Modest system upgrade opinions please :-)

[NWDave]

OK, so here's my current system playing in a fully treated room:

Ethernet-->Roon NUC7i7BNH-->Ethernet-->Cambridge Audio 851N-->balanced cables-->Parasound A23+ --> Revel M106 speakers

Some ideas on my reactions to previous upgrades/trials:

1) Used to have the Schiit Bifrost Multibit but switched it out for the 851N, which sounded so much richer and three-dimensional (to me);

2) Upgraded from a Parasound 275v2 to the A23+ and the difference was the single greatest improvement I've ever heard in a system ... I suspect the Revels will take even more, but I don't know if I want to trial an A21+ only to have to ship a 71-lb amp back to the dealer;

3) Recently tried a Benchmark AHD2 amp in place of the A23+ and immediately returned it ... I think the Benchmark is no doubt a fine amp, but it seemed lethargic and 2-dimensional compared to the Parasound

So those are the things that might help the opinionated among you to chime in. :-)

Oh, and where my mind has gone besides the possible amp upgrade to the A21+ includes (a) trying the Auralic Altair G1 in place of the Cambridge Audio 851N, (b) trying a higher-end DAC in place of the 851N and simply using USB from the NUC to the DAC, (c) upgrading the M106s, although, at $1000 each and given my love of the Revel sound, I don't know how profitable that would be.

Budget for said upgrade is around $3000, more if I can sell the replaced item on the used market.

Thanks for all your help!

Dave


 

[GregWormald]

What's missing from the music when playing the system as is?

What do you hope to get more of?

 

The Revels drop off a fair bit below 60 Hz, what about going up in the range if bass is important to you and your music?

[NWDave]

Hi, Greg.

Thanks for the response. You know, I'm perfectly satisfied with the bass; on sine sweeps, the Revels start producing at 25 Hz and become quite rumbly around 35 Hz. I have thought about a pair of micro-subwoofers, but I've had subwoofers before and they're just too much. I listen to a lot of vocal, folk, acoustic, and solo instrumental so deep bass isn't a requirement. Is that a DAC-based solution?

I think if there's one thing I wish this system had is a more realistic soundstage (if that's the right word). It can feel "flat" sometimes. Other times, I can pick the instruments out with no problem. Perhaps that's more of a recording/source issue. But that's what I'd like: more realistic presentation, i.e., so I can "locate" the instruments and performers in "space".

Great question. Really helped me clarify my thoughts.

[davide256]

37 minutes ago, NWDave said:

Hi, Greg.

Thanks for the response. You know, I'm perfectly satisfied with the bass; on sine sweeps, the Revels start producing at 25 Hz and become quite rumbly around 35 Hz. I have thought about a pair of micro-subwoofers, but I've had subwoofers before and they're just too much. I listen to a lot of vocal, folk, acoustic, and solo instrumental so deep bass isn't a requirement. Is that a DAC-based solution?

I think if there's one thing I wish this system had is a more realistic soundstage (if that's the right word). It can feel "flat" sometimes. Other times, I can pick the instruments out with no problem. Perhaps that's more of a recording/source issue. But that's what I'd like: more realistic presentation, i.e., so I can "locate" the instruments and performers in "space".

Great question. Really helped me clarify my thoughts.

Buy a NAS to get the media storage out of your Roon server and use a good USB cable to connect your NUC Roon server direct to the DAC in the Cambridge. That should get you better resolution/imaging vs letting the Cambridge streamer firmware act as a limiter on the NUC's capability.

[NWDave]

Hi, David.

Ah, interesting. I had an NAS setup, but got rid of it when I built the NUC and put an SSD in the internal storage of the NUC. It doesn't matter that they're on separate SSDs within the NUC? Or is it that you have two signals coming off a single (Ethernet) cable?

[davide256]

9 hours ago, NWDave said:

Hi, David.

Ah, interesting. I had an NAS setup, but got rid of it when I built the NUC and put an SSD in the internal storage of the NUC. It doesn't matter that they're on separate SSDs within the NUC? Or is it that you have two signals coming off a single (Ethernet) cable?

USB out is  susceptible to voltage noise from components in the server and the power supply. Right now you have solved that issue with your SATA drives

by using the Roon server as a NAS and the electrical  isolation from the Cambridge as an ethernet streamer endpoint. But you can do better if you run a NAS , use an M.2 drive for your Roon OS drive in the NUC, use a good LPS for the NUC PS and connect the NUC USB to the DAC section. If you use HQPlayer or CPU intensive settings you should alternatively consider a 2nd NUC for Roon/USB endpoint as the increased CPU activity at the server will generate additional noise affecting USB out, streaming to a USB endpoint mitigates this, you only deal with the noise generated at the endpoint.

When I last used Roon it was under Euphony which allowed me to run Roonserver on an Optane memory M.2 drive, it was very close to Stylus for performance with USB connection from server to DAC. Roon is a great solution for playing music to any endpoint device that supports it.

