Evolution...

[Guy 13]

Hi all.
Now it the speaker's wire turn.
Not much to say about that.
I always thought that the bigger (In gage) the better,
but with time and reading from people that knows a lot more than me,
there are other factors to consider,
like inductance and capacitance.
After my move to my (Second) home country Canada
(My first home country is planet Vietnam, that's what I like to think)
I will do some test on speker wires and find out if I can improve enough the sound quality
to be notice by my old ears.
In the past, I did some test between Signal cables 14 ga. multistrands OFC
and heavy duty (Made in China) extension cables 12G, Not OFC, but copper
with thick, very thick, but flexible rubber enveloppe.
I've also tried with and without banana plug.
Honestly, I didn't hear any difference,
sad that with many test and upgrade I cannot distinguish
any improvement or very little improvements.



Guy 13

Next post I will talk about my ambiant stereo system in my office.

[tmazz]

Hi all.
I read everywhere that good interconnect makes a '' HUGE '' difference on sound.
Well, sometime ago I bought a few different model of Signal Cable
and I've trown in some '' El Cheapo '' interconnect that you get free when you purchase '' El Cheapo '' components.
Something that is worth probably 2.95 USD each sets.
My Signal Cables models were OFC and OFC with silver coating.
The silver coating had plastic bullet connectors, the OFC has what I believe was copper bullet
with Gold (? ? ? ) plating.
Of course the '' Super El Cheapo '' interconnect sounded like, El Cheapo,
thin sound.
Now the difference between the OFC and OFC with silver coating
was more difficult to hear.
Not sure, if I could really hear a difference,
so I've used that OFC silver coating on my system.
I had a look at the Decware DAG 99USD for 50cm
or at the time of my test something equivalent.
I never want to pay more than 50 USD for 1 meter interconnect,
that me and that my thinking, because I don't think my ears will hear the difference
and my budget tell me not to invest that much in something that I do not hear differences in sound quality.
Humm mmm almost forgot to tak about the interconnect that I made myself.
Made in China bullets and shielded cables.
Again, difficult to tell the difference between the Signal Cable OFC (Silver)
and my own cables.
One thing is sure, they cost less to make and sound as good for me and maybe a little less good for someone else,
mind you, I am sure that if someone else had listen to my cables, they might have said they sound terrible,
bu that's o.k. they are in my system and I am happy with them.
That's what happen when you are not demanding like me.

Guy 13

(Next : Speaker cable)

I have found cables to be very system dependent. a number of years ago a friend of mine brought over to my place a pair of interconnects that he picked up at a great price on a clearance sale. They made a significant improvement in my system and I ordered five pairs. very excited about this find, i brought them over to another friends house. We put them in his system and not only did he not get the magic that I found, but the actually sounded bad in his system. Go figure.

The bottom line here is that if you find something that works well in your system, just go with it and don't worry about what it is.

Actually now that I think about it, that philosophy works for pretty much anything in audio, not just cable.

[Guy 13]

Hi TMAZZ,
the more I write here, to more I think about it,
the more I am convinced that I cannot tell the difference between
many audio (Up grade) items.
Some can tell differences like :
Subtle, huge, noticeable difference between A and B
but for me, it is very difficult.
Is it my brain, my ears or a combination of the two ? ? ?
In addition, when I compare A to B the switch over from one to another
must be within one second,
that the time my memory keeps information from previous hearing.
Well good if they can hear small, tiny differences between A and B,
but not me or just a little.
Plus the fact that I am retired and my financial status is not what it use to be,
therefore, I don't spend 500 USD on a pair of interconnects
or 1,500 USD on a pair of headphones, etc...
I think that when I am back in Canada,
there will be only a few audio items that I will buy
to improve my system.
The Schiit Asgard for one...
Of course we need a TV and a DVD player,
since everything here is not compatible and-or too old.
I might write something on the appropriate topic to get member's opinions and experience,
even if I know pretty much what I will buy.

