Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Following the recent thread about adding a DAC to my Schneider DVD player, I
went ahead and purchased a used Meridian 203 when it was offered by a
subscriber here. It arrived this morning and it's been playing all day...

My initial impressions are that there's much better detail and a huge
improvement in bass (cleaner, deeper, more controlled). Individual
instruments are easier to pick out and follow. Bass drums and low toms have
tone rather than just a thumpiness, and basslines can be picked out around
the drums. There's far better resolution of cymbals and other high tish-tish
noises - hardly ever noticed such things on the Schenider. Strings solo or
in small groups are clearer - the sound of rosined horsehair passing over
strings is really quite noticable. Soundstaging seems better - although I
haven't concentrated too much on this as yet, there have been a few times
when something has sounded 'solid but further away' (like, several yards
behind the speakers, but as if the room was bigger).

Overall, it's as if heavy curtains have been drawn back from the speakers.
I'm certainly hearing things in my CDs that I wasn't hearing before. I
realise that I'm still listening to the system at present - it'll take a
while for my brain to stop spotting differences and get used to the sound,
so I can't comment on how musical the DAC is. I'll see how this goes once
I've lived with it for a while. Suffice it to say that the prognosis is
pretty good - the Schneider is too mushy to ever sound musical.


I found that using a coax cable resulted in a little 'tick' noise when
skipping tracks. It would happen right at the start of a track. I tried an
optical interconnect and it stopped happening. I presume this is down to
some sort of interference, but can't really say what's causing it. I note
that the Lock light on the DAC goes out between each track, which I gather
has something to do with the player not sending timing information unless
it's actually playing music, so it might be related to that. I haven't
noticed anything in the way of digital artefacts - the Meridian seems to
have tracked everything I've played without a problem.


My feeling is that the differences between the Merdian DAC and the Arcam
player are slight, and that the difference between both of them and the
Schneider is pretty big. I was orginally considering getting a better
single-box CD player, and I would probably have preferred to get a new one
(zero wear on the mechanism), which would have meant waiting quite a while
until Arcam-sized money was available.

With the arrival of the 203, I don't think I'll be going shopping for an
Arcam any time soon, if at all. In fact, the 400 quid I didn't spend (and
don't have!) would probably be better spent on some mods to the speakers
(current semi-plan is isobaric subs and reboxed mid & high, possibly
bi-amped).

At a fifth of the price of a new Arcam, I think this is a thoroughly
excellent upgrade.


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 19:26:12 -0000
"Wally" wrote:


My feeling is that the differences between the Merdian DAC and the Arcam
player are slight

I got my ARCAM dac yesterday and have some optical cable on order. I dont have a coax output :)

I wonder why the dac has 'main' and 'aux' outputs? perhaps it can decode four channels at once? it has two phillips DACs in it I think.

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup.

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 19:26:12 -0000
"Wally" wrote:


My feeling is that the differences between the Merdian DAC and the Arcam
player are slight

I got my ARCAM dac yesterday and have some optical cable on order. I dont have a coax output :)

I wonder why the dac has 'main' and 'aux' outputs? perhaps it can decode four channels at once? it has two phillips DACs in it I think.

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup.

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Ian Molton wrote:

My feeling is that the differences between the Merdian DAC and the
Arcam player are slight

I got my ARCAM dac yesterday and have some optical cable on order. I
dont have a coax output :)

I look forward to your Team DAC review. :-)


I wonder why the dac has 'main' and 'aux' outputs? perhaps it can
decode four channels at once? it has two phillips DACs in it I think.

How many inputs? Any switches on the front?


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Ian Molton wrote:

My feeling is that the differences between the Merdian DAC and the
Arcam player are slight

I got my ARCAM dac yesterday and have some optical cable on order. I
dont have a coax output :)

I look forward to your Team DAC review. :-)


I wonder why the dac has 'main' and 'aux' outputs? perhaps it can
decode four channels at once? it has two phillips DACs in it I think.

How many inputs? Any switches on the front?


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 20:49:39 -0000
"Wally" wrote:


I got my ARCAM dac yesterday and have some optical cable on order. I
dont have a coax output :)

I look forward to your Team DAC review. :-)


I wonder why the dac has 'main' and 'aux' outputs? perhaps it can
decode four channels at once? it has two phillips DACs in it I think.

How many inputs? Any switches on the front?

2 inputs - optical and coax, but it seems only one may be used at once.

two selector switches to choose the input (and one on the back to select the default on powerup, heh.)

theres a switch labelled 'phase'. Wonder what that does?


--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup.

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 20:49:39 -0000
"Wally" wrote:


I got my ARCAM dac yesterday and have some optical cable on order. I
dont have a coax output :)

I look forward to your Team DAC review. :-)


I wonder why the dac has 'main' and 'aux' outputs? perhaps it can
decode four channels at once? it has two phillips DACs in it I think.

How many inputs? Any switches on the front?

2 inputs - optical and coax, but it seems only one may be used at once.

two selector switches to choose the input (and one on the back to select the default on powerup, heh.)

theres a switch labelled 'phase'. Wonder what that does?


--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup.

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Ian Molton wrote:

How many inputs? Any switches on the front?

2 inputs - optical and coax, but it seems only one may be used at
once.

two selector switches to choose the input (and one on the back to
select the default on powerup, heh.)

theres a switch labelled 'phase'. Wonder what that does?

