Pure Overkill Computer Audio Office System

madmax

DarqueKnight wrote: »

My initial plan was to replace the 27 year old (1988 vintage) CD player with a DAC and run a USB cable from a computer running JRiver Media Center software. I don't particularly care for JRiver's sound quality in my home's two channel system.

Why do you suppose this is the case? What did you hear that you don't like?

DarqueKnight

madmax wrote: »

What did you hear that you don't like?

The problem was more along the lines of what I didn't hear: clarity, detail, layering, transients, all the things that are eaten up and obscured by the high electrical noise environment of the typical computer.

It was like going from high end separates to a mass market receiver.

tonyb

That's a good analogy Ray, a separate designated music server is built for audio, your home computer not so much. For most though, it suffices.....until you hear what the other options can do and your wallet starts crying like a baby.

machone

I am a firm believer that noise is main enemy of the digital signal path and that it contributes to "digital glare". 1&0's don't get from point A to point B by magic.

This week I ditched my Dell laptop and replaced it with a Quantum Byte all solid state computer. Low power cpu so no fans or moving parts, outboard power supply x-former, wireless keyboard and mouse. I am running Jriver, feeding it into my Marantz SA8005 via USB and controlling Jriver with Gizmo.

So far I am liking the results.

madmax

DarqueKnight wrote: »

madmax wrote: »

What did you hear that you don't like?

The problem was more along the lines of what I didn't hear: clarity, detail, layering, transients, all the things that are eaten up and obscured by the high electrical noise environment of the typical computer.

It was like going from high end separates to a mass market receiver.

Thanks, just getting into some of this hi res stuff and first to say I am ignorate of the subject matter so far. From what I read assumed Jriver on a laptop driving via USB was the cats meow. Maybe you just saved me from some mistakes! Just playing music doesn't get it for me, it must be something special. Geesh, how much will I have to spend for something of very high quality to drive my DAC?

DarqueKnight

madmax wrote: »

From what I read assumed Jriver on a laptop driving via USB was the cats meow.

JRiver on a laptop or MacBook is the cat's meow if you are not a critical listener. When I read reviews, I look to see if the reviewer mentions any of the stereophonic performance metrics that are important to me. If they just says X sounded better than Y without specifying things like sound stage, imaging, clarity, detail, etc., then the review is of no value to me with regard to evaluating stereophonic performance.

madmax wrote: »

Maybe you just saved me from some mistakes! Just playing music doesn't get it for me, it must be something special.

Just playing music gets it for 95% of the population. A lot of the people who are enthralled with JRiver via a laptop are comparing that to music via a cell phone or iPod through ear buds.

madmax wrote: »

Geesh, how much will I have to spend for something of very high quality to drive my DAC?

You are a vinyl enthusiast, so you know nothing "special" comes cheap. This is as true of digital as it is of analog. With that said, a good audiophile music server, such as the Bryston BDP-1, can be had for less than $1000 on the used market. If you are looking for a digital player/DAC combination to get close to the sound of vinyl, you are looking at a five figure investment for a new purchase and mid to high four figures for used equipment. I documented the trials and tribulations in my introduction to computer audio and hi-rez here:

http://forum.polkaudio.com/discussion/168179/the-year-of-dacs/p1

madmax

I have a DAC on order and am just now reviewing some options to go from a hard drive to the DAC for high res files. I saw the BDP1 and it looks like something I might try. The Aurender stuff for around $2600 looks pretty interesting also. I guess to start with I'll give my Oppo 105D a try since I already have it. It has digital out so I would be staying away from USB all together, I'm thinking that might be a big plus to start with. If that doesn't do anything for me I'll look more at the BDP-1 etc. Is it the USB part that causes the majority of the problem?

[Deleted User]

I give this review 5 raccoon tails!

madmax

Oh, and read your review on the BDP-2 vs -1, sounds like the -2 would be the way to go.

DarqueKnight

madmax wrote: »

Is it the USB part that causes the majority of the problem?

The digital interface (USB, coax, AES) is not the problem. The problems come from how a particular manufacturer implements that interface.

madmax wrote: »

Oh, and read your review on the BDP-2 vs -1, sounds like the -2 would be the way to go.

Yes, the BDP-2 is a much better machine. I highly recommend it. There may be other solutions that more closely fit in with your sound quality goals.

[Deleted User]

Hi DK,

would you say the Detect is = to the powerbase in power conditioning?
I'm debating a powerbase for my CD source. (which is sitting on pads
that are sitting on a granite slab currently)

DarqueKnight

rednedtugent wrote: »

would you say the Detect is = to the powerbase in power conditioning?

No. I would think the Dectet is better.

I've not compared the two. I'm basing this on the fact that the PowerBase is primarily an isolation platform with some power conditioning thrown in, and the fact that PS Audio CEO Paul McGowan said he does not plug anything into his PowerBases other than his P10 AC regenerators. The PowerBase was designed specifically for the P10 AC regenerator, but other components can benefit from its power filtering and vibration isolation properties.

My DAC sounds better plugged into it's PowerBase, rather than plugged directly into the P10 AC regenerator. The DAC's PowerBase is plugged into the P10. My Cary Audio CD 306 SACD player sounded better plugged into its Power Base rather than straight to the P10. This is contrary to PS Audio's advice not to use another power filtration device between a component and a P10. I was a bit "disappointed" that the PowerBase made a small improvement in the SACD player's and DAC's performance, because it meant the expense of an additional power cord.

My turntable and digital player sound better sitting on their PowerBases, but there was no additional sonic benefit, or difference, heard when each was plugged into their PowerBases.

With all of that said, a PowerBase might provide better sound due to its combination of power conditioning and vibration abatement.

[Deleted User]

thanks DK!