Guy 13

[tmazz]

Before my first wife passed away we lived in a house that afforded me the luxury of a dedicated audio room. This room was all mine and I could do whatever I wanted in it. So over the 27 years we lived there I tweak that room in all kinds of way. I could place equipment and speakers however and wherever I wanted and use any  acoustic treatment that my heart desired. If I don't say so myself , it sounded damn good. Then when I got remarried I needed to find a house that would meet the needs of not only my budget but an extended blended family. Unfortunately, when we found a house that worked for the family, it did not come with a space I could use for a separate audio room. While this kind of bummed me out at first, it really turned out to be a blessing in disguise. My audio system had to fit into a common space, the living room and as such had to blend into a multi use space that to start wit was significanly smaller than what I had before. Sp gone was were the oversized speakers and the 135 lb 30 inch deep tube amp. I had to downsize in order to fit in the available space and as such, my expectations of how good it would be were also diminished. (Just for kicks I actually tried the big Thiel CS-6s in the room and they just overpowered it.)

I went into this move knowing the sound would not be as good as I had and to my surprise what ended up happening is I began to spend more time listening to and enjoying the music and less time fussing over the sound itself.  As I think back on it the change in my system was probably a good thing because even if I did find a room big enough to use the old stuff, it would have most likely taken me a long time to tweak the setup in that room to the point that it sounded as good ad the first room and I would have been miserable until then knowing tat the system did not sound as good as it should. My lowered sonic expectations freed me to enjoy the music more than I had in a long time.

I have now changed my way of thinking about new equipment. Instead of listening to see if the change sounds better, I am now looking to see if the change allows me to enjoy or connect with the music better. Where I used to strive to put together a system that had the best sound I now look more for one that provides the most musical enjoyment. Sometimes that coinsides with the best sound , but sometimes not.

A friend of mine recently conducted an experiment with regards to high res files. He took several LPs and digitized then at various bit rates and asked me to evaluate the sound. His contention was that the differences in high res files was all in the mastering and the bit rates had very little if anything to do with the sound quality. Much to his dismay, through critical listening I was able to identify the higher bit rate files 90+% of the time.Being in this hobby as long as I have been I knew exactly what to listen for, things like attack and decay on cymbals and body resonance on a hollow wood instrument. But while I could hear and identify these difference, in doing so I was concentrating on the sound and not the music. What surprised me most about this experiment is that when i sat back and just listened to the music the higher bit rates did not add that much if anything to my enjoyment of the music. My toe tapped just a much to the redbook file as it did to the 96/24 and the 192 file did not do much more to draw me into the music.

Now I am still an audio nerd and so the prospect of better sound is still enjoyable on some level, but in recent years I have just put it more in perspective and place much less importance on chasing that last 1% of SQ.

[Nick B]

Before my first wife passed away we lived in a house that afforded me the luxury of a dedicated audio room. This room was all mine and I could do whatever I wanted in it. So over the 27 years we lived there I tweak that room in all kinds of way. I could place equipment and speakers however and wherever I wanted and use any  acoustic treatment that my heart desired. If I don't say so myself , it sounded damn good. Then when I got remarried I needed to find a house that would meet the needs of not only my budget but an extended blended family. Unfortunately, when we found a house that worked for the family, it did not come with a space I could use for a separate audio room. While this kind of bummed me out at first, it really turned out to be a blessing in disguise. My audio system had to fit into a common space, the living room and as such had to blend into a multi use space that to start wit was significanly smaller than what I had before. Sp gone was were the oversized speakers and the 135 lb 30 inch deep tube amp. I had to downsize in order to fit in the available space and as such, my expectations of how good it would be were also diminished. (Just for kicks I actually tried the big Thiel CS-6s in the room and they just overpowered it.)

I went into this move knowing the sound would not be as good as I had and to my surprise what ended up happening is I began to spend more time listening to and enjoying the music and less time fussing over the sound itself.  As I think back on it the change in my system was probably a good thing because even if I did find a room big enough to use the old stuff, it would have most likely taken me a long time to tweak the setup in that room to the point that it sounded as good ad the first room and I would have been miserable until then knowing tat the system did not sound as good as it should. My lowered sonic expectations freed me to enjoy the music more than I had in a long time.