Something to do with the timing circuitry, perhaps (phase-locked loop)? Or
how about some surround sound trickery on the aux channel if it feeds rear
speakers? Front/rear phasing?


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Ian Molton wrote:

How many inputs? Any switches on the front?

2 inputs - optical and coax, but it seems only one may be used at
once.

two selector switches to choose the input (and one on the back to
select the default on powerup, heh.)

theres a switch labelled 'phase'. Wonder what that does?

Something to do with the timing circuitry, perhaps (phase-locked loop)? Or
how about some surround sound trickery on the aux channel if it feeds rear
speakers? Front/rear phasing?


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

"Wally" wrote in message
...
Following the recent thread about adding a DAC to my Schneider DVD player,
I
went ahead and purchased a used Meridian 203 when it was offered by a
subscriber here. It arrived this morning and it's been playing all day...


:-)



My initial impressions are that there's much better detail and a huge
improvement in bass (cleaner, deeper, more controlled). Individual
instruments are easier to pick out and follow. Bass drums and low toms
have
tone rather than just a thumpiness, and basslines can be picked out around
the drums. There's far better resolution of cymbals and other high
tish-tish
noises - hardly ever noticed such things on the Schenider. Strings solo or
in small groups are clearer - the sound of rosined horsehair passing over
strings is really quite noticable. Soundstaging seems better - although I
haven't concentrated too much on this as yet, there have been a few times
when something has sounded 'solid but further away' (like, several yards
behind the speakers, but as if the room was bigger).

Overall, it's as if heavy curtains have been drawn back from the speakers.
I'm certainly hearing things in my CDs that I wasn't hearing before. I
realise that I'm still listening to the system at present



Interesting post.

Right, sounds like you've got the signal best part sorted. To cap it off
now, go the next step and get it routed through a decent valve amp. Beg,
borrow or steal summat that'll push out about 25-30W a side, switch it on
and give it about 20 minutes to get the 'trons organised, put on something
'full bodied', crank it up about halfway and strap yerself in tight.......!!

(Then come back here and tell me you *didn't* like it!!!)

;-)

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

"Wally" wrote in message
...
Following the recent thread about adding a DAC to my Schneider DVD player,
I
went ahead and purchased a used Meridian 203 when it was offered by a
subscriber here. It arrived this morning and it's been playing all day...


:-)



My initial impressions are that there's much better detail and a huge
improvement in bass (cleaner, deeper, more controlled). Individual
instruments are easier to pick out and follow. Bass drums and low toms
have
tone rather than just a thumpiness, and basslines can be picked out around
the drums. There's far better resolution of cymbals and other high
tish-tish
noises - hardly ever noticed such things on the Schenider. Strings solo or
in small groups are clearer - the sound of rosined horsehair passing over
strings is really quite noticable. Soundstaging seems better - although I
haven't concentrated too much on this as yet, there have been a few times
when something has sounded 'solid but further away' (like, several yards
behind the speakers, but as if the room was bigger).

Overall, it's as if heavy curtains have been drawn back from the speakers.
I'm certainly hearing things in my CDs that I wasn't hearing before. I
realise that I'm still listening to the system at present



Interesting post.

Right, sounds like you've got the signal best part sorted. To cap it off
now, go the next step and get it routed through a decent valve amp. Beg,
borrow or steal summat that'll push out about 25-30W a side, switch it on
and give it about 20 minutes to get the 'trons organised, put on something
'full bodied', crank it up about halfway and strap yerself in tight.......!!

(Then come back here and tell me you *didn't* like it!!!)

;-)

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 20:49:39 -0000
"Wally" wrote:


I got my ARCAM dac yesterday and have some optical cable on order. I
dont have a coax output :)

I look forward to your Team DAC review. :-)


I wonder why the dac has 'main' and 'aux' outputs? perhaps it can
decode four channels at once? it has two phillips DACs in it I think.

How many inputs? Any switches on the front?

2 inputs - optical and coax, but it seems only one may be used at once.

two selector switches to choose the input (and one on the back to select
the default on powerup, heh.)

theres a switch labelled 'phase'. Wonder what that does?




Inverts the phase which can sometimes improve the sound. (Buggered if I know
how or why though......)

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 20:49:39 -0000
"Wally" wrote:


I got my ARCAM dac yesterday and have some optical cable on order. I
dont have a coax output :)

I look forward to your Team DAC review. :-)


I wonder why the dac has 'main' and 'aux' outputs? perhaps it can
decode four channels at once? it has two phillips DACs in it I think.

How many inputs? Any switches on the front?

2 inputs - optical and coax, but it seems only one may be used at once.

two selector switches to choose the input (and one on the back to select
the default on powerup, heh.)

theres a switch labelled 'phase'. Wonder what that does?




Inverts the phase which can sometimes improve the sound. (Buggered if I know
how or why though......)

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Keith G wrote:

Right, sounds like you've got the signal best part sorted. To cap it
off now, go the next step and get it routed through a decent valve
amp. Beg, borrow or steal summat that'll push out about 25-30W a
side, switch it on and give it about 20 minutes to get the 'trons
organised, put on something 'full bodied', crank it up about halfway
and strap yerself in tight.......!!

(Then come back here and tell me you *didn't* like it!!!)

