Rob wrote:

2) benefits *may* arise from the isolation;
How far apart do they have to be?

Dunno - try it?

Er, you seem to think it's a factor, so I'm asking you to provide a number.
Do Meridian, et-al, say that physical separation is the right way to deploy
their gear? If you "don't know", then you're just bumping your gums, aren't
you?


I've never spent a great deal on CDPs in absolute terms - I use a
Marantz KI 6000 atm - ...

My current CD player was (literally) pulled out of a bucket earlier this
week.


... and I can't consistently tell a qualitative
difference between various CDPs. Your method seems to have worked -
what type of DAC do you have?

Meridian 203. I was able to consistently distinguish between this DAC and
the output from a mate's Arcam 8or9 CD player (digital out from the player
into the DAC, into another channel on the same amp). It wasn't level
matched, but I don't recall anything amiss with levels. He twiddled the
source switch while I listened with my eyes closed. His player sounded warm
compared to my DAC, which sounded 'cold' on his system but seems fine on
mine. Couldn't distingush between them for 'raw fidelity', just a slightly
different character to the sound.


This'll cheer you up - I was just having a drive around my new
neighbourhood this morning, happened on a hifi shop that happened to
have an ex-dem turntable/cartridge, 50 quid down, then 8 quid on a few
records at the local Oxfam - marvellous, just ****es on the
digidiskbitformat nonsense. :-)

Turntables and vinyl are a pain in the arse - static, dust, scratches,
having to flip sides, storage bulk, record wear, stylus wear, etc. I ditched
mine years ago and I'm glad I did. CD is cleaner, clearer, has better
dynamic range, is damage-resilient, takes up less space, can be picked up
and played in the car without pratting about, setting levels for
compilations is a no-brainer, etc.


--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk

Wally wrote:
Rob wrote:


2) benefits *may* arise from the isolation;

How far apart do they have to be?


Dunno - try it?


Er, you seem to think it's a factor, so I'm asking you to provide a number.
Do Meridian, et-al, say that physical separation is the right way to deploy
their gear? If you "don't know", then you're just bumping your gums, aren't
you?


I don't know how many ways there are of saying 'I don't know' so perhaps
I am bumping my gums.



I've never spent a great deal on CDPs in absolute terms - I use a
Marantz KI 6000 atm - ...


My current CD player was (literally) pulled out of a bucket earlier this
week.


Good news. It does annoy me how things in general, and electronics in
particular, get chucked away as we're told they're obsolete.



... and I can't consistently tell a qualitative
difference between various CDPs. Your method seems to have worked -
what type of DAC do you have?


Meridian 203. I was able to consistently distinguish between this DAC and
the output from a mate's Arcam 8or9 CD player (digital out from the player
into the DAC, into another channel on the same amp). It wasn't level
matched, but I don't recall anything amiss with levels. He twiddled the
source switch while I listened with my eyes closed. His player sounded warm
compared to my DAC, which sounded 'cold' on his system but seems fine on
mine. Couldn't distingush between them for 'raw fidelity', just a slightly
different character to the sound.


I gather from this NG and around that the Meridian stuff is good. If I
get the opportunity I'll give one a try, without doubt.



This'll cheer you up - I was just having a drive around my new
neighbourhood this morning, happened on a hifi shop that happened to
have an ex-dem turntable/cartridge, 50 quid down, then 8 quid on a few
records at the local Oxfam - marvellous, just ****es on the
digidiskbitformat nonsense. :-)


Turntables and vinyl are a pain in the arse - static, dust, scratches,
having to flip sides, storage bulk, record wear, stylus wear, etc. I ditched
mine years ago and I'm glad I did. CD is cleaner, clearer, has better
dynamic range, is damage-resilient, takes up less space, can be picked up
and played in the car without pratting about, setting levels for
compilations is a no-brainer, etc.


:-)

I agree! Vinyl is something of a labour of love which I don't happen to
mind, and I can readily appreciate bothers many. I have thousands of
CDs/digital recordings. But the point is that I'd rather listen to a
vinyl recording then a CD. I just prefer the sound.

Rob

Turntables and vinyl are a pain in the arse - static, dust, scratches,
having to flip sides, storage bulk, record wear, stylus wear, etc. I ditched
mine years ago and I'm glad I did. CD is cleaner, clearer, has better
dynamic range, is damage-resilient, takes up less space, can be picked up
and played in the car without pratting about, setting levels for
compilations is a no-brainer, etc.

I agree! Vinyl is something of a labour of love which I don't happen to mind, and I can readily appreciate bothers many. I have
thousands of CDs/digital recordings. But the point is that I'd rather listen to a vinyl recording then a CD. I just prefer the
sound.