I have now changed my way of thinking about new equipment. Instead of listening to see if the change sounds better, I am now looking to see if the change allows me to enjoy or connect with the music better. Where I used to strive to put together a system that had the best sound I now look more for one that provides the most musical enjoyment. Sometimes that coinsides with the best sound , but sometimes not.

A friend of mine recently conducted an experiment with regards to high res files. He took several LPs and digitized then at various bit rates and asked me to evaluate the sound. His contention was that the differences in high res files was all in the mastering and the bit rates had very little if anything to do with the sound quality. Much to his dismay, through critical listening I was able to identify the higher bit rate files 90+% of the time.Being in this hobby as long as I have been I knew exactly what to listen for, things like attack and decay on cymbals and body resonance on a hollow wood instrument. But while I could hear and identify these difference, in doing so I was concentrating on the sound and not the music. What surprised me most about this experiment is that when i sat back and just listened to the music the higher bit rates did not add that much if anything to my enjoyment of the music. My toe tapped just a much to the redbook file as it did to the 96/24 and the 192 file did not do much more to draw me into the music.

Now I am still an audio nerd and so the prospect of better sound is still enjoyable on some level, but in recent years I have just put it more in perspective and place much less importance on chasing that last 1% of SQ.

Great post. I am curious though about upsampling and what it might do to much of the old tunes I listen to.  If I recall correctly, my previous dac ...the Antelope Gold...could play some high res but not upsample. Right now, I have the Border Patrol nos dac.

[Guy 13]

Before my first wife passed away we lived in a house that afforded me the luxury of a dedicated audio room. This room was all mine and I could do whatever I wanted in it. So over the 27 years we lived there I tweak that room in all kinds of way. I could place equipment and speakers however and wherever I wanted and use any  acoustic treatment that my heart desired. If I don't say so myself , it sounded damn good. Then when I got remarried I needed to find a house that would meet the needs of not only my budget but an extended blended family. Unfortunately, when we found a house that worked for the family, it did not come with a space I could use for a separate audio room. While this kind of bummed me out at first, it really turned out to be a blessing in disguise. My audio system had to fit into a common space, the living room and as such had to blend into a multi use space that to start wit was significanly smaller than what I had before. Sp gone was were the oversized speakers and the 135 lb 30 inch deep tube amp. I had to downsize in order to fit in the available space and as such, my expectations of how good it would be were also diminished. (Just for kicks I actually tried the big Thiel CS-6s in the room and they just overpowered it.)
I went into this move knowing the sound would not be as good as I had and to my surprise what ended up happening is I began to spend more time listening to and enjoying the music and less time fussing over the sound itself.  As I think back on it the change in my system was probably a good thing because even if I did find a room big enough to use the old stuff, it would have most likely taken me a long time to tweak the setup in that room to the point that it sounded as good ad the first room and I would have been miserable until then knowing tat the system did not sound as good as it should. My lowered sonic expectations freed me to enjoy the music more than I had in a long time.

I have now changed my way of thinking about new equipment. Instead of listening to see if the change sounds better, I am now looking to see if the change allows me to enjoy or connect with the music better. Where I used to strive to put together a system that had the best sound I now look more for one that provides the most musical enjoyment. Sometimes that coinsides with the best sound , but sometimes not.

A friend of mine recently conducted an experiment with regards to high res files. He took several LPs and digitized then at various bit rates and asked me to evaluate the sound. His contention was that the differences in high res files was all in the mastering and the bit rates had very little if anything to do with the sound quality. Much to his dismay, through critical listening I was able to identify the higher bit rate files 90+% of the time.Being in this hobby as long as I have been I knew exactly what to listen for, things like attack and decay on cymbals and body resonance on a hollow wood instrument. But while I could hear and identify these difference, in doing so I was concentrating on the sound and not the music. What surprised me most about this experiment is that when i sat back and just listened to the music the higher bit rates did not add that much if anything to my enjoyment of the music. My toe tapped just a much to the redbook file as it did to the 96/24 and the 192 file did not do much more to draw me into the music.

Now I am still an audio nerd and so the prospect of better sound is still enjoyable on some level, but in recent years I have just put it more in perspective and place much less importance on chasing that last 1% of SQ.

Hi tmazz.
Thanks for that very nice write up.
Your past situation will be my future situation.
When I move to Canada on arrival we will rent a one bedroom apartment,
therefore, no dedicated audio room.
The only place where I will be able to put some of my audio stuff will be in the living room,
it's a commoun area and I cannot do whatever I want, tat's for sure,
even if my mife is very tolerent accepting some of my ugly audio stuff..
I will buy a TV and DVD player and put what ever audio stuff I have left
on the tv cabinet,
I will sell all the big items, mainly monster speakers...
Later on, we will buy a triplex,
but that doesn't garanty  I will have a dedicated audio room.
So, I've already decided to scale down my system,
probably end-up with my ambiant system for my office and maybe,
I won't even have a dedicated office room.
Well... What can I say.
I will make my ambiant system as much as possible enjoyable
and as small as possible.
I already a a pretty good idea what it will look like and what I will be.
With my last system with the Decware and wide range driver in OB
that was the one I liked the most,
because I could hear all the substilities of the instrument
and at the same time, enjoy the melody.
Plus with our reinforced concrete house, I could play
as loud as a discotheque and my with didn't hear a thing.
Well those good old days will be gone soon.

Thanks again for sharing your '' Evolution ''

Guy 13

[tmazz]

Before my first wife passed away we lived in a house that afforded me the luxury of a dedicated audio room. This room was all mine and I could do whatever I wanted in it. So over the 27 years we lived there I tweak that room in all kinds of way. I could place equipment and speakers however and wherever I wanted and use any  acoustic treatment that my heart desired. If I don't say so myself , it sounded damn good. Then when I got remarried I needed to find a house that would meet the needs of not only my budget but an extended blended family. Unfortunately, when we found a house that worked for the family, it did not come with a space I could use for a separate audio room. While this kind of bummed me out at first, it really turned out to be a blessing in disguise. My audio system had to fit into a common space, the living room and as such had to blend into a multi use space that to start wit was significantly smaller than what I had before. Sp gone was were the oversized speakers and the 135 lb 30 inch deep tube amp. I had to downsize in order to fit in the available space and as such, my expectations of how good it would be were also diminished. (Just for kicks I actually tried the big Thiel CS-6s in the room and they just overpowered it.)

I went into this move knowing the sound would not be as good as I had and to my surprise what ended up happening is I began to spend more time listening to and enjoying the music and less time fussing over the sound itself.  As I think back on it the change in my system was probably a good thing because even if I did find a room big enough to use the old stuff, it would have most likely taken me a long time to tweak the setup in that room to the point that it sounded as good ad the first room and I would have been miserable until then knowing tat the system did not sound as good as it should. My lowered sonic expectations freed me to enjoy the music more than I had in a long time.

I have now changed my way of thinking about new equipment. Instead of listening to see if the change sounds better, I am now looking to see if the change allows me to enjoy or connect with the music better. Where I used to strive to put together a system that had the best sound I now look more for one that provides the most musical enjoyment. Sometimes that coinsides with the best sound , but sometimes not.

A friend of mine recently conducted an experiment with regards to high res files. He took several LPs and digitized then at various bit rates and asked me to evaluate the sound. His contention was that the differences in high res files was all in the mastering and the bit rates had very little if anything to do with the sound quality. Much to his dismay, through critical listening I was able to identify the higher bit rate files 90+% of the time.Being in this hobby as long as I have been I knew exactly what to listen for, things like attack and decay on cymbals and body resonance on a hollow wood instrument. But while I could hear and identify these difference, in doing so I was concentrating on the sound and not the music. What surprised me most about this experiment is that when i sat back and just listened to the music the higher bit rates did not add that much if anything to my enjoyment of the music. My toe tapped just a much to the redbook file as it did to the 96/24 and the 192 file did not do much more to draw me into the music.

