wow_music

I can't tell you what to pic, nor should anyone because we all hear things a bit differently. However I will share HOW I make choices.

Acoustic music is better at diagnosing the sonics of a component simply because the listener has had a chance to hear it in real life. I've always felt that if a component could reproduce the tonality of acoustic instruments accurately, their reproduction of the tonality of electronic instruments must inherently be accurate. However, I would agree that if a trained listener had heard a recording of non-acoustic instruments on a system that is known to be extremely accurate because of it's performance with recordings of acoustic instruments in real space enough times that they could then use that recording with some authority.

Don

Hi

Mrlowry makes good sense.

I would warn against getting something to bright sounding though, while this might initially sound like it is detailed it can become tiring after a while. Some people prefer the sound that way and that is absolutely fine, just think about it before purchasing.

The thing is any one of the units discussed would be a good choice, there are no lemons in that group, personally i would have imagined the Rega to be the best but it also looks like the most expensive. Dont be afraid with NAD especially to buy last years model which would save you 30-40%

Alan

Couple of things

1 - Dont be concerned to much about what people tell you, by all means listens to opinions but use these to select a range of kit to listen to, not to decide.

2 - NAD might be Canadian owned now but they are basically a british sound, ive always found CA to be to dry for my taste. I would not worry about the all Canadian system you mention, it looks great to me.

Alan

You've got good brands identified, so go with your listening preference. I can't tell you what to choose - but can share that I have a low tolerance for things that sound at all harsh - when there is a warm/cool choice, I'd go with the warm every time...

Quote:
Thanks again guys.

Does Upsampling do any good for me?

Sidetrack a bit - A question about a separate (external) DAC. Do you mean something like this: http://www.stereophile.com/digitalprocessors/cambridge_audio_azur_dacmagic_da_converter/

Does that mean I can even connect my PC (using Sound Blaster Sound Card) to DAC then to Amp and then speaker?
That sounds interesting to me. Not sure if my computer is compatible though - since it has only a 2.5mm output jack from sound card.

While there are a couple of exceptions most computer sound cards aren't actually that great sounding, ironic isn't it. The ideal way to hook up the Cambridge to the computer would be through the USB on the computer to the USB on the DAC. Plus you could also use the coaxial Digital from any CD player to the DAC when you wanted all of the quality that the DAC was capable of. USB can degrade audio because of two very complicated factors digital jitter and poor quality re-sampling. I'll provide very short explanations, which are greatly simplified:

Jