It's again about my CDM9NT. Originally, I thought it is because of the amplifier or receiver that doesn't give enough power, so, I listen to people's advise and got a Rotel RB 1080. I can definitely hear improvement over my Denon receiver, sounds more solid, more bass, very clear, alot of detail, it finally gives me back the sound of my previous Rotel receiver. However, I am still not satisfied. I have a pair of old B&W Martrix III with Adcom GF-555 amplifier and pre-amp, and it sounds better. I have been thinking hard of a word to described it, and I finally find one. My CDM9NT sounds "backward", or not as "forward". The position of the singer sounds maybe 1 meter further away then my Matrix III ... is it possible? Would it be due to the environment, or the EQ, or the position of the speakers? Would it help if I adjust the EQ? Or is it the nature of the speaker that nothing can change it?
CDM9NT sounds BACKWARD
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
That could be as simple as the speaker toe in, how far apart they are, the source that you are using or the room. Swap out your matrix for the NT9 with the same positioning and angle then compare. If they still have a more recessed sound then it could be a chraacter of the speaker. I have the closely related 700s and they have been more forward sounding in my setup.Mac 8gb SSD Audirvana ->Weiss INT202 firewire interface ->Naim DAC & XPS2 DR->Conrad Johnson CT5 & LP70S-> Vivid B1s. Nordost Valhalla cables & resonance management. (Still waiting for Paul Hynes PS:M)
Siamese :evil: :twisted:- Bottom
-
If absolute phase is being flipped in that system the singer could sound farther away. When absolute phase is flipped the soundstage is turned front to back. Try switching phase, red speaker cable to black amp terminal and vice versa, on both channels on the amp and see what happens.
Eric- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by hifiguymiWhen absolute phase is flipped the soundstage is turned front to back.
No, disbelief is still going strong. Phase is just a matter of where you are on the wave crest. If there's not a phase imbalance then reversing phase is just a very slight shift in time. Certainly there's a huge change to soundstage when one side is reversed. But to reverse everything wouldn't have an audible effect.
The sense of depth or forwardness has a lot to do with loudness. The volume knob can work like a zoom lens, so a clockwise rotation can bring the image closer.- Bottom
Comment
-
I read that article, I cannot fully understand the theory, but it sounds like it says that the source can be out of phase, and if that's the case, then we should switch at the amplifier-speaker connection to make them in phase? Or for some pre-amp that can revert the phase, we can change that in the pre-amp?- Bottom
Comment
-
Some preamps can do it but not many. My suggestion was to try it on the amp because it's something that can be done without adding anything else into the system. If things get worse, then that is not it. If they get better then you at least have something to work with. You can then see if it's the source buy trying a different one and work your way down the chain if that is not it.
Eric- Bottom
Comment
-
i will try it today. Also, I am using Denon receiver as the processor, and it has the Audyssey that it will detect if it is out of phase. But in the manual, it says "for some speakers, this error message may be displayed even if the speaker is properly connected. If you are sure the wiring is correct, select "Skip".
I double check my wiring connection, and they are connected correctly on the polarity.- Bottom
Comment
-
I tried switching the polarity, but can hear any difference. Also, I tried that Audyssey, it doesn't detect any out of phase. But I found out what the problem is. :P
In my Denon receiver, there is a function called Auto Surround Mode. It was set to "on". I tried turn it off, and the sound is more forward now. Although there is only a subtle difference, but I think this is the root cause.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alex TangI tried switching the polarity, but can hear any difference. Also, I tried that Audyssey, it doesn't detect any out of phase. But I found out what the problem is. :P
In my Denon receiver, there is a function called Auto Surround Mode. It was set to "on". I tried turn it off, and the sound is more forward now. Although there is only a subtle difference, but I think this is the root cause.
To make your cdm9nt's sound their best , you need to run electronics that are going to bring out the best in them. I suggest replacing your Denon receiver with a Pioneer Elite SC model and still use it as a preamp with your Rotel RB1080. Now this is only if you are running a full theater system. You can also try out a Marantz av8003 Preamp. This is a fantastic sounding preamp and will make your B7W's sing. NAD makes an outstanding receiver in the T785HD. This you will no longer need your Rotel amp. It has plenty of power and will drive your 9nt's very very well. Sound quality wise the NAD is superior to all other suggestions. it's not pretty looking like the Marantz or Pioneer but sound quality wise to me is the man.
When designing a system especially when using such damn good speakers like the CDM9NT's as mains , you need to have synergy in your system. If you have a piece thats lacking like a Denon receiver , you will get results like your getting now.