Now I am still an audio nerd and so the prospect of better sound is still enjoyable on some level, but in recent years I have just put it more in perspective and place much less importance on chasing that last 1% of SQ.

Great post. I am curious though about upsampling and what it might do to much of the old tunes I listen to.  If I recall correctly, my previous dac ...the Antelope Gold...could play some high res but not upsample. Right now, I have the Border Patrol nos dac.

Just to be clear, the experiment that I did was not using upsampled versions of the same music, it was Vinyl rips done multiple times at higher and high  bitrates. Upsampling involves taking a digital file and converting it to a higher bit rate, essentially repeating each sample a set number of times. This does not add any information to the signal so the upsampled signal will have the same resolution as  the original signal, not the resolution of the higher bitrate that it is now running at. In theory, what upsampling does do is shifts the the frequency of the digital noise associated with the signal further away from the audible spectrum which allows the DAC to use a shallower slope, or in some cases even no filter to remove that noise from the final output.  Steep slope filters tend to introduce things like phase shifts and in general lower order filters are preferable in audio applications. (I say "in general" because in high end audio it seems that the only absolute truth is that there are no absolute truths in high end audio.  )

All that said, I have heard excellent designs that use oversampling and your Border Patrol DAC is perhaps the best sound redbook DAC I have ever heard and it does no oversampling at all. There are so many design variables in a DAC that it is hard to isolate the effect of any one through comparison of commercial products. While I  am sure that oversampling or not may very well have some kind of sonic effect, the fact that there are great DAC out there on both sides of the fence just proves to me that oversampling is just a small piece of the puzzle and the overall design of the DAC is far more important than whether or not it uses oversampling.

I am further made skeptical about the value of oversampling in and of itself because I have spoken with and read posts from more than a few people who have used Room to convert all of their PCM files to DSD before sending them off to the DAC. Some of them thing=k that this is the greatest thing since canned beer and others think it is a wasted effort and the DSD stream sounds no different than the native file. Again no clear consensus and I would tend to think the differences in opinion are probably related to which DAC they are using.

I tend to look at upsampling vs non-upsampling like I do all of the tubes vs transistors arguments. Both have their strengths and weaknesses, but both when engineered properly both can be used to make excellent equipment.

[Nick B]

Before my first wife passed away we lived in a house that afforded me the luxury of a dedicated audio room. This room was all mine and I could do whatever I wanted in it. So over the 27 years we lived there I tweak that room in all kinds of way. I could place equipment and speakers however and wherever I wanted and use any  acoustic treatment that my heart desired. If I don't say so myself , it sounded damn good. Then when I got remarried I needed to find a house that would meet the needs of not only my budget but an extended blended family. Unfortunately, when we found a house that worked for the family, it did not come with a space I could use for a separate audio room. While this kind of bummed me out at first, it really turned out to be a blessing in disguise. My audio system had to fit into a common space, the living room and as such had to blend into a multi use space that to start wit was significantly smaller than what I had before. Sp gone was were the oversized speakers and the 135 lb 30 inch deep tube amp. I had to downsize in order to fit in the available space and as such, my expectations of how good it would be were also diminished. (Just for kicks I actually tried the big Thiel CS-6s in the room and they just overpowered it.)

I went into this move knowing the sound would not be as good as I had and to my surprise what ended up happening is I began to spend more time listening to and enjoying the music and less time fussing over the sound itself.  As I think back on it the change in my system was probably a good thing because even if I did find a room big enough to use the old stuff, it would have most likely taken me a long time to tweak the setup in that room to the point that it sounded as good ad the first room and I would have been miserable until then knowing tat the system did not sound as good as it should. My lowered sonic expectations freed me to enjoy the music more than I had in a long time.