My amp is the Millennium 4-20 stereo kit that Maplin was selling a few years
ago. EF86 input to an ECC83 driving 2xEL34 in push-pull, class AB1,
nominally 20W per channel, good for 27 apparently. Clear, punchy transients
at about 1/4 to 1/3 volume - it develops 20W for 220mW input, so perhaps
it's reaching full volume peaks at my normal volume setting. Some music is
less enjoyable at about half volume, and it gradually deteriorates after
that. Goes pretty loud, never had it up full. It ain't mega-fi, but it
sounds okay. :-)

I had the valves baked in honey and soaked in swamp water - to make 'em
sweet and give 'em soul, you understand. Unfortunately, they just got sticky
and the pins corroded. I reckon a good way to hear 'the valve sound' is to
take a heavy guitar with beefy pickups and plug it into a decent valve
guitar amp. Turn it up and tickle the amp into ever-increasing levels of
creamy Audiophonic Overload Nirvana. There *is* no substitute. I built a
valve hi-fi amp (using the finest dessicated snakes) for no reason other
than: I want one. :-)

Nah, the next thing to address is the speakers. One of them is developing a
loose back panel - the original builder was economical with the screws, and
the 'plastic wood' crap that acted as a glue as well as a filler has gven
way. I need to get the panel off to see about adding extra screws to hold it
down. They're big and wardrobe-like - I'd like something much smaller and
with better bass. I want a flatter response (they're a bit boomy in places)
and more oomph low down.

The eventual plan is to make new bass enclosures, stash them out of the way,
and put the mid and top drivers into small boxes of LS3/5a sorta size. I'm
currently entertaining isobaric enclosures for the bass because I happen to
have four bass drivers - sounds like a lot of bass for the buck and easier
to build than transmission lines (which was my previous bass fantasy).


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Keith G wrote:

Right, sounds like you've got the signal best part sorted. To cap it
off now, go the next step and get it routed through a decent valve
amp. Beg, borrow or steal summat that'll push out about 25-30W a
side, switch it on and give it about 20 minutes to get the 'trons
organised, put on something 'full bodied', crank it up about halfway
and strap yerself in tight.......!!

(Then come back here and tell me you *didn't* like it!!!)

My amp is the Millennium 4-20 stereo kit that Maplin was selling a few years
ago. EF86 input to an ECC83 driving 2xEL34 in push-pull, class AB1,
nominally 20W per channel, good for 27 apparently. Clear, punchy transients
at about 1/4 to 1/3 volume - it develops 20W for 220mW input, so perhaps
it's reaching full volume peaks at my normal volume setting. Some music is
less enjoyable at about half volume, and it gradually deteriorates after
that. Goes pretty loud, never had it up full. It ain't mega-fi, but it
sounds okay. :-)

I had the valves baked in honey and soaked in swamp water - to make 'em
sweet and give 'em soul, you understand. Unfortunately, they just got sticky
and the pins corroded. I reckon a good way to hear 'the valve sound' is to
take a heavy guitar with beefy pickups and plug it into a decent valve
guitar amp. Turn it up and tickle the amp into ever-increasing levels of
creamy Audiophonic Overload Nirvana. There *is* no substitute. I built a
valve hi-fi amp (using the finest dessicated snakes) for no reason other
than: I want one. :-)

Nah, the next thing to address is the speakers. One of them is developing a
loose back panel - the original builder was economical with the screws, and
the 'plastic wood' crap that acted as a glue as well as a filler has gven
way. I need to get the panel off to see about adding extra screws to hold it
down. They're big and wardrobe-like - I'd like something much smaller and
with better bass. I want a flatter response (they're a bit boomy in places)
and more oomph low down.

The eventual plan is to make new bass enclosures, stash them out of the way,
and put the mid and top drivers into small boxes of LS3/5a sorta size. I'm
currently entertaining isobaric enclosures for the bass because I happen to
have four bass drivers - sounds like a lot of bass for the buck and easier
to build than transmission lines (which was my previous bass fantasy).


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

"Wally" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:

Right, sounds like you've got the signal best part sorted. To cap it
off now, go the next step and get it routed through a decent valve
amp. Beg, borrow or steal summat that'll push out about 25-30W a
side, switch it on and give it about 20 minutes to get the 'trons
organised, put on something 'full bodied', crank it up about halfway
and strap yerself in tight.......!!

(Then come back here and tell me you *didn't* like it!!!)

My amp is the Millennium 4-20 stereo kit that Maplin was selling a few
years
ago. EF86 input to an ECC83 driving 2xEL34 in push-pull, class AB1,
nominally 20W per channel, good for 27 apparently. Clear, punchy
transients
at about 1/4 to 1/3 volume - it develops 20W for 220mW input, so perhaps
it's reaching full volume peaks at my normal volume setting. Some music is
less enjoyable at about half volume, and it gradually deteriorates after
that. Goes pretty loud, never had it up full. It ain't mega-fi, but it
sounds okay. :-)



Oops! Teaching my grannie to suck eggs here........!! :-)




I had the valves baked in honey and soaked in swamp water - to make 'em
sweet and give 'em soul, you understand. Unfortunately, they just got
sticky
and the pins corroded. I reckon a good way to hear 'the valve sound' is to
take a heavy guitar with beefy pickups and plug it into a decent valve
guitar amp. Turn it up and tickle the amp into ever-increasing levels of
creamy Audiophonic Overload Nirvana. There *is* no substitute. I built a
valve hi-fi amp (using the finest dessicated snakes) for no reason other
than: I want one. :-)


Nah, the next thing to address is the speakers. One of them is developing
a
loose back panel - the original builder was economical with the screws,
and
the 'plastic wood' crap that acted as a glue as well as a filler has gven
way. I need to get the panel off to see about adding extra screws to hold
it
down. They're big and wardrobe-like - I'd like something much smaller and
with better bass. I want a flatter response (they're a bit boomy in
places)
and more oomph low down.