But thats not the only reason your system may sound the way it does. If you want , list your complete system including interconnects and speaker wire used so we can go over the entire system to see where all the weak links in the chain are.
Placement of the speakers in the room are probably the biggest factor before you get into power amps and weakness in the system. Without proper placement , there is no hope to achieve the best performance. The CDM9NT's are extremely fussy with placement . One inch off and you hear it. I have Installed these speakers many times and almost purchased them myself. I still would like to own a pair for a 2 channel system somewhere. Love them.
Get me some pic's of your room Maybe I can find a few problems in there that can easily be fixed. We together can get them to sing like I know they can. If in then you are still not happy with them , then we will talk about moving into something else. It is very possible you just don't like them but you have to set them up calibrate and have proper electronics to power them in order to make that decision.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dmantisit goes further but your on the right track to fixing your problem. Get rid of the Denon receiver and use something else. Denon receivers sound dull and lifeless in my opinion. I never got any speaker package to sound its best off any Denon receiver and I have Installed them for over 11 years. I have Installed everything they made in all that time and always found something better for sound quality.
To make your cdm9nt's sound their best , you need to run electronics that are going to bring out the best in them. I suggest replacing your Denon receiver with a Pioneer Elite SC model and still use it as a preamp with your Rotel RB1080. Now this is only if you are running a full theater system. You can also try out a Marantz av8003 Preamp. This is a fantastic sounding preamp and will make your B7W's sing. NAD makes an outstanding receiver in the T785HD. This you will no longer need your Rotel amp. It has plenty of power and will drive your 9nt's very very well. Sound quality wise the NAD is superior to all other suggestions. it's not pretty looking like the Marantz or Pioneer but sound quality wise to me is the man.
When designing a system especially when using such damn good speakers like the CDM9NT's as mains , you need to have synergy in your system. If you have a piece thats lacking like a Denon receiver , you will get results like your getting now.
But thats not the only reason your system may sound the way it does. If you want , list your complete system including interconnects and speaker wire used so we can go over the entire system to see where all the weak links in the chain are.
Placement of the speakers in the room are probably the biggest factor before you get into power amps and weakness in the system. Without proper placement , there is no hope to achieve the best performance. The CDM9NT's are extremely fussy with placement . One inch off and you hear it. I have Installed these speakers many times and almost purchased them myself. I still would like to own a pair for a 2 channel system somewhere. Love them.
Get me some pic's of your room Maybe I can find a few problems in there that can easily be fixed. We together can get them to sing like I know they can. If in then you are still not happy with them , then we will talk about moving into something else. It is very possible you just don't like them but you have to set them up calibrate and have proper electronics to power them in order to make that decision.
BTW, I owned a 35wpc NAD integrated amp years back (like say 17 years ago, I still have pics of it I could dig up sometime) and can't say it was the most reliable piece I've owned. The right channel developed some type of major problem in the sub sonic frequencies that made the woofer pulse almost to the point of bottoming out but with no audible sound what so ever, and with no signal playing, lol. Just turn it on and the woofer would start to pulse uncontrollably. I couldn't comment on the sound quality because the rest of the system was junk (Optimus speakers for example).- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by emig5mI've never owned a Denon, or probably no where near the amount of experience with different equipment that you have, but value peoples experiences that has had a lot of hands on experience with a bunch of different brands. My question is, what do you think of Yamaha? And also how Yamaha vs a Denon stacks up to each other? Everyone that's heard my system has been very impressed, but in reference to what? Their Bose and stock car systems? :lol:
BTW, I owned a 35wpc NAD integrated amp years back (like say 17 years ago, I still have pics of it I could dig up sometime) and can't say it was the most reliable piece I've owned. The right channel developed some type of major problem in the sub sonic frequencies that made the woofer pulse almost to the point of bottoming out but with no audible sound what so ever, and with no signal playing, lol. Just turn it on and the woofer would start to pulse uncontrollably. I couldn't comment on the sound quality because the rest of the system was junk (Optimus speakers for example).
This kept them going for years. 2000 to about 2006 then they started to go a little down hill. All Yamaha receivers even there entry models had better dynamic range and control then any other receiver in their class. Sound quality was pure and clean. Some thought of them as bright. I thought of them as detailed and clean up top. Low end extension was excellent even on hard load speakers.
Todays offerings I'm not all that impressed. I found them to be not as rock solid as they once where in the past. I would not mate a Yamaha with a pair of B&W anything. I don't like the way they sound together. Back in the day I would use a RXV1 or a DSP1 without a flinch but today I don't have that going on. The RXZ1 was kinda good but I didn't feel the sound quality was as crisp and powerful as it once was.