I have now changed my way of thinking about new equipment. Instead of listening to see if the change sounds better, I am now looking to see if the change allows me to enjoy or connect with the music better. Where I used to strive to put together a system that had the best sound I now look more for one that provides the most musical enjoyment. Sometimes that coinsides with the best sound , but sometimes not.

A friend of mine recently conducted an experiment with regards to high res files. He took several LPs and digitized then at various bit rates and asked me to evaluate the sound. His contention was that the differences in high res files was all in the mastering and the bit rates had very little if anything to do with the sound quality. Much to his dismay, through critical listening I was able to identify the higher bit rate files 90+% of the time.Being in this hobby as long as I have been I knew exactly what to listen for, things like attack and decay on cymbals and body resonance on a hollow wood instrument. But while I could hear and identify these difference, in doing so I was concentrating on the sound and not the music. What surprised me most about this experiment is that when i sat back and just listened to the music the higher bit rates did not add that much if anything to my enjoyment of the music. My toe tapped just a much to the redbook file as it did to the 96/24 and the 192 file did not do much more to draw me into the music.

Now I am still an audio nerd and so the prospect of better sound is still enjoyable on some level, but in recent years I have just put it more in perspective and place much less importance on chasing that last 1% of SQ.

Great post. I am curious though about upsampling and what it might do to much of the old tunes I listen to.  If I recall correctly, my previous dac ...the Antelope Gold...could play some high res but not upsample. Right now, I have the Border Patrol nos dac.

Just to be clear, the experiment that I did was not using upsampled versions of the same music, it was Vinyl rips done multiple times at higher and high  bitrates. Upsampling involves taking a digital file and converting it to a higher bit rate, essentially repeating each sample a set number of times. This does not add any information to the signal so the upsampled signal will have the same resolution as  the original signal, not the resolution of the higher bitrate that it is now running at. In theory, what upsampling does do is shifts the the frequency of the digital noise associated with the signal further away from the audible spectrum which allows the DAC to use a shallower slope, or in some cases even no filter to remove that noise from the final output.  Steep slope filters tend to introduce things like phase shifts and in general lower order filters are preferable in audio applications. (I say "in general" because in high end audio it seems that the only absolute truth is that there are no absolute truths in high end audio.  )

All that said, I have heard excellent designs that use oversampling and your Border Patrol DAC is perhaps the best sound redbook DAC I have ever heard and it does no oversampling at all. There are so many design variables in a DAC that it is hard to isolate the effect of any one through comparison of commercial products. While I  am sure that oversampling or not may very well have some kind of sonic effect, the fact that there are great DAC out there on both sides of the fence just proves to me that oversampling is just a small piece of the puzzle and the overall design of the DAC is far more important than whether or not it uses oversampling.

I am further made skeptical about the value of oversampling in and of itself because I have spoken with and read posts from more than a few people who have used Room to convert all of their PCM files to DSD before sending them off to the DAC. Some of them thing=k that this is the greatest thing since canned beer and others think it is a wasted effort and the DSD stream sounds no different than the native file. Again no clear consensus and I would tend to think the differences in opinion are probably related to which DAC they are using.

I tend to look at upsampling vs non-upsampling like I do all of the tubes vs transistors arguments. Both have their strengths and weaknesses, but both when engineered properly both can be used to make excellent equipment.

Thanks for the clarification. It certainly would be fun for me to have a dac that can upsample as I’ve not had that capability. Nor do I know anyone who has an upsampling dac. I used to belong to a Las Vegas audio group, but they have disbanded a few years ago. My Border Patrol SE dac is a good performer and owner Gary Dews is now offering an upgrade using the Jenson paper in oil signal coupling capacitors. If I go that route, I’ll upgrade the tube as well.