You think that's a pain in the arse and a labour of love? Try living with my
temperamental valve amp for a weekend. THAT is high-maintenance. I'm lucky
(very lucky) to get a whole, interrupted trouble-free DAY out of it at the
moment. And no, I am really not exaggerating. And right now it's unwell again,
so back to the Cyrus II again.

Sigh/


Martin - wanders off muttering something like "sassn frassn sonofabi-..."

(Except she's a girl.)
--
M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967 110890
Manchester, U.K. http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?user=fleetie

"Dave Giles" wrote in message

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Given that you can buy 24/96 sound cards for your PC
which demonstrate more than 100dB dynamic range, that
wouldn't seem to be much of an issue for 16/44 CD.


Maybe those sound cards are pretty well shielded - I
don't know.

There's several ironies here. One of them is that Stweart is
undestating the reality of quality audio interfaces. The
best have something like 122 dB dynamic range, for less than
$200 there are several with 110 dB dynamic range, and for
$30 there is at least one with about 92 dB dynamic range.

Your next surprise may be the fact that none of these cards
have any visible extra shielding.

I know that the Linn Tunboks uses a
conventional PCI sound card (albeit a Linn soundcard, as
conventional as that makes it), so I appreciate that a PC
which doesn't interfere with it's analogue output isn't
impossible.

Not only isn't it impossible, its likely.

However, my point is that there have been no
assurances from Cambridge Audio that this is the case.

Audiophiles have this mistaken idea that somehow audio gear
has a pristine EMI situation under the covers. Fact is as
soon as the first TTL signal creeps into the box, it's all
downhill after there. Modern CD and DVD players have all of
the same kinds of noise generating circuitry as a PC, right
down to the switchmode power supply. In the US the noise
laws are the same for home CD players and home PCs, because
they are actually so similar from a electromagnetic noise
viewpoint.

Fleetie wrote:

You think that's a pain in the arse and a labour of love? Try living
with my temperamental valve amp for a weekend. THAT is
high-maintenance. I'm lucky (very lucky) to get a whole, interrupted
trouble-free DAY out of it at the moment. And no, I am really not
exaggerating. And right now it's unwell again, so back to the Cyrus
II again.

My valve amp wasn't like that - had to change the mains xfromer after a few
years due to loose windings or something, changed out one o/p valve 3 or 4
years and I currently need to find a replacement pre-amp valve. Not bad for
10 year old Maplin kit...


Martin - wanders off muttering something like "sassn frassn
sonofabi-..."

(Except she's a girl.)



--
Wally - who doesn't see his valve amp as being of either sex
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk

Rob wrote:

My current CD player was (literally) pulled out of a bucket earlier
this week.

Good news. It does annoy me how things in general, and electronics in
particular, get chucked away as we're told they're obsolete.

It was actually being recycled via a mailing list dedicated to the recycling
of almost anything, and was left in the bin for me to collect because the
householder wasn't around and it was raining. But it was pulled out of a
bin - rescued from the brink of the landfill by a hair's-breadth!


I gather from this NG and around that the Meridian stuff is good. If I
get the opportunity I'll give one a try, without doubt.

I bought mine sound unheard. One of the key phrases that was bandied about
was "properly engineered". I can't imagine what I'd have to buy/spend to
improve on it.


I agree! Vinyl is something of a labour of love which I don't happen
to mind, and I can readily appreciate bothers many. I have thousands
of CDs/digital recordings. But the point is that I'd rather listen to
a vinyl recording then a CD. I just prefer the sound.

I haven't had the opportunity to compare them directly on a system that I'm
familiar with. The mate with the Arcam CD player has a turntable, but it's
not very good (the CD is a hands-down winner).


--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk

Fleetie wrote:


You think that's a pain in the arse and a labour of love? Try living with my
temperamental valve amp for a weekend. THAT is high-maintenance. I'm lucky
(very lucky) to get a whole, interrupted trouble-free DAY out of it at the
moment. And no, I am really not exaggerating. And right now it's unwell again,
so back to the Cyrus II again.


Well, it has to be said, that several of us here did point you at a kit
amp, but you had to go off and buy something all shiny from china. So
don't exoect too much in the way of sympathy...

The offer to try and fix it is still open BTW :-)

--
Nick

Well, it has to be said, that several of us here did point you at a kit amp, but you had to go off and buy something all shiny
from china. So don't exoect too much in the way of sympathy...

The offer to try and fix it is still open BTW :-)

I have 4 6AX7 (IIRC) valves winging their way to me at the moment, cos
some of the output valves are toast to be honest, from sparking over.

I just hope these don't go the same way.

I'll keep you posted, and thanks.