DarqueKnight

During the course of this office system upgrade, my performance goals changed from wanting a simple computer audio system to replace the antiquated CD-based audio system to wanting a significantly improved stereophonic experience.

With that said, I was somewhat hesitant to invest in the Bryston 4B3 amp because I thought it might be too much overkill, even for an overkill office rig. I also had some concerns about the modified SDA CRS+ loudspeakers being able to render a significantly better stereophonic presentation in a small office space. I knew the CRS+s can benefit from better amplification because I have had them in my two channel rig with the Parasound Halo JC 1s and the Pass Labs X600.5s and they sounded spectacular. My concerns were unfounded because the 4B3 was a transformational improvement in stereophonic performance.

Further Study

I was initially planning to upgrade the Adcom GFP-750 preamplifier, but, based on the results from upgrading the DAC and power amp, I think a preamp replacement is in order. the Bryston BP-26 is at the top of the list.


Bryston BP-26 preamp with MPS-2 outboard power supply.




References:

Bryston 4B3 Power Amp Review:

http://forum.polkaudio.com/discussion/172772/bryston-4b3-power-amplifier-review#latest

Bryston BDA-3 DAC Review:

http://forum.polkaudio.com/discussion/172529/bryston-bda-3-dac-review

DarqueKnight

The BP-26/MPS-2 is here...and it's staying a while.


Figure 37. My BP-26/MPS-2 and I got off to a rough start, but we're fine now.


Figure 38. I think I'll hold it here...for a while. My ears are satisfied now.


Figure 39. The Adcom GFP-750 prepares for retirement. I'm not selling it though.

tonyb wrote: »

I dunno Ray, you feel the 750 is up to snuff with it's playmates ?

No Tony, the 750 was not up to snuff with its playmates. Even with its initial rough-sounding, fresh-out-of-the-box, audition, it was clear that the BP-26 was significantly better in stereophonic performance than the 750.

Updated Equipment List

Bryston BDA-3 digital to analog converter
Bryston BDP-2 digital player with IAD sound card upgrade and 500GB internal drive
Bryston BP-26 preamp with MPS-2 power supply
Bryston 4B3 power amp (300 wpc 8 ohms/500 wpc 4 ohms)
PS Audio xStream Transcendent XLR interconnects for DAC and preamp
Revelation Audio Labs Prophecy Cryo-Silver CCIC USB cable
Revelation Audio Labs 6pin XLR Power Umbilical cable for MPS-2/BP-26
PS Audio Premier SC power cords for DAC, digital player, power amp and preamp
PS Audio P10 AC Regenerator
PS Audio AC-12 power cord for P10 AC Regenerator
Polk Audio SDA CRS+ (1989 version) loudspeakers (heavily modified)
Douglas Connection CDF92 speaker cable (9 AWG)
HiFi Tuning Classic Gold fuses for amp, preamp, AC regenerator
HiFi Tuning Silver Star fuse for DAC.
Dell Venue Pro 11 7140 tablet computer, with dock, for digital player and DAC control
Logitech Harmony One universal remote for preamp and DAC

DarqueKnight

Oops...I didn't notice that I had used the wrong photo link for figure 39 in the previous post.



Figure 39. The Adcom GFP-750 prepares for retirement. I'm not selling it though.

pitdogg2

how can that puny little scrawny amp kick that behemoth of an amp's b u t t sitting on top of it? I ain't buying it....



Say it ain't so Ray.......



big dose of sarcastic ness

DarqueKnight

That result shouldn't be surprising since all amps sound alike.

pitdogg2

DarqueKnight wrote: »

That result shouldn't be surprising since all amps sound alike.

indeed

mikeyb128

I'm saving my pennies for one of these cubed series 4B's. I had a demo lined up but didn't end up going through with it, as I know I'm going to want one.

DarqueKnight

I read that experimenting with the placement of the BP-26's power supply could be beneficial.

I wanted to move the MPS-2 power supply under the desk and sit it on top of the 4B3 amp. The amp's heat sinks get barely warm, therefore I wasn't concerned about heat, I was concerned about the amp's magnetic field inducing noise into the MPS-2, and thereby into the BP-26. Bryston suggested that moving the MPS-2 power supply away from the BP-26 could result in a lowered noise floor, and they said there would be no induced noise issues with placing the MPS-2 on top of the 4B3.


Figure 40. Moving the BP-26's power supply to the side lowered the noise
floor and resulted in better bass and imaging.


Figure 41. Moving the BP-26's power supply under the desk resulted in even better sound.

Yes, the corner of the MPS-2 will be padded.


Figure 42. The BDA-3 DAC's transformer does not affect the BP-26. The BDA-3's
transformer is on the far left and the BP-26's chassis is empty on the far left side. The BP-26's far left side is for optional phono and DAC circuit boards. The MPS-2's transformer was directly under the BP-26's audio circuits on the right.

warren

Man, that's an outstanding over kill!!
Thanks for sharing..

AroundTheSound

hi DarqueKnight,
i have i question for you : what's your opinion about adcom 565se compared to rotel rhb10 ?
thank you

Joey_V

Love overkill. Great job Ray.

DarqueKnight

AroundTheSound wrote: »

hi DarqueKnight,
i have i question for you : what's your opinion about adcom 565se compared to rotel rhb10 ?
thank you

I don't have any personal experience with the RHB-10. From what I have read of it, it should easily outperform the 565se ($1,500) since it was built with much higher parts and construction quality. It was a true dual mono design with two transformers. It also retailed for $2,700 in 1997, which is equivalent to $4,120 in 2017 dollars. The RHB-10 would be more comparable to the Bryston 4B3 (also a true dual mono design with two transformers) that replaced the 565se.

AroundTheSound

thank you, indeed!!!
if someone has listended the rotel rhb10, should be fine if report its impressions.