[Guy 13]

Hi all.
In my EVOLUTION or quest to get better sound quality,
I've tried a few times to upgrade the sound quality of my Decware SE-84C+
I've tried differenc brands and models variation of power tubes
and voltage amplifier and even the rectifier tube.
For the power tube, the amplifier was supplied with Russian SV83,
then I tried the Electro Harmonic, then the Gold Lion EL84 and out
of the three brands, the EH EL84 sounded a little better,
just a little, maybe maximum 10% better sound quality mainly in the mid frequencies.
Difficult to judge the differences between the tubes,
since sound memory only last 1 second (For me) therefore,
shuting power, using mits not to burn my pinkies, pau back the new tubes,
power back the unit and wait to warm up,
the one sencond is more like 30 seconds at best.
I also tried a pair of Toshiba NOS EL-84 but they sounded terrible,
I am not exagerating, sound was like putting several layers of hand towels over the speakers
and the volume had to be jack up a lot, like 50% more,
I returned the tube and exchange them for the Gold Lion.
I also had two other tubes from the same supplier that were defective,
no need to say that he's on my black list.
No name will be mentionned here, I don't want to tarnish his reputation...
For the voltage amplifier tube, the 6922, I've tried many different brands:
No name Russian, Electro Harmonic Thomas organ tube, RCA NOS,
and aonther brand that I forgot the brand name.
Since I did not hear any differences between all the tubes,
I end-up keeping the Electro Harmonic 6922.
In the future, I might try the 6DJ8 according to Decware,
that tube got more micro details that the others.
Will see, not an expensive trial or maybe up-grade.
For the rectifier, lots of people say that the 5U4 improve the sound over the 5AR4,
didn't hear any difference, but kept the 5U4 in there.
So that all my foolling aroung with tube to try to improve sound quality
but in the end it was fun, but kept the RCA 5U4, EH EL84 and EH 6922.

Guy 13

[Guy 13]

Hi all.
I think I've pretty much covered my stereo audio system(s) EVOLUTION
sooooo....
Now I will talk (With pictures) about my present ambiant system in my office
that I use every day and that I enjoy as much as my main system,
which is now packed and ready to go for a long trip around the world.
I will use my office system until the last minute,
it will not be put on sea cargo, but will come with me in the plane's cargo.
It's up to the point that now, I cannot live with it.
Like the advertising of the credit card (American Express) says :
Don't leave home without it !
... and that's what I will do.

I will start with my Grace Digital Internet radio (Model MONDO red, my favorite color)
with analogue RCA output that I use.
Big clock display,
good sound for a unit that I paid at the time about 200 USD from Amazon.com
and that was ship to my nephew in Seattle
and a friend brought it to me on planet Vietnam via personnal belonging.
No transport or custom fees.
For a few years I listen to all the music stations without or with very little advertising,
then I found Art Radio that for 4 USD a month got a reasonnable choice of genre of music.
The interconnect from the radio to the Schiit switch box model SYS.
(Sorry don't know the real name in English of that device)
the interconnect are Signal Cable OFC silver coating.
More to come on my next post.

Guy 13

Also a photo of the complete set up.

[Guy 13]

Hi all.
A little more about my ambiant music office system.
Same brand : Signal Cable
but one is OFC with steel (Brass or copper ?) bullet
and the other is OFC with silver coating with some kind of plastic bullet and a braided sleeve
the can esily being pull out of the bullet.
Please don't ask me which one sound's better ? ? ?
The same to me.
From the Fulla 2 ther is a usb c to rca cable with some kind of coton enveloppe.
From the Internet radio and from the Fulla 2 to the Schiit SYS switch box with volume control.Eventually the fulla 2 and the SYS will be replaced by the Schiit Asgard.
 