Hmmm, there's a school of thought that reckons speaker boxes with a few
holes and splits in 'em can sound pretty good. (In fact there are some
nutters who also like a few holes in their bass cones!) - I had a pair of
old Sabres that that had a few seams opening up and they sounded great. I
filled them with Plastic Padding though and then went and blew 'em up with a
50wpc Class A valve amp and a bit too much 'welly'! (Perhaps I should of
left 'em alone......!!)



The eventual plan is to make new bass enclosures, stash them out of the
way,
and put the mid and top drivers into small boxes of LS3/5a sorta size. I'm
currently entertaining isobaric enclosures for the bass because I happen
to
have four bass drivers - sounds like a lot of bass for the buck and easier
to build than transmission lines (which was my previous bass fantasy).



The idea of separate enclosures for bass and mid drivers with a nice little
separate 50 kHz tweeter sitting on top is one that has interested me for a
while now. (Won't go anywhere though - no budget for such foolishness
atm.... :-)

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

"Wally" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:

Right, sounds like you've got the signal best part sorted. To cap it
off now, go the next step and get it routed through a decent valve
amp. Beg, borrow or steal summat that'll push out about 25-30W a
side, switch it on and give it about 20 minutes to get the 'trons
organised, put on something 'full bodied', crank it up about halfway
and strap yerself in tight.......!!

(Then come back here and tell me you *didn't* like it!!!)

My amp is the Millennium 4-20 stereo kit that Maplin was selling a few
years
ago. EF86 input to an ECC83 driving 2xEL34 in push-pull, class AB1,
nominally 20W per channel, good for 27 apparently. Clear, punchy
transients
at about 1/4 to 1/3 volume - it develops 20W for 220mW input, so perhaps
it's reaching full volume peaks at my normal volume setting. Some music is
less enjoyable at about half volume, and it gradually deteriorates after
that. Goes pretty loud, never had it up full. It ain't mega-fi, but it
sounds okay. :-)



Oops! Teaching my grannie to suck eggs here........!! :-)




I had the valves baked in honey and soaked in swamp water - to make 'em
sweet and give 'em soul, you understand. Unfortunately, they just got
sticky
and the pins corroded. I reckon a good way to hear 'the valve sound' is to
take a heavy guitar with beefy pickups and plug it into a decent valve
guitar amp. Turn it up and tickle the amp into ever-increasing levels of
creamy Audiophonic Overload Nirvana. There *is* no substitute. I built a
valve hi-fi amp (using the finest dessicated snakes) for no reason other
than: I want one. :-)


Nah, the next thing to address is the speakers. One of them is developing
a
loose back panel - the original builder was economical with the screws,
and
the 'plastic wood' crap that acted as a glue as well as a filler has gven
way. I need to get the panel off to see about adding extra screws to hold
it
down. They're big and wardrobe-like - I'd like something much smaller and
with better bass. I want a flatter response (they're a bit boomy in
places)
and more oomph low down.



Hmmm, there's a school of thought that reckons speaker boxes with a few
holes and splits in 'em can sound pretty good. (In fact there are some
nutters who also like a few holes in their bass cones!) - I had a pair of
old Sabres that that had a few seams opening up and they sounded great. I
filled them with Plastic Padding though and then went and blew 'em up with a
50wpc Class A valve amp and a bit too much 'welly'! (Perhaps I should of
left 'em alone......!!)



The eventual plan is to make new bass enclosures, stash them out of the
way,
and put the mid and top drivers into small boxes of LS3/5a sorta size. I'm
currently entertaining isobaric enclosures for the bass because I happen
to
have four bass drivers - sounds like a lot of bass for the buck and easier
to build than transmission lines (which was my previous bass fantasy).



The idea of separate enclosures for bass and mid drivers with a nice little
separate 50 kHz tweeter sitting on top is one that has interested me for a
while now. (Won't go anywhere though - no budget for such foolishness
atm.... :-)

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 22:44:44 -0000, "Wally"
wrote:

Ian Molton wrote:

How many inputs? Any switches on the front?

2 inputs - optical and coax, but it seems only one may be used at
once.

two selector switches to choose the input (and one on the back to
select the default on powerup, heh.)

theres a switch labelled 'phase'. Wonder what that does?

Something to do with the timing circuitry, perhaps (phase-locked loop)? Or
how about some surround sound trickery on the aux channel if it feeds rear
speakers? Front/rear phasing?

It's a feature that has pretty well fallen out of fashion these days.
It reverses the phase of the output, so that you can correct for
absolute phase, i.e. when the kick drum skin punches towards you, the
speaker cone does the same. There was a big fuss about this in the
early '90s, but it's now generally agreed that there's no audible
difference.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 22:44:44 -0000, "Wally"
wrote:

Ian Molton wrote:

How many inputs? Any switches on the front?