[GregWormald]

10 hours ago, NWDave said:

I think if there's one thing I wish this system had is a more realistic soundstage (if that's the right word). It can feel "flat" sometimes. Other times, I can pick the instruments out with no problem. Perhaps that's more of a recording/source issue. But that's what I'd like: more realistic presentation, i.e., so I can "locate" the instruments and performers in "space".

You said the room was fully treated—could it be too damped? 

How large is the room and how far away are the speakers from the walls?

How about a room diagram? Set-up can make a huge difference to the 3d presentation or lack of.

 

[Tokyokyoto]

The biggest/best upgrade for you (and it’s free for 30 days) is to install Euphony os on your NUC.  

[NWDave]

3 hours ago, GregWormald said:

You said the room was fully treated—could it be too damped? 

How large is the room and how far away are the speakers from the walls?

How about a room diagram? Set-up can make a huge difference to the 3d presentation or lack of.

 

The treatments *might* be an issue, although I've been very cautious about adding the right mix of bass traps and diffusers under the guidance of the company that sells them. I also did a lot of single-item adding and subtracting to make sure nothing was detracting from the sound. If there's an issue, it's probably the need to have the speakers only a foot from the wall due to the size of the room and the fact it's also a carpeted living room.

If I get a chance later to draw a diagram, I will. But I greatly appreciate that line of thought—it's probably along the correct lines and might not be solvable unless I find a larger room (or larger house :-).

[GregWormald]

Ahh, a foot from the wall could be an issue—but maybe not as well. Is that the front baffle or the back of the cabinet?

 

Have a look at the WASP technique for speaker placement. The basic start of the technique should tell you if the speakers are in the right ballpark.

 

If you do need to move them out for serious listening then some sliders under the spikes would make a shift in-and-out practicable. I've just bought a set of Herbies spike sliders/decouplers and they are working for me. My best set-up requires one speaker to sit in front of the glass sliding door to the patio!

 

 

[davide256]

19 hours ago, NWDave said:

The treatments *might* be an issue, although I've been very cautious about adding the right mix of bass traps and diffusers under the guidance of the company that sells them. I also did a lot of single-item adding and subtracting to make sure nothing was detracting from the sound. If there's an issue, it's probably the need to have the speakers only a foot from the wall due to the size of the room and the fact it's also a carpeted living room.

If I get a chance later to draw a diagram, I will. But I greatly appreciate that line of thought—it's probably along the correct lines and might not be solvable unless I find a larger room (or larger house :-).

Image is not part of any conductors score😁 And monophonic recordings can be amazing

 

What persuades and is the opposite of flat is a system where complex detail has the resolution of a proof coin. Sadly source solutions can "blenderize" background instruments, music becomes flat like a worn standing liberty quarter. Vinyl and digital both share this in common for commercial source solutions

[NWDave]

15 hours ago, GregWormald said:

Ahh, a foot from the wall could be an issue—but maybe not as well. Is that the front baffle or the back of the cabinet?

 

 

 

Back of the cabinet. But you know what? While I was making an overly meticulous diagram (LOL) of my room arrangement last night, I realized our sofa had backed a good foot behind the prime equilateral listening position. Not sure how it "crept" over the past few months. Anyway, much of the stage is better simply by moving the sofa up a foot.

WRT the speakers, they're 92" apart, tweeter to tweeter; tweeter is 20" from the wall behind it; and first reflection points have been made equal with standing diffusers at 3' to either side of the tweeter for an effective room width of 15' and depth of 12'. I say "effective", since my room is, unfortunately, longer than it is wide at 12'x25" and the speakers cannot "shoot" down the length due to a gas stove in one of the corners than cannot be worked around. I'd like to have it removed so I can put a speaker there, but my wife has this need for warmth in the winter ... go figure :-)

I will watch the video. Many thanks. I like the idea of movable speakers very much. I'd like to have them further out, but their relatively close distance to the front wall is due to spousal concessions, i.e., "I don't want to keep tripping over your speakers every time I want to look out the window". :)

Will keep you updated! And many thanks again (to you and Dave).

[NWDave]

10 hours ago, davide256 said:

Image is not part of any conductors score😁 And monophonic recordings can be amazing

 

 

Perhaps idealism is my real problem here. When I play one of those audiophile adjustment albums, I realize how good my system (any system?) can sound with well-recorded material. The only exception that sort of reinforces my original question is that I never hear instruments "6 feet above your stereo" or "18 feet to the left (or right)". It's always more like 2 feet above and 3 feet to the left or right. That's probably a limitation of having a 12' x 25' room with an open end. :-/

[GregWormald]

The 20" from the wall sounds OK, but trying the WASP should let you know. Sometimes an inch can make a real difference.

Be aware that the "audiophile" perfect set-ups are often in ideal rooms. Your set-up is pretty good the way it is, and the results appear pretty good as well .

Do what you can and remember it's all about the music, not the system.