Now the piece of resistance, the amplifier subwoofer Brand Cambridge.
Was purchase 15 years ago in Canada and still work strong.
It failed once one or two years after I,ve purchased it, since then, no problem.
The subwoofer is bass reflec with a 5'' (At the most) woofer
and I believe a 15 watts Class D amplifier
and for the satellite amplifier I would think they are 5 to 10 watts each channel.
The original satellite speakers were 2 or 3'' drivers in a plastic housing.
That's why they were replaces with Sony speakers.
The subwoofer is powered by a walwart 12V. 1.5amp
one day I will try to power it with a dryfit 12V 7A battery to see - hear if there is some improvement.
A battery like that here on planet Vietnam cost about 10 USD the same thing in Canada is 2X to 3X more expensive,
Maybe here there choice of products is more limited, but the prices are 2 to 4X less expensive,
that's why I like it here....
I already mentionned inanother post that the subwoofer doesn't go below 70Hz
more due to the driver itself than the amplifier.
One day, I will try to bypass the small woofer with a bigger one, to ear the difference,
just for fun, because I am happy with the sound.
Sometime with my Grace Digital Mondo and balance of the system,
I am surprised of what comes out of the speakers.
Look like the source (Art Radio) is 192Kbps MP3,
that's what I see on the scrooling display.
The Schiit Fulla 2 for 99$ is a super bargain.
The builtin headphone is pretty good also.
I think the Fulla 2 is a must to bypass the crappy heaphone jack
of my and any other laptop.
 


























Well that's it for now.
What's next ? ? ? ?

Guy 13

[rollo]

Downsizing is not a bad thing. As long as tonality and harmonics are not diminished all is good. Sound staging, imaging, scale might be lost but no big deal. The only thing maybe would be scale, meaning size of sound stage. Being spoiled by Maggies first the Pipedreams scale became an important part. Smaller sound stage now seems tunneled or unnatural now.
If I had a smaller space to deal with a two way stand mount speaker would be my choice. Adding a small sub like the Gallo [ Killer BTW ] would fill in the bass.
If I was to spend money it would be for the very best front end I could afford. Garbage in garbage out. Speakers would be Fritz Carrera BTW.


charles

[Guy 13]

Hi all.
There are several reasons why I stop the EVOLUTION or I call it
the quest for always better.
First reason :
The money, I have other priorities, my moving back to Canada
with my wife is the biggest one.
That will be costly, even if we wont leave planet Vietnam poor...
Second reason is :
Space in our new location.
Third reason is :
I don't know why, but a few years back I started to be tired of always looking for something better.
I said to myself : It doesn't make sense to spend so much $ $ $ and never be satisfied
or get tired or unsatisfied with what I bought,
plus the fact that we you sell, you loose.
I want to choose carefully and keep what I bought as long as I can
and enjoy it as much as possible.
I don't say I wont buy more audio stuff, but only if it's a super deal
and it's way better that what I already have.
Fourth reason is :
Also for convenience and space, I will (Try) to digitilize all my audio analogue.
It will be difficult (Mentally) to let go all my vinyl and CD and audio cassettes....
It will be a difficult decision.
But who knows, I might keep some of it, as souvenir, nostalgia...
Another thing is :
No more expensive (Audio) stuff, so when it fail and it's
unrepairable or it cost more to repair than buy a new one,
then I can trow it in the garbage
(Excuse me, in the specialized recycle bin)
and wont cry over it.
The other thing I want to mention is :
I like to have back up, because according to Murphy's law :
Everything that can fail, will fail one day
(Or something like that.)

EVOLUTION is good, but for reasons stated above, it must stop when ....
For me, when you cannot afford to....

Guy 13

 

[Guy 13]

Hi all.

   WOW !

2,055 views.
I am surprised (and happy),
is my write up on my evolution that interesting ?

Guy 13

[rollo]

  Yes it is Guy. Good stuff to read. Back to upsampling DACs. Up sampling is hard to accomplish. Only a few if any Manufacturers get it right IMHO. Why fool with 44.1 as it is a great rate. Now if recorded in DSD at higher rate and played that way the result is better. However not much music recorded that way.
  My old Lector was the only digital piece that to my ears up sampled without any sonic artifacts. I like 1X oversampling and 44.1 the best. Now the Border Patrol is an over achiever for the money no question as numerous units sold. However rated a "C"component by Stereophile. I think it is a "B+" myself.
 I like a ladder DAC, future proof and non up sampling. Listen to as many as you can within budget and you will be glad you did.

charles