2 inputs - optical and coax, but it seems only one may be used at
once.

two selector switches to choose the input (and one on the back to
select the default on powerup, heh.)

theres a switch labelled 'phase'. Wonder what that does?

Something to do with the timing circuitry, perhaps (phase-locked loop)? Or
how about some surround sound trickery on the aux channel if it feeds rear
speakers? Front/rear phasing?

It's a feature that has pretty well fallen out of fashion these days.
It reverses the phase of the output, so that you can correct for
absolute phase, i.e. when the kick drum skin punches towards you, the
speaker cone does the same. There was a big fuss about this in the
early '90s, but it's now generally agreed that there's no audible
difference.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

In article , Wally
wrote:
Following the recent thread about adding a DAC to my Schneider DVD
player, I went ahead and purchased a used Meridian 203 when it was
offered by a subscriber here. It arrived this morning and it's been
playing all day...

[snip]

I found that using a coax cable resulted in a little 'tick' noise when
skipping tracks. It would happen right at the start of a track. I tried
an optical interconnect and it stopped happening. I presume this is down
to some sort of interference, but can't really say what's causing it. I
note that the Lock light on the DAC goes out between each track, which I
gather has something to do with the player not sending timing
information unless it's actually playing music, so it might be related
to that.

It is unlikely to be interference. The comments you make about the 'lock'
light going off when you skip tracks implies that the signal stream from
the deck is being interrupted in some way. This will cause the DAC to lose
lock and have to regain it when the deck starts sending again. The source
may differ in how it outputs signals during the re-start transient via
co-ax and optical links, and this may explain the 'tick'. However its not
an effect I've encountered using coax inputs to either a 263 or 563 dac.
The players I use seem to leave the output 'on' during track skipping, etc,
so allowing the dac to remain locked.


My feeling is that the differences between the Merdian DAC and the Arcam
player are slight, and that the difference between both of them and the
Schneider is pretty big.

This is in line with what I would have hoped. My own view is that the
'better' the dac, the more closely it is recovering the waveforms specified
by the information on the CD/DVD. Thus 'better' dacs should sound similar
since they are all trying to reconstuct the same pattern from a given
CD/DVD.

[snip]

With the arrival of the 203, I don't think I'll be going shopping for an
Arcam any time soon, if at all. In fact, the 400 quid I didn't spend
(and don't have!) would probably be better spent on some mods to the
speakers (current semi-plan is isobaric subs and reboxed mid & high,
possibly bi-amped).

Buy electrostatics. 8-]

My own view/experience is that loudspeakers and room acoustics are where
you can usually make the biggest improvements to the results once you have
a decent source/amp.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

In article , Wally
wrote:
Following the recent thread about adding a DAC to my Schneider DVD
player, I went ahead and purchased a used Meridian 203 when it was
offered by a subscriber here. It arrived this morning and it's been
playing all day...

[snip]

I found that using a coax cable resulted in a little 'tick' noise when
skipping tracks. It would happen right at the start of a track. I tried
an optical interconnect and it stopped happening. I presume this is down
to some sort of interference, but can't really say what's causing it. I
note that the Lock light on the DAC goes out between each track, which I
gather has something to do with the player not sending timing
information unless it's actually playing music, so it might be related
to that.

It is unlikely to be interference. The comments you make about the 'lock'
light going off when you skip tracks implies that the signal stream from
the deck is being interrupted in some way. This will cause the DAC to lose
lock and have to regain it when the deck starts sending again. The source
may differ in how it outputs signals during the re-start transient via
co-ax and optical links, and this may explain the 'tick'. However its not
an effect I've encountered using coax inputs to either a 263 or 563 dac.
The players I use seem to leave the output 'on' during track skipping, etc,
so allowing the dac to remain locked.


My feeling is that the differences between the Merdian DAC and the Arcam
player are slight, and that the difference between both of them and the
Schneider is pretty big.

This is in line with what I would have hoped. My own view is that the
'better' the dac, the more closely it is recovering the waveforms specified
by the information on the CD/DVD. Thus 'better' dacs should sound similar
since they are all trying to reconstuct the same pattern from a given
CD/DVD.

[snip]

With the arrival of the 203, I don't think I'll be going shopping for an
Arcam any time soon, if at all. In fact, the 400 quid I didn't spend
(and don't have!) would probably be better spent on some mods to the
speakers (current semi-plan is isobaric subs and reboxed mid & high,
possibly bi-amped).

Buy electrostatics. 8-]

My own view/experience is that loudspeakers and room acoustics are where
you can usually make the biggest improvements to the results once you have
a decent source/amp.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

It's a feature that has pretty well fallen out of fashion these days.
It reverses the phase of the output, so that you can correct for
absolute phase, i.e. when the kick drum skin punches towards you, the
speaker cone does the same. There was a big fuss about this in the
early '90s, but it's now generally agreed that there's no audible
difference.

Ah, I see. How does one tell if one's absolute phase is correct?


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

It's a feature that has pretty well fallen out of fashion these days.
It reverses the phase of the output, so that you can correct for
absolute phase, i.e. when the kick drum skin punches towards you, the
speaker cone does the same. There was a big fuss about this in the
early '90s, but it's now generally agreed that there's no audible
difference.

Ah, I see. How does one tell if one's absolute phase is correct?


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:

It is unlikely to be interference. The comments you make about the
'lock' light going off when you skip tracks implies that the signal
stream from the deck is being interrupted in some way. This will
cause the DAC to lose lock and have to regain it when the deck starts
sending again.