YPAO room correction has to be the worse in the business. It actually sounds worse after calibration then before. Only system I can honestly say that. Even Bose room correction system seems to work very well. I don't get it.
Whats in your system my man? Give me a list.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by DmantisYamaha is was a good receiver company. The DSPA1 was a benchmark when it hit the market. It was such a fantastic intergraded pre/amp. I really thought it could hang with any separates in it's price class and then some. Excellent dynamic range and control.
This kept them going for years. 2000 to about 2006 then they started to go a little down hill. All Yamaha receivers even there entry models had better dynamic range and control then any other receiver in their class. Sound quality was pure and clean. Some thought of them as bright. I thought of them as detailed and clean up top. Low end extension was excellent even on hard load speakers.
Todays offerings I'm not all that impressed. I found them to be not as rock solid as they once where in the past. I would not mate a Yamaha with a pair of B&W anything. I don't like the way they sound together. Back in the day I would use a RXV1 or a DSP1 without a flinch but today I don't have that going on. The RXZ1 was kinda good but I didn't feel the sound quality was as crisp and powerful as it once was.
YPAO room correction has to be the worse in the business. It actually sounds worse after calibration then before. Only system I can honestly say that. Even Bose room correction system seems to work very well. I don't get it.
Whats in your system my man? Give me a list.
Could it be possible that AVRs are just too flip-floppity from year-to-year to really say a brand is either good or bad but more about a specific model from a certain year? I've always had poor sound from anything Sony (except some headphones) and even CD players using the analog outputs I could tell my Sony 400 disc sounded more compressed and muffled compared to my Pioneer 100 disc that I thought I was upgrading from (100 disc to 400) that was a lot more crystal clear and dynamic sounding. Maybe there was a reason the 400 disc Sony cost less than a Pioneer with only 1/4 of the disc space, lol. But really how do I know the Sonys of "today" aren't improved? I know the sour taste Sony audio products have left in my mouth over the years, I'd be hard pressed to try them again I'll tell you that.
My current Yamaha is my first. I only bought it because I needed an HDMI receiver that decoded the new formats AND because of the AVS forum deal that was going. I was scared it might actually sound worse than my previous Sony because the Sony cost around $1000 and the Yamaha was only $430, but man was I taken by surprise! The Sonys you had to EQ the hell out of them to get any tone and punch and the Yamaha was more crystal clear and punchier without touching any eq/tone control. Anyhow, what would you recommend to me that you would consider better sound quality over my Yamaha that is good enough to run on B&W speakers, but not a crazy hi-end expensive piece, but something with a price more down to earth. Maybe a Pioneer AVR with pre-amp outs?
There's at least one person that likes the sound of a Denon over higher end gear (and also using B&W 800Ds). http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1220877- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by emig5mThanks for the feedback. I'm currently using a Yamaha 663 (with a Emotiva XPA-5 power amp) with B&W 800s up front (804S/HTM3S), 685s in the rear, and a Sunfire Signature EQ for a sub. I think the Yamaha sounds great, but my point of reference is to some older Sonys which where very thin/compressed and low-fi sounding, even on lower end speakers like Cerwin Vega the difference was easily noticeable (comparing to my Carver stereo separates at the time). I've heard some high end brands at the store, but really wasn't all that impressed by it. I agree that YPAO doesn't do all that good, I use the initial settings then adjust to preference.
Could it be possible that AVRs are just too flip-floppity from year-to-year to really say a brand is either good or bad but more about a specific model from a certain year? I've always had poor sound from anything Sony (except some headphones) and even CD players using the analog outputs I could tell my Sony 400 disc sounded more compressed and muffled compared to my Pioneer 100 disc that I thought I was upgrading from (100 disc to 400) that was a lot more crystal clear and dynamic sounding. Maybe there was a reason the 400 disc Sony cost less than a Pioneer with only 1/4 of the disc space, lol. But really how do I know the Sonys of "today" aren't improved? I know the sour taste Sony audio products have left in my mouth over the years, I'd be hard pressed to try them again I'll tell you that.
My current Yamaha is my first. I only bought it because I needed an HDMI receiver that decoded the new formats AND because of the AVS forum deal that was going. I was scared it might actually sound worse than my previous Sony because the Sony cost around $1000 and the Yamaha was only $430, but man was I taken by surprise! The Sonys you had to EQ the hell out of them to get any tone and punch and the Yamaha was more crystal clear and punchier without touching any eq/tone control. Anyhow, what would you recommend to me that you would consider better sound quality over my Yamaha that is good enough to run on B&W speakers, but not a crazy hi-end expensive piece, but something with a price more down to earth. Maybe a Pioneer AVR with pre-amp outs?
