System synergy and "source first"

[Mr_Sukebe]

Unfortunately there's been something of a renaisance during the last few years about the importance of more speakers, multi-channel amplifiers and the like. One of the side effects has been the downgrading of the perceived importance of the source on a system.
Over the weekend, I had a very interesting reminder of just how critical the front end is.

A chap I know popped down with a new PSU and digital interconnect for the DAC that I'm using. Frankly I was pretty gobsmacked with the improvement.

As background, for a few weeks I've been using a Meridian 203 DAC, which IMO is probaly capable of competing with any modern £500 CDP that can be bought. It's a fairly good DAC, reasonable life, not bad tonal accuracy, but once the system is full warmed, adds a slightly edgy unpleasant digital "sheen" to the sound.

The first test was my *** with it's new PSU. Sure enough, wiped away the digital sheen with lovely level of naturalness, particularly in the mid-range. Unfortunately it was a little lacking in control at the frequency extremes.

Out of interest, we tried a new DAC that my friend has built, which uses 8 DAC chips in parallel (all 1543s), the theory being that the parallel running will even out error correction issues. The side effect being that you need an Op amp output stage. Tidied up the frequency extremes, but lost some of the naturalness in the mid range. Pros and cons, but personally I couldn't live with it, and went back to the ***.

The we added the new digital IC that he'd built for the ***. Completely cleaned out a whole layer of "hash" and smear that I'd never realised even existed, resulting in most of the better frequency extremes. Initially it was a little disconcerting as I've grown used to stereos having a little bleed around the edges on performers. This really solidified them. To try to explain the differences, imagine a normal female singer infront of you (that's the after), now stick a airline into the singer (ACME cartoon style) and blow her up so she's twice the diameter, that was the before. Just can't think of how better to explain it.
Definitely a big improvement.

So all in all, successful time, especially for so little cash.
Note that absolutely none of the above involved changes to either the DAC, or the amp/speakers. It was all about the quality of signal going into the DAC. So the next time you see a CD player advert blathering about the DAC chip, ask a few questions about the quality of the transport, clocks and power supply.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

I get the impression that the best thing for my transport would be a new clock circuit such as the Trichord 4 setup. Problem is that it's not cheap.

What I do fancy doing is getting a comparison of my existing front end (transport/dac) against a new CDP. My shortlist presently includes the Consonance Droplet (heard it at Heathrow, sounded lush), the Resolution Audio Opus CD21 and a couple of Wadia units.
Chances are that my existing CDP will get blown out of the water, in which I'll need to do a lot of saving. The Wadia units would cost me more than I paid for my car.
If my CDP gets close, then I'll think about the Trichord upgrade.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

I believe that Committed tried/heard a kit called a Monica2. Run a search on google and you should be able to find it. I'm sure that it's a mail order item from the US.
Committed has a DAC the same as mine, and rated the Monica2 as even better, infering that it's a rather good bit of kit.
So that would be my suggestion.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

9>
The budget really will be dependant upon the gains.
I simply don't know how much better any of the units will be when compared to my existing front end.
Could be that the more expensive units are only slightly better, or just different, in which case it'll be a waste of dosh. On the other hand, could be that I simply MUST have a Wadia 861, in which case it will be a LOT of money.
In short, I don't have an absolute budget (the 861 will probably cost £5k), however I do want to get value for money (IMO), so a lot of money better give a lot of return.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

Im sure I am not the only one thinking you are absolutely bonkers spending £5,000 on a CD Player!

Are you sure the point of diminishing return wasnt way, way back and you have just become hypercritical now?

If I don't think it's worth the dosh, then I won't do it, really is that simple.
Diminishing returns is an interesting concept.
My thoughts are that people simply want to upgrade and always improve on things. They stop when they run out of money and are temporarily "happy" with what they have. When more money is available, it's easy to justify an upgrade. That simple really.

If you want to find out what a large chunk of money gets on a sound system, and are in London, look me up and I'll give you a dem. I promise that the differences are substantially bigger than the magazines will lead you to believe.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

A few thoughts:
- Different people have different priorities in life. In my own, I don't love hi-fi, but I do love music, and understand that getting a good system together aids my love of it. That's why I throw a sizeable chunk of disposable income at it.
- I'm very likely to move in the next two to three months, meaning that playing with room interaction is a little pointless at present
- As 9 has already suggest, kit does change the interaction in a room. A lot of cheaper kit simply doesn't have the control or clean signal that a more expensive system has. Just changing my digital IC improved that, so there's clearly more to come in that area
- Once I've moved, I'd be very interested in playing with room acoustics, better find out what size room I'll have to play with first. Lets just say that the listening room will be one of the key things I'll be thinking about during the choice of where to move to. In my last apartment, I remember walking into the lounge on the viewing and thinking "this room isn't the usual rectangle, it'll be great for acoustics", sure enough, certainly was.