Michael J
pfm Member
Then you wil need a big, preferably chrome, shiny to apply room correction at not less than several thousand major monetary units (Yen excluded). Obvs.
CD Transport
- Thread starter per flemming
- Start date
Then you wil need a big, preferably chrome, shiny to apply room correction at not less than several thousand major monetary units (Yen excluded). Obvs.
Julf
Facts are our friends
Chances are the source material was digital at some point (unless you only listen to pre-1980 music).
buy a spare one now if you are a long term person. I did for my Audiolab 8200cdq. got it from Audiolab direct
Purité Audio
Trade: Purite Audio
Then you wil need a big, preferably chrome, shiny to apply room correction at not less than several thousand major monetary units (Yen excluded). Obvs.
ADCs are built into the Grimm and Kii THREE speakers you just select between analogue or digital source,
Keith
I don't suppose you sell either of those fabulous products, do you?
Purité Audio
Trade: Purite Audio
I am sure there must be ADCs built into other speakers I just couldn't think of any ,perhaps Grimm and Kii and the Beolab 90's are unique ?
Keith
Keith
per flemming
Registered User
Hi Nick
Never heard about the Metronome
Found a review and the asking price popped up, I stopped reading again
DBest wishes
Per
per flemming
Registered User
Hi Brab. A few more thoughts for you. The CXC seems an incredible bargain. Build quality seems excellent and it feels very substantial. I like weighty components
The remote wins over the PS Audio device. Feels better, looks better and works better. The only real issue I've had with the PS is that you have to be right in front of the unit for the remote to work.
I've spent a couple of days with it and have had a couple of very focused listening sessions with some blind comparisons.
I really find the CXC hard to fault. At times, on certain tracks, there seems some harshness and that's something I've never experienced with the PS.
The dilemma for me is whether I can justify keeping the PS. I'm convinced it's better but it's very, very marginal. For a new buyer it's a no-brainier. A £300 player with a six-year warranty for an extra £30 or a £3k player with a two-year warranty.
Hope that helps.
Just received a CXC transport
First impression it doesn't have that "feeling" the Karik transport sliding tray load, its merely" plastic feeling like most players out there, otherwise it looks good solid build. I will have it placed on my Audiotec wallshelf.
As for performance its early hours but seem to be more bombastic solid sounding than either Apollo or Karik used as transport only. The weight in bas area is just deeper and more pronounced, the other two transport were a bit on the unsafe relaxed thin road.
If a transport ad involvement and tonality the Karik win I guess, but as noticed its early hours.
Indeed it seem to be worth its asking price
Hi Brab. A few more thoughts for you. The CXC seems an incredible bargain. Build quality seems excellent and it feels very substantial. I like weighty components
The remote wins over the PS Audio device. Feels better, looks better and works better. The only real issue I've had with the PS is that you have to be right in front of the unit for the remote to work.
I've spent a couple of days with it and have had a couple of very focused listening sessions with some blind comparisons.
I really find the CXC hard to fault. At times, on certain tracks, there seems some harshness and that's something I've never experienced with the PS.
The dilemma for me is whether I can justify keeping the PS. I'm convinced it's better but it's very, very marginal. For a new buyer it's a no-brainier. A £300 player with a six-year warranty for an extra £30 or a £3k player with a two-year warranty.
Hope that helps.
Thanks for the report. After a long audiophile career CDs have become my favorite form of replay so I'm willing to spend a lot to maximize transport/DAC sq. It's nice to know that I can relax for a bit with the CXC (and take advantage of the incredible music and bargains now available via CD) given that it seems to be at least at the entry level of state of the art.
Thanks for the feedback.
Wonder how long it'll be before:
- You get asked if you DBT'd it
- Someone will state that it's purely placebo
per flemming
Registered User
?? No idea what you say
Purité Audio
Trade: Purite Audio
Double blind test, but unsighted comparisons are really useful.
Keith
Keith
per flemming
Registered User
I usually prefer to stay with the new gear for a couple of weeks before shifting
Good to be getting used to the sound as A/B often confuse me providing wrong or meaningless conclusions, for me its about if I enjoy listening not the tiny difference analysis
adamdea
You are not a sound quality evaluation device
How about the Genelec 8260s you used to sell Keith?
adamdea
You are not a sound quality evaluation device
suzywong
Wot, no electrons?
Interesting. So is the idea behind it that the unit takes an analogue signal, converts to digital, fiddles around in the digital domain, and then converts back to analogue to drive the speakers?
And before anyone jumps down my throat, I'm happy with the concept at system level - after all this is what my meridian 5.1 does - but it does seem overly complicated at speaker level.
Anybody heard them? Benefits?
Julf
Facts are our friends
Yes, that is what all the speakers with active DSP / crossovers do. And the trend will continue, as DSP gets cheaper and more powerful (and most sources are digital these days).
Werner
pfm Member
The one flaw I see with this at the moment is that there is no industry standard for volume control.
It should be possible to control the system's (i.e. sources plus active speakers) volume with a centralised generic controller, and then have the system apply the attenuation where it is optimal.
What happens today, most of the time, is that the analogue input is reduced (prior to ADC!) or that the digital input is divided down prior to processing. This is generally not optimal.
It should be possible to control the system's (i.e. sources plus active speakers) volume with a centralised generic controller, and then have the system apply the attenuation where it is optimal.
What happens today, most of the time, is that the analogue input is reduced (prior to ADC!) or that the digital input is divided down prior to processing. This is generally not optimal.
adamdea
You are not a sound quality evaluation device
Yes agreed. It would be great if this could be optimised across the system.