There's at least one person that likes the sound of a Denon over higher end gear (and also using B&W 800Ds). http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1220877
I know nothing about the Emotiva amp. I have read many good things about them. I'd like to get some experience with them. I can't suggest their preamp as again I know nothing about them.- Bottom
Comment
-
Please help me to see what can be improved. My setup is very simple:
Denon AVR 988 receiver (same as 2808ci)
Rotel RB 1080
Sony BDP350 Bluray player
Quartect Straight wire speaker cable
Regular RCA gold plated cable between Denon and Rotel amp
Regular HDMI cable between Sony Bluray player and Denon receiver
I previously has a Rotel CD player, but can't hear much difference with my Sony, so, I sold it. Also, I am not a big believer in expensive cables. Please let me know what is your suggestion that will give the biggest bang for the buck. I have thought about upgrade my speaker, I really like the look of B&W 802, but it is very expensive and probably out of my budget, and also may not improve alot due to my other component. Maybe I should add a pre-amp just for music.
There is nothing behind my sofa, it is the dinning room.
- Bottom
Comment
-
Speakers too close to the back wall, hard wood floors, no sound absorption would be my "guess". I would toe in and angle the tweeters right behind your head too...
Check out some of Ethan Winer's videos on Youtube...
This 14-minute video from RealTraps explains the basics of room layout and acoustic treatment, and presents practical solutions to many common problems. The ...
- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by emig5mSpeakers too close to the back wall, hard wood floors, no sound absorption would be my "guess". I would toe in and angle the tweeters right behind your head too...
Check out some of Ethan Winer's videos on Youtube...
This 14-minute video from RealTraps explains the basics of room layout and acoustic treatment, and presents practical solutions to many common problems. The ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nzmB...eature=channel
Any other suggestions? how about adding a pre-amp? Or if want to change/upgrade the speaker, what would be a good choice? I would like to stick with B&W, my budget would be < $3000. I don't think the 7 series or CM9 would be a significant upgrade. How about 804 or 805? Would I get significant improvement? But there are no woofer on the 805, is it really "better" than a full range speaker?- Bottom
Comment
-
I finally take the Adcom GFP-555 and try out with my set up, all I can say is wow, it is significantly better than the Denon! I didn't expect that. I thought the most important component would be the speaker, then it is the amp ... I don't expect a pre-amp can give such a big difference. It is much more detail, the vocal is much forward and clear, and the bass is much punchy. I am trying to find a way to describe. My Denon sounds flat, the Adcom sounds much more dynamic and musical. It seems I can hear alot more note . I think I will add a pre-amp to my set up, any good suggestion? I think I can get the GFP-555 pretty cheap from Audiogon, but it doesn't have a remote, quite inconvenient. And it seems Rotel doesn't make 2-ch preamp?- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alex TangI finally take the Adcom GFP-555 and try out with my set up, all I can say is wow, it is significantly better than the Denon! I didn't expect that. I thought the most important component would be the speaker, then it is the amp ... I don't expect a pre-amp can give such a big difference. It is much more detail, the vocal is much forward and clear, and the bass is much punchy. I am trying to find a way to describe. My Denon sounds flat, the Adcom sounds much more dynamic and musical. It seems I can hear alot more note . I think I will add a pre-amp to my set up, any good suggestion? I think I can get the GFP-555 pretty cheap from Audiogon, but it doesn't have a remote, quite inconvenient. And it seems Rotel doesn't make 2-ch preamp?
Get a preamp by NAD in the T175hd , this is the right piece for you. It will do what the Adcom did and more as it's also a theater preamp. This is a done deal.
Also pull those speakers away from the walls ,they are getting killed there. They also need to be setup correctly. This will also greatly improve your musical performance playback. Please read the B&W manual and get as close to their setup as you can. I'll quickly give you some pointers.
Ok your seating distance and feet apart of the speakers is fine. I can work with that but get them off the back wall at least 6 inches or more if you can. Then start toeing them in so that the point directly behind your head. When you sit in the middle of the 2 speakers at the seating position, you want to be able to just see slightly the insides of the speaker sides. Imagine a triangle , the tweeters of the speakers pointing the lines to the point right behind your head. This will give you a huge sound stage and clear center point. B&W probably does this the best out of all speakers made.