[davide256]

13 hours ago, NWDave said:

Perhaps idealism is my real problem here. When I play one of those audiophile adjustment albums, I realize how good my system (any system?) can sound with well-recorded material. The only exception that sort of reinforces my original question is that I never hear instruments "6 feet above your stereo" or "18 feet to the left (or right)". It's always more like 2 feet above and 3 feet to the left or right. That's probably a limitation of having a 12' x 25' room with an open end. :-/

Never heard this... and that includes every audiophile system I've ever listened to in a home or at a show. If you can get good instrument placement left to right, front to back, the system is imaging well. 

[NWDave]

10 hours ago, davide256 said:

Never heard this... and that includes every audiophile system I've ever listened to in a home or at a show. If you can get good instrument placement left to right, front to back, the system is imaging well. 

If you want to give the calibration recording I use a whirl, here's a link (tracks in question are 29-34):

https://www.nativedsd.com/catalogue/albums/2xhdft1042-audiophile-hires-system-test-great-sampling-tracks-included/




 

[ecwl]

Re-reading what @NWDave is looking for in his system, given the budget, I only have two advice.

I suspect both are counter-intuitive to you. But would give you that extra realism in soundstage and sound in general.

1) Hire somebody to build a convolution filter for you so you can run it in Roon. Mitch Barrett has a good service at accuratesound.ca. You will need a laptop and USB microphone probably though.

2) Buy a Chord Hugo 2, feed it with a cheap Toslink cable from your Cambridge Audio 851N and use the Hugo 2 as your battery powered DAC/preamp.

 

#1 is counterintuitive because you already feel you’re getting enough bass from the bookshelf speakers. But sometimes, the sound is not just about the frequency response but also the step response and overall resonance in the room. This is not something a simple parametric EQ can correct and it can take months to really understand how to get more out of building your own convolution filters whose software is expensive so it’s probably cheaper to hire somebody to do it. The problem is it sounds like you did the room acoustics and speaker setup all by yourself so it’s hard to overcome the loss of control over your system. Because it feels like this DSP filter is at the mercy of somebody else. I mean, you can buy Audiolense or Acourate and learn to optimize the filter yourself but I ended up spending months tweaking in Acourate before I fully understood what I’m really doing.

 

#2 is counterintuitive because you’re essentially keeping the Cambridge Audio 851N as a Ethernet streamer via Toslink and bypassing the DAC/preamp of the Cambridge Audio 851N. And the Chord Hugo 2 is supposed to be a portable battery-powered DAC. The problem is Chord doesn’t make anything like the 851N nor in 851N’s price range. The other problem is that Hugo 2 is very high resolution but any weird noise that gets into it can potentially worsen its performance so I don’t recommend charging it or having it plugged in all the time when playing music or feeding it with USB or S/PDIF which means you’re stuck with Toslink. If you really like the sound, i guess you can sell the 851N and get a Chord 2Go to replace it. 

 

For #1, you really have no way to know whether you’ll like it or not without simply spending the money. For #2, I guess you could always just order a Hugo 2 online and if you don’t like it, you can return it (perhaps after re-stocking fee). 

 

Btw, I have listened to my own Hugo 2 connected to a Parasound A21 driving PSB Imagine T3 at a friend’s place. So this is not some hypothetical dream system/combo I’m randomly recommending.

 

 

[NWDave]

Sorry for the late response, but this is really helpful. Thank you, and I'll let you know if I pursue the Chord option; oddly enough, I was thinking of doing the exact same thing you recommend except with the Qutest.

[ecwl]

6 hours ago, NWDave said:

Sorry for the late response, but this is really helpful. Thank you, and I'll let you know if I pursue the Chord option; oddly enough, I was thinking of doing the exact same thing you recommend except with the Qutest.

Unfortunately, Qutest does not have digital volume/digital preamp functionality.

So you would either have to add an analog preamp with Qutest and it is very difficult to get an analog preamp with sufficient resolution to ensure you don’t lose the soundstage (or transparency). My friend has a nice Parasound preamp for his vinyl but I bypassed that with the Hugo 2 as I can clearly hear the degradation from the preamp.

Alternatively, you can feed Qutest with a music signal that has already been digitally attenuated in volume. However, I am not sure Cambridge 851N can do that. I’m aware Bluesound devices can. The problem with that solution is that digital volume attenuation is not implemented the same way across devices and computers and some algorithms preserve soundstage (and transparency) better than others. This is why I recommended Hugo 2 instead of Qutest to try.

[pvanosta]

Another option would be to, rather than the Altair, get the Vega G1 (used if necessary). It works perfectly as a Roon endpoint and accepts the signal via ethernet as well. I was running it as follows:

- Roon ROCK on a fanless NUC (ROCK only, no music files)

- music library on a Synology NAS

- everything wired via ethernet through a Gigabit switch

- ethernet from that same switch to a Vega G1

- Balanced from the Vega to a Parasound JC2-BP and then to monoblocks.

It sounded great and just worked. The Altair G1 is cheaper than the Vega G1and it has a bunch of features you don;t need as a Roon user (Lightning DS etc). The Vega is 'just' a dac with a LAN input, so it only does the one thing and does it very well...