Yup.

The source may differ in how it outputs signals during
the re-start transient via co-ax and optical links, and this may
explain the 'tick'.

I had wondered if it might be that, but kinda discounted it, thinking that
they both handle the same data stream - maybe they do but the circuitry for
each signal behaves differently (ie, coax output is flawed).


... However its not an effect I've encountered using
coax inputs to either a 263 or 563 dac. The players I use seem to
leave the output 'on' during track skipping, etc, so allowing the dac
to remain locked.

If I can blame it on the source, then I can live with that.


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:

It is unlikely to be interference. The comments you make about the
'lock' light going off when you skip tracks implies that the signal
stream from the deck is being interrupted in some way. This will
cause the DAC to lose lock and have to regain it when the deck starts
sending again.

Yup.

The source may differ in how it outputs signals during
the re-start transient via co-ax and optical links, and this may
explain the 'tick'.

I had wondered if it might be that, but kinda discounted it, thinking that
they both handle the same data stream - maybe they do but the circuitry for
each signal behaves differently (ie, coax output is flawed).


... However its not an effect I've encountered using
coax inputs to either a 263 or 563 dac. The players I use seem to
leave the output 'on' during track skipping, etc, so allowing the dac
to remain locked.

If I can blame it on the source, then I can live with that.


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Keith G wrote:

Oops! Teaching my grannie to suck eggs here........!! :-)

I don't claim expertise, just possession. :-) I'd always wanted one, partly
for the hell of it, partly curiosity. I tend to think that, if it's a decent
spec, it'll probably sound okay.


Hmmm, there's a school of thought that reckons speaker boxes with a
few holes and splits in 'em can sound pretty good.

If they're part of the design, they might be okay, but I don't think it
counts if it's a cab that's shaking itself to bits. :-)


(In fact there are
some nutters who also like a few holes in their bass cones!) ...

I hesitate to wonder how that can make an improvement.


... - I had
a pair of old Sabres that that had a few seams opening up and they
sounded great. I filled them with Plastic Padding though and then
went and blew 'em up with a 50wpc Class A valve amp and a bit too
much 'welly'! (Perhaps I should of left 'em alone......!!)

Nah, openING up is a changing of state - they might have sounded good at the
time, but they may well have deteriorated. Too many watts is a different
issue...


The idea of separate enclosures for bass and mid drivers with a nice
little separate 50 kHz tweeter sitting on top is one that has
interested me for a while now. (Won't go anywhere though - no budget
for such foolishness atm.... :-)

It depends on what you're starting from - if you can reuse your existing
drivers (or have spares), then the budget is little more than wood.


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Keith G wrote:

Oops! Teaching my grannie to suck eggs here........!! :-)

I don't claim expertise, just possession. :-) I'd always wanted one, partly
for the hell of it, partly curiosity. I tend to think that, if it's a decent
spec, it'll probably sound okay.


Hmmm, there's a school of thought that reckons speaker boxes with a
few holes and splits in 'em can sound pretty good.

If they're part of the design, they might be okay, but I don't think it
counts if it's a cab that's shaking itself to bits. :-)


(In fact there are
some nutters who also like a few holes in their bass cones!) ...

I hesitate to wonder how that can make an improvement.


... - I had
a pair of old Sabres that that had a few seams opening up and they
sounded great. I filled them with Plastic Padding though and then
went and blew 'em up with a 50wpc Class A valve amp and a bit too
much 'welly'! (Perhaps I should of left 'em alone......!!)

Nah, openING up is a changing of state - they might have sounded good at the
time, but they may well have deteriorated. Too many watts is a different
issue...


The idea of separate enclosures for bass and mid drivers with a nice
little separate 50 kHz tweeter sitting on top is one that has
interested me for a while now. (Won't go anywhere though - no budget
for such foolishness atm.... :-)

It depends on what you're starting from - if you can reuse your existing
drivers (or have spares), then the budget is little more than wood.


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

In article , Wally
wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

It's a feature that has pretty well fallen out of fashion these days.
It reverses the phase of the output, so that you can correct for
absolute phase, i.e. when the kick drum skin punches towards you, the
speaker cone does the same. There was a big fuss about this in the
early '90s, but it's now generally agreed that there's no audible
difference.

Ah, I see. How does one tell if one's absolute phase is correct?


Method A) Experiment and compare the two settings. If you can tell the
difference between phases, choose the one you prefer. If you can't tell the
difference, it doesn't matter. :-)

Method B) Check the units in your system to see if they end up 'inverting'
the signal, then consider which setting might be best for ensuring your
system is non-inverting (including the speakers, of course).

Of course, in each case you have no idea *what* the studio, etc, did to the
signal before it arrived in your home, and there is a good chance that some
instruments, etc, were 'inverted' some of the time whilst others were not.
Hence you might decide it is just another button to play with. ;-

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

In article , Wally
wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

It's a feature that has pretty well fallen out of fashion these days.
It reverses the phase of the output, so that you can correct for
absolute phase, i.e. when the kick drum skin punches towards you, the
speaker cone does the same. There was a big fuss about this in the
early '90s, but it's now generally agreed that there's no audible
difference.

Ah, I see. How does one tell if one's absolute phase is correct?