So with these 2 changes in your system , you will greatly increase your listening pleasure. I also suggest an area rug. I see a Kids play rubber mat on the floor? That will work fine if it covers the entire front area of floor or at least the distance the front speakers are apart and then a little more.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alex TangI finally take the Adcom GFP-555 and try out with my set up, all I can say is wow, it is significantly better than the Denon! I didn't expect that. I thought the most important component would be the speaker, then it is the amp ... I don't expect a pre-amp can give such a big difference. It is much more detail, the vocal is much forward and clear, and the bass is much punchy. I am trying to find a way to describe. My Denon sounds flat, the Adcom sounds much more dynamic and musical. It seems I can hear alot more note . I think I will add a pre-amp to my set up, any good suggestion? I think I can get the GFP-555 pretty cheap from Audiogon, but it doesn't have a remote, quite inconvenient. And it seems Rotel doesn't make 2-ch preamp?- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by emig5mJust curious, but where you using analog or digital connections with the Denon?
So, if I get the Adcom, it will be used just for 2 Ch., and my Denon will be used for movie, sort of having 2 systems.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by DmantisNow that you have heard a difference by changing out the preamp , get rid of that Denon , there is no reason to own it you don't like the way it sounds.
Get a preamp by NAD in the T175hd , this is the right piece for you. It will do what the Adcom did and more as it's also a theater preamp. This is a done deal.
Also pull those speakers away from the walls ,they are getting killed there. They also need to be setup correctly. This will also greatly improve your musical performance playback. Please read the B&W manual and get as close to their setup as you can. I'll quickly give you some pointers.
Ok your seating distance and feet apart of the speakers is fine. I can work with that but get them off the back wall at least 6 inches or more if you can. Then start toeing them in so that the point directly behind your head. When you sit in the middle of the 2 speakers at the seating position, you want to be able to just see slightly the insides of the speaker sides. Imagine a triangle , the tweeters of the speakers pointing the lines to the point right behind your head. This will give you a huge sound stage and clear center point. B&W probably does this the best out of all speakers made.
So with these 2 changes in your system , you will greatly increase your listening pleasure. I also suggest an area rug. I see a Kids play rubber mat on the floor? That will work fine if it covers the entire front area of floor or at least the distance the front speakers are apart and then a little more.
The NAD T175HD sure seems to be a very good preamp, but it is quite expensive. I can only find 1 selling at Audiogon fro $2250. There is also a T175 (non HD) selling for $1149. I can live without HD for the movie. Besides the HD, do you know if the processor portion are the same?
But the T175 is only the pre-amp, right? Then I need to either keep my Denon, or get another multichannel amp? I think that is a stretch for me right now.
Or I can leave the Denon for movie, and get the Adcom GFA-555 for music which can be found for $200. Another concern I have is I haven't heard the NAD before, I am not sure if it will produce the sound I like.
What do you think? How about a NAD 1600 stereo preamp? It seems I can find one pretty cheap too.
Sorry to sound cheap, but for a guy with a family, this is only a hobby and I have other priorities, I need to get the best bang for the buck.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by emig5mHow where you connecting to the Denon? Analog or digital? (from the source)
hmm ... but you lead me to think of something. In the case of Adcom, if I am connecting the player to Adcom thru Analog ... that means I am using the DAC in Sony, right? Then, can I actually connect the player directly to the amp? It seems not ...- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alex TangFrom my Bluray to Denon, it is connected with HDMI cable.
hmm ... but you lead me to think of something. In the case of Adcom, if I am connecting the player to Adcom thru Analog ... that means I am using the DAC in Sony, right? Then, can I actually connect the player directly to the amp? It seems not ...
Originally posted by Alex Tang
The NAD T175HD sure seems to be a very good preamp, but it is quite expensive. I can only find 1 selling at Audiogon fro $2250.
Sorry to sound cheap, but for a guy with a family, this is only a hobby and I have other priorities, I need to get the best bang for the buck.- Bottom
Comment
-
I am more leaning towards adding a 2 ch preamp for stereo music. I am comparing the NAD 1600 vs Adcom GFP-710. They are about the same price in the used market. I don't need tuner, but I would like to have remote. The advantage of Adcom is I have hear the GFP-555, and I quite like it, and hopefully other models in Adcom would sound similar. There is currently one available on Aduiogon for $200, seems to be a good deal. the condition is only 6/10 with scratches. For the NAD, I haven't heard of it, so, I don't know how does it sound. But there is one selling locally on craigslist currently for CAD$220, seems pretty fair price, and it says it is in excellent condition without scratch.