Martin
--
M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967 110890
Manchester, U.K. http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?user=fleetie

Arny Krueger wrote:

Audiophiles have this mistaken idea that somehow audio gear
has a pristine EMI situation under the covers. Fact is as
soon as the first TTL signal creeps into the box, it's all
downhill after there. Modern CD and DVD players have all of
the same kinds of noise generating circuitry as a PC, right
down to the switchmode power supply. In the US the noise
laws are the same for home CD players and home PCs, because
they are actually so similar from a electromagnetic noise
viewpoint.

Interesting point about switchmode power supplies. Sure, SMPS' create EMI,
but there are subtle differences between a PC and a hifi CD player. If you
assume that the cabinet sizes are the same (because we're talking about
something which is basically a PC in a CD player box):

1) most modern CD players are fairly empty with the analogue circuits as far
away from the power supply as it can get. Not sure if you're familiar with
the back plane of the 640H but the analogue outputs are pretty close to the
power supply.

2) Typical power consumption of - for example - a VIA C3 setup is about 70W.
Typical power consumption of an audio-only CD player is about 20W.

So, if you assume a similar design of power supply (for the sake of
argument), then it's not unreasonable to assume that the 70W power supply
will pop out 3.5 times as much EMI as the 20W jobbie. Then factor in that
the cramped PC-based unit will have it's analogue output somewhat closer to
the power supply than the audio-only CD player (and work in inverse
square), and it's got a pretty hairy CPU on the other side of it too, then
it's potentially something to worry about.

I'm not for one moment suggesting that life for an analogue signal is a bed
of roses inside a CD player - I'm just suggesting that there may be other
considerations when building a PC-based hifi component.

The point of the original post was to raise concerns about CA's forthcoming
product, concerns which those people who have been following the product
closely over the past 10 months have raised with CA only to have the forums
removed from us. As I've replied elsewhere, I hope the concerns which I
have do prove to be unfounded and I hope it's a great product, but I guess
we'll see.

It'll probably sell by the bucket-load, anyway. Richer Sounds could shift
cold bags of porridge if it tried... (I know - I bought a PD480 - arf....)

"Dave Giles" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

Audiophiles have this mistaken idea that somehow audio
gear has a pristine EMI situation under the covers. Fact
is as soon as the first TTL signal creeps into the box,
it's all downhill after there. Modern CD and DVD players
have all of the same kinds of noise generating circuitry
as a PC, right down to the switchmode power supply. In
the US the noise laws are the same for home CD players
and home PCs, because they are actually so similar from
a electromagnetic noise viewpoint.

Interesting point about switchmode power supplies. Sure,
SMPS' create EMI, but there are subtle differences
between a PC and a hifi CD player. If you assume that the
cabinet sizes are the same (because we're talking about
something which is basically a PC in a CD player box):

1) most modern CD players are fairly empty with the
analogue circuits as far away from the power supply as it
can get. Not sure if you're familiar with the back plane
of the 640H but the analogue outputs are pretty close to
the power supply.

Most modern PCs are also fairly empty.

2) Typical power consumption of - for example - a VIA C3
setup is about 70W. Typical power consumption of an
audio-only CD player is about 20W.

AFAIK there's no rule that says that the internal noise of a
piece of equipment bears some proportion to its power level,
but if there was, the difference between 20 watts and 70
watts is a paltry 5 dB.

So, if you assume a similar design of power supply (for
the sake of argument), then it's not unreasonable to
assume that the 70W power supply will pop out 3.5 times
as much EMI as the 20W jobbie.

Like I said, you're presuming a scientific law that doesn't
exist.

Then factor in that the
cramped PC-based unit will have it's analogue output
somewhat closer to the power supply than the audio-only
CD player (and work in inverse square),

You're wrong about that. The traditional desktop PC is no
longer very cramped inside. There's about 7 inches between
the edge of the power supply of the PC I just built and the
sound chip on the motherboard.

Furthermore, the power supply in a PC is almost always
entirely shielded by a steel box while the power supplies in
the optical players I've checked are open.

OTOH consider that the real issue is the mixing of analog
and digital signals. This mixing of analog and digital
signal is inherent in the very existence of critical parts
like DAC chips which both PCs and CD players must have to
make audio signals.

and it's got a pretty hairy CPU on the other side of it
too, then it's
potentially something to worry about.

The operative word is potentially.

There's an area of electronic design called "mixed signal".
Given that as Stewart says some of the quietest audio gear
around is in the form of audio interfaces that fit into PCI
slots in a PC, its safe to say that somebody out there knows
how to do good mixed signal designs! ;-)

I'm not for one moment suggesting that life for an
analogue signal is a bed of roses inside a CD player -
I'm just suggesting that there may be other
considerations when building a PC-based hifi component.

Suggest on dude - there's the reality of the literal tons of
computer audio gear that has already been built and is in
service and works just fine.