Method A) Experiment and compare the two settings. If you can tell the
difference between phases, choose the one you prefer. If you can't tell the
difference, it doesn't matter. :-)

Method B) Check the units in your system to see if they end up 'inverting'
the signal, then consider which setting might be best for ensuring your
system is non-inverting (including the speakers, of course).

Of course, in each case you have no idea *what* the studio, etc, did to the
signal before it arrived in your home, and there is a good chance that some
instruments, etc, were 'inverted' some of the time whilst others were not.
Hence you might decide it is just another button to play with. ;-

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:

My feeling is that the differences between the Merdian DAC and the
Arcam player are slight, and that the difference between both of
them and the Schneider is pretty big.

This is in line with what I would have hoped.

Yep, I kinda reckoned it would be close to the Arcam (or an Arcam-class
sound). I always knew that the Schneider was a stop-gap (bought because my
previous dsposable 30quid CD player packed in).


My own view is that the
'better' the dac, the more closely it is recovering the waveforms
specified by the information on the CD/DVD. Thus 'better' dacs should
sound similar since they are all trying to reconstuct the same
pattern from a given CD/DVD.

A bit like amplifiers, I suppose.


Buy electrostatics. 8-]

Aren't they rather big?


My own view/experience is that loudspeakers and room acoustics are
where you can usually make the biggest improvements to the results
once you have a decent source/amp.

I would agree with that. The speakers and room define most of the basic
character of the sound.


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:

My feeling is that the differences between the Merdian DAC and the
Arcam player are slight, and that the difference between both of
them and the Schneider is pretty big.

This is in line with what I would have hoped.

Yep, I kinda reckoned it would be close to the Arcam (or an Arcam-class
sound). I always knew that the Schneider was a stop-gap (bought because my
previous dsposable 30quid CD player packed in).


My own view is that the
'better' the dac, the more closely it is recovering the waveforms
specified by the information on the CD/DVD. Thus 'better' dacs should
sound similar since they are all trying to reconstuct the same
pattern from a given CD/DVD.

A bit like amplifiers, I suppose.


Buy electrostatics. 8-]

Aren't they rather big?


My own view/experience is that loudspeakers and room acoustics are
where you can usually make the biggest improvements to the results
once you have a decent source/amp.

I would agree with that. The speakers and room define most of the basic
character of the sound.


--
Wally
www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk
Latest addition: Early Works gallery

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 15:18:14 -0000, "Wally"
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

It's a feature that has pretty well fallen out of fashion these days.
It reverses the phase of the output, so that you can correct for
absolute phase, i.e. when the kick drum skin punches towards you, the
speaker cone does the same. There was a big fuss about this in the
early '90s, but it's now generally agreed that there's no audible
difference.

Ah, I see. How does one tell if one's absolute phase is correct?

Unless one has done one's own recording, one can't! To be fair, a very
few labels such as Pope Music do make the point that they use
'minimalist' recording techniques, and they do quote absolute phase on
their recordings. In general however, it seems to be one of those
audiophile fashion things like TIM, which has vanished into the mists
of history. Pretty obviously, it has no relevance to a multi-miked
recording.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 15:18:14 -0000, "Wally"
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

It's a feature that has pretty well fallen out of fashion these days.
It reverses the phase of the output, so that you can correct for
absolute phase, i.e. when the kick drum skin punches towards you, the
speaker cone does the same. There was a big fuss about this in the
early '90s, but it's now generally agreed that there's no audible
difference.

Ah, I see. How does one tell if one's absolute phase is correct?

Unless one has done one's own recording, one can't! To be fair, a very
few labels such as Pope Music do make the point that they use
'minimalist' recording techniques, and they do quote absolute phase on
their recordings. In general however, it seems to be one of those
audiophile fashion things like TIM, which has vanished into the mists
of history. Pretty obviously, it has no relevance to a multi-miked
recording.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 15:18:14 -0000, "Wally"
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

It's a feature that has pretty well fallen out of fashion these days.
It reverses the phase of the output, so that you can correct for
absolute phase, i.e. when the kick drum skin punches towards you, the
speaker cone does the same. There was a big fuss about this in the
early '90s, but it's now generally agreed that there's no audible
difference.

Ah, I see. How does one tell if one's absolute phase is correct?

Unless one has done one's own recording, one can't! To be fair, a very
few labels such as Pope Music do make the point that they use
'minimalist' recording techniques, and they do quote absolute phase on
their recordings. In general however, it seems to be one of those
audiophile fashion things like TIM, which has vanished into the mists
of history. Pretty obviously, it has no relevance to a multi-miked
recording.

Would it be reasonable to assume positive digital numbers correspond to
acoustic conpression and vice versa?

Ian

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 15:18:14 -0000, "Wally"
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

It's a feature that has pretty well fallen out of fashion these days.
It reverses the phase of the output, so that you can correct for
absolute phase, i.e. when the kick drum skin punches towards you, the
speaker cone does the same. There was a big fuss about this in the
early '90s, but it's now generally agreed that there's no audible
difference.

Ah, I see. How does one tell if one's absolute phase is correct?

Unless one has done one's own recording, one can't! To be fair, a very
few labels such as Pope Music do make the point that they use
'minimalist' recording techniques, and they do quote absolute phase on
their recordings. In general however, it seems to be one of those
audiophile fashion things like TIM, which has vanished into the mists
of history. Pretty obviously, it has no relevance to a multi-miked
recording.