Any recommendation or opinion on which one would you pick? I don't really need it urgently, so, I can wait for better ones .. but which brand would you go with my Rotel and B&W better?- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alex TangI am more leaning towards adding a 2 ch preamp for stereo music.
Any recommendation or opinion on which one would you pick? I don't really need it urgently, so, I can wait for better ones .. but which brand would you go with my Rotel and B&W better?
I have a pair of CDM9NT speakers powered by an RB-1080. Over a year ago I upgraded my preamp to an RC-1082 and I'm very happy with it. The tone controls on this preamp are particularly useful because my speakers can be too bright with some recordings and bass shy with others.
I agree with other posters about having the speakers toed in so they point behind your head, in my case about 1 - 2 feet. I've also improved the sound by pulling them out from the wall, in my case about 15 inches.
It's taken me a long time to get my system to sound right. An external DAC, careful integration with a sub, a large rug on the wooden floor in front of the speakers and heavier curtains have also been important ingredients.
Nigel.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by bigburner
It's taken me a long time to get my system to sound right. An external DAC, careful integration with a sub, a large rug on the wooden floor in front of the speakers and heavier curtains have also been important ingredients.
Nigel.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by emig5mThanks for the feedback. I'm currently using a Yamaha 663 (with a Emotiva XPA-5 power amp) with B&W 800s up front....
Marantz SR5002 (music fed by apple airport express via optical)
rotel RB-985 THX (4 channels bipowering fronts, 1 for the center)
B&W - 683, CDM-CNT, CDS3 (sides), DM601 (rears)
a combo of haveflex and audioquest cables.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by theblue- Bottom
Comment
-
I also tried connecting my Sony Bluray player to Denon using RCA to bypass Denon's DAC, the result is horrible. Afterall, Denon's DAC is not the worst.
I have pull the speakers forward (11 in. away from the wall), and toe in following people's suggestion. Can't really hear much difference, but I will keep it this way.
I bought a used Adcom GFP-710 from Audiogon for $200. Let's wait and see how does sit sound.
I have another question, but I will start another thread for that.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alex TangI also tried connecting my Sony Bluray player to Denon using RCA to bypass Denon's DAC, the result is horrible. Afterall, Denon's DAC is not the worst.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by emig5mHa! That's what I was getting at....using the analog connections on lower end gear is just awful in my experience. I stick with using lossless (not even resampled) digital transportation and I've been having good success with lower end gear. Call me crazy, but I can tell when the signal is being resampled to a different frequency from my PC... Bit-for-bit perfect digital transmission from the source is what gives me that crystal clear clarity! Your Sony Bluray might be resampling CD 44.1KHz to DVD standard 48KHz? (yes I'm aware my AVR upsamples to 192Khz once it gets the signal, but it's the point of keeping the signal as pure as possible for as long as possible - you might not notice one veil being thrown over the sound, but start throwing in two or more and it starts to become noticeable).- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alex TangThen now i have a question. When I connects my Sony player to Adcom preamp using RCA, I believe Sony is used for the decoding, right? Then .. what exactly is the Adcom doing? It is not doing processing, and also not amplifying. And the Adcom GFA-710 doesn't have digital audio input, so, I need to buy a good CD player then? 8O
My Sony CD player was a little muffled and less dynamics using the analog connections over my Pioneer (back when I still used CD players) which was just clearer and more dynamic. Same sound traits with AVRs - the Sony's always seemed like a step down from everything else I used, even comparing to Radio Shack Optimus AVRs (which where actually rebadged Pioneers). (Sorry to any Sony owners, they just performed the worst for me!)
This is why I like all lossless digital transportation these days... you don't have to worry about signal degradation, poor analog in/outs or have to spend big money on high end components (or cables) to keep your analog signal clean and clear. Good fidelity can be had on the cheap.... but I think this is all moot for the problem you're experiencing. And I don't think anyone will really be able to give definite help without actually hearing what it's doing first hand.- Bottom
Comment
-
I think my main question is how to get the best out of what I have. And here is the thought process.
A) Bluray ->(RCA) Denon receiver -> (RCA) Rotel amp ---- bad result
B) Bluray ->(HDMI) Denon receiver ->(RCA) Rotel amp --- OK result
So, the conclusion I draw is the DAC in Denon is better than that of Sony player. If I added the Adcom preamp, I think I have 2 options:
1) Bluray ->(RCA) Adcom preamp ->(RCA) Rotel amp --- Good result
2) Bluray ->(HDMI) Denon ->(RCA) Adcom preamp ->(RCA) Rotel amp - ?
