 'The album was the first digitally recorded major-label album in popular music', not the first digital recording ever made or released.
I doubt the engineers had no experience at all with the equipment but agree they could still have been getting to grips with it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.