Would it be reasonable to assume positive digital numbers correspond to
acoustic conpression and vice versa?

Ian

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 21:38:55 +0000, Ian Bell
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 15:18:14 -0000, "Wally"
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

It's a feature that has pretty well fallen out of fashion these days.
It reverses the phase of the output, so that you can correct for
absolute phase, i.e. when the kick drum skin punches towards you, the
speaker cone does the same. There was a big fuss about this in the
early '90s, but it's now generally agreed that there's no audible
difference.

Ah, I see. How does one tell if one's absolute phase is correct?

Unless one has done one's own recording, one can't! To be fair, a very
few labels such as Pope Music do make the point that they use
'minimalist' recording techniques, and they do quote absolute phase on
their recordings. In general however, it seems to be one of those
audiophile fashion things like TIM, which has vanished into the mists
of history. Pretty obviously, it has no relevance to a multi-miked
recording.

Would it be reasonable to assume positive digital numbers correspond to
acoustic conpression and vice versa?

In a system with correct absolute phase all the way through - yes.
Assuming you mean compression/rarefaction, and not clipping! :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 21:38:55 +0000, Ian Bell
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 15:18:14 -0000, "Wally"
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

It's a feature that has pretty well fallen out of fashion these days.
It reverses the phase of the output, so that you can correct for
absolute phase, i.e. when the kick drum skin punches towards you, the
speaker cone does the same. There was a big fuss about this in the
early '90s, but it's now generally agreed that there's no audible
difference.

Ah, I see. How does one tell if one's absolute phase is correct?

Unless one has done one's own recording, one can't! To be fair, a very
few labels such as Pope Music do make the point that they use
'minimalist' recording techniques, and they do quote absolute phase on
their recordings. In general however, it seems to be one of those
audiophile fashion things like TIM, which has vanished into the mists
of history. Pretty obviously, it has no relevance to a multi-miked
recording.

Would it be reasonable to assume positive digital numbers correspond to
acoustic conpression and vice versa?

In a system with correct absolute phase all the way through - yes.
Assuming you mean compression/rarefaction, and not clipping! :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

In article , Wally
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:

My own view is that the 'better' the dac, the more closely it is
recovering the waveforms specified by the information on the CD/DVD.
Thus 'better' dacs should sound similar since they are all trying to
reconstuct the same pattern from a given CD/DVD.

A bit like amplifiers, I suppose.

In my view, yes. However in both cases the user might *want* the player or
amp to alter the sound in a specific way as they may prefer the sound that
results. In this case 'better' may mean something that does not approach
the same common ground. Matter of personal choice and circumstances.


Buy electrostatics. 8-]

Aren't they rather big?

No, no. Your room is too small. :-)

Having said that, yesterday I moved a pair of ESL63's into our living room
to try out with out TV/DVD system. This room is quite small, so the
speakers dominate the room. Placed either side of the TV, they span about
90 percent of the width of the room, and the room is wider than it is long.

Despite that, SWMBO likes the appearance[1], and we both found the sound on
last night's broadcasts (BBC4) of Chopin and (BBC) Nutcracker! to be
superb. At last, pianos that sound like pianos when we watch TV/DVD!!

[1] This is a turn-around. She resisted having large speakers in the living
room for some time. Then a week or so ago she suddenly suggested we give it
a try. I think she has over time become accustomed to good sound, and hence
fallen victim - like myself - to the idea that the sound matters more than
the clutter. :-) The down-side is that I'll now have to buy another pair
of ESLs for the main hifi in the other room.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

In article , Wally
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:

My own view is that the 'better' the dac, the more closely it is
recovering the waveforms specified by the information on the CD/DVD.
Thus 'better' dacs should sound similar since they are all trying to
reconstuct the same pattern from a given CD/DVD.

A bit like amplifiers, I suppose.

In my view, yes. However in both cases the user might *want* the player or
amp to alter the sound in a specific way as they may prefer the sound that
results. In this case 'better' may mean something that does not approach
the same common ground. Matter of personal choice and circumstances.


Buy electrostatics. 8-]

Aren't they rather big?

No, no. Your room is too small. :-)

Having said that, yesterday I moved a pair of ESL63's into our living room
to try out with out TV/DVD system. This room is quite small, so the
speakers dominate the room. Placed either side of the TV, they span about
90 percent of the width of the room, and the room is wider than it is long.

Despite that, SWMBO likes the appearance[1], and we both found the sound on
last night's broadcasts (BBC4) of Chopin and (BBC) Nutcracker! to be
superb. At last, pianos that sound like pianos when we watch TV/DVD!!

[1] This is a turn-around. She resisted having large speakers in the living
room for some time. Then a week or so ago she suddenly suggested we give it
a try. I think she has over time become accustomed to good sound, and hence
fallen victim - like myself - to the idea that the sound matters more than
the clutter. :-) The down-side is that I'll now have to buy another pair
of ESLs for the main hifi in the other room.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Added a DAC to a cheap CD player - and got a result
 

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 08:59:05 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:

[1] This is a turn-around. She resisted having large speakers in the living
room for some time. Then a week or so ago she suddenly suggested we give it
a try. I think she has over time become accustomed to good sound, and hence
fallen victim - like myself - to the idea that the sound matters more than
the clutter. :-) The down-side is that I'll now have to buy another pair
of ESLs for the main hifi in the other room.

And two more surround, eventually. ;-)

Kal