I tried option 1, the result is better than A above. I believe Bluray is doing the decoding, I am not clear what Adcom has done to make it sounds better.
So, for option 2, it's like using the Denon processor, then out put to Adcom to do its "magic". Since A has better result than B .. would 2 also give better result than 1? Or I am adding too many components in the flow that will degrade the sound quality?- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by emig5mThis is why I like all lossless digital transportation these days... you don't have to worry about signal degradation, poor analog in/outs or have to spend big money on high end components (or cables) to keep your analog signal clean and clear. Good fidelity can be had on the cheap.... but I think this is all moot for the problem you're experiencing. And I don't think anyone will really be able to give definite help without actually hearing what it's doing first hand.Main System:
B&W 801D
Emotiva USP-1 Pre-Amp
Chord SPM-650 Stereo Amp
Oppo BDP-105
Squeezebox Touch
Second System:
B&W CM7
Emotiva UMC-1
Emotiva UPA-2
Oppo BDP-83SE
Grant Fidelity DAC-09
- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alex TangI think my main question is how to get the best out of what I have. And here is the thought process.
A) Bluray ->(RCA) Denon receiver -> (RCA) Rotel amp ---- bad result
B) Bluray ->(HDMI) Denon receiver ->(RCA) Rotel amp --- OK result
So, the conclusion I draw is the DAC in Denon is better than that of Sony player. If I added the Adcom preamp, I think I have 2 options:
1) Bluray ->(RCA) Adcom preamp ->(RCA) Rotel amp --- Good result
2) Bluray ->(HDMI) Denon ->(RCA) Adcom preamp ->(RCA) Rotel amp - ?
I tried option 1, the result is better than A above. I believe Bluray is doing the decoding, I am not clear what Adcom has done to make it sounds better.
So, for option 2, it's like using the Denon processor, then out put to Adcom to do its "magic". Since A has better result than B .. would 2 also give better result than 1? Or I am adding too many components in the flow that will degrade the sound quality?
That said you can run the digital to your Denon and be alright, but you won't be getting the most from your system. If you use the Adcom as a pre-amp you don't want to put the Denon in front if you dont have to..
My suggestion for true Stereo setup would be to get a half decent CD player and run RCA directly to the Adcom and then to the Rotel..Main System:
B&W 801D
Emotiva USP-1 Pre-Amp
Chord SPM-650 Stereo Amp
Oppo BDP-105
Squeezebox Touch
Second System:
B&W CM7
Emotiva UMC-1
Emotiva UPA-2
Oppo BDP-83SE
Grant Fidelity DAC-09
- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by stuofsci02This is partially true, but there is still much that can degrade sound in the digital world also including jitter. In the end your Pre/Pro still have to convert back to analog, and in my experience a nice pre/pro with 10 digital inputs can never compete with a "Good" dedicated CD player with a single analog stream.
Anyway... an alternative way would be using a separate high quality DAC+pre-amp with a PC as a digital transport...- Bottom
Comment
-
Yes... Of course CD is cumbersome. I use a SqueezeBox connected wirelessly to my PC where I have 100's of gigs of Lossless files in FLAC and AAC format. Certainly much handier. The problem of course is my OPPO CD source sounds better playing the same files, so until I can afford a sweet external DAC, I have been burning my FLAC files back to CD to play in the OPPO..
I am not sure if you have had trouble with the HDMI, but that would be my least favourite method of digital connection. I would prefer to go Coax or TOSlink.
The problem with a music server is for most people this will involve equipment that they don't have, so we should really use the word "source" to represent any device the is outputing an analog signal. This could be a CD player, or it could be something connected to an external DAC or Pre/Pro. In the end, for me the source makes much of the difference.Main System:
B&W 801D
Emotiva USP-1 Pre-Amp
Chord SPM-650 Stereo Amp
Oppo BDP-105
Squeezebox Touch
Second System:
B&W CM7
Emotiva UMC-1
Emotiva UPA-2
Oppo BDP-83SE
Grant Fidelity DAC-09
- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by stuofsci02
That said you can run the digital to your Denon and be alright, but you won't be getting the most from your system. If you use the Adcom as a pre-amp you don't want to put the Denon in front if you dont have to..
Anyway, for the sake of discussion, why connecting my CD player to Denon then to Adcom is not good? I believe the most critical part that will impact the sound quality in a player is the DAC. So, by sending data to Denon through digital (where there should be no loss), we are using the better Denon DAC. This should be equivalent to having a decent Cd player with good DAC, right?
To be very picky, there are still possible areas that a good CD player will deliver better sound. I can think of 2 at the moment:
1) the loss or interferance between interconnects, and maybe inside the components. Having the player connect to Denon introduce 1 addition component and 1 additional interconnect.
2) A good CD player should have good vibration control, and more solid build.
Is there other advantages that a good CD player will bring? I think I can live with the above 2 items, and my untrained ears probably can't hear the differences.
It seems I am over analyzing this stuff. :- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alex TangI think I will try both set up and see how it goes. And I may add a decent CD player later since I read a post that someone get a pretty good CD player on eBay for $50 bucks or so. (BTW, any good suggestion?)
Anyway, for the sake of discussion, why connecting my CD player to Denon then to Adcom is not good? I believe the most critical part that will impact the sound quality in a player is the DAC. So, by sending data to Denon through digital (where there should be no loss), we are using the better Denon DAC. This should be equivalent to having a decent Cd player with good DAC, right?
To be very picky, there are still possible areas that a good CD player will deliver better sound. I can think of 2 at the moment:
1) the loss or interferance between interconnects, and maybe inside the components. Having the player connect to Denon introduce 1 addition component and 1 additional interconnect.
2) A good CD player should have good vibration control, and more solid build.
Is there other advantages that a good CD player will bring? I think I can live with the above 2 items, and my untrained ears probably can't hear the differences.
It seems I am over analyzing this stuff. :
If you are going to send via digital to your Denon, then your Denon will do the DAC. Since your Denon is already now acting as a pre-amp, there is no reason to send that via analog to the Adcom Pre-amp.. The Adcom can now only make the signal worse (not better). So you might as well run directly out of the Denon analog L/R outputs to the Rotel amp and call it a day.
If you run your Sony 350 analog outputs to the Denon, then you will be using the worse DAC in the Sony, but also there is a good chance that the Denon will Re-digitize the signal (ADC) to give you tone controls and bass management. It will then go back to analog using the Denon DAC, and your signal is now killed since you uses the crappy DAC in the sony to the ADC in the Denon to the DAC in the Denon... Yuck... Unless your Denon has true analog bypass this is what will happen.
Your next choice is to run analog out from the RCA on the Sony directly to the Adcom Pre-Amp. The Adcom pre-amp will give you Volume Control and Tone Control all in the analog domain which will mean no more ADC or DAC.. Of course you are still using the DAC in the Sony which stinks..
So with the equipment you have, I believe the Sony to the Denon by digital to the Rotel Amp will give you the best sound, with no Adcom Pre-Amp.
So the last question that remains is, can you get a source (CD-Player, Blu-Ray etc.) that has a better DAC and analog stage then the one included in your Denon for a price you can live with. Then you would go RCA direct to the Adcom. In generally, I can almost gaurantee it. Since a CD player only needs one DAC and one analog output stage they can do a much better job with it then a AVR can which requires the DAC and analog stage for each of the digital inputs..
I believe you could make a great improvement for less then $500 by getting a used CD play like a NAD or Rotel, or you could get a used External DAC like the DACMagic or other.
Cheers.
StuartMain System:
B&W 801D
Emotiva USP-1 Pre-Amp
Chord SPM-650 Stereo Amp
Oppo BDP-105
Squeezebox Touch
Second System:
B&W CM7
Emotiva UMC-1
Emotiva UPA-2
Oppo BDP-83SE
Grant Fidelity DAC-09
- Bottom
Comment
-
I finally got the Adcom pre-amp, and it sounds good, even with my not-so-good Sony Blu-ray DAC. It is much better than the Denon and even the Rotel receiver. The bass is much more punchy, more detail and clarity. It just seems I can hear alot more notes. Now, I am quite satisfied. :T- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Alex TangI finally got the Adcom pre-amp, and it sounds good, even with my not-so-good Sony Blu-ray DAC. It is much better than the Denon and even the Rotel receiver. The bass is much more punchy, more detail and clarity. It just seems I can hear alot more notes. Now, I am quite satisfied. :T
Now at least you know for your next step (should you want another step) the addition of a good quality source will only make things better.Main System:
B&W 801D
Emotiva USP-1 Pre-Amp
Chord SPM-650 Stereo Amp
Oppo BDP-105
Squeezebox Touch
Second System:
B&W CM7
Emotiva UMC-1
Emotiva UPA-2
Oppo BDP-83SE
Grant Fidelity DAC-09
- Bottom
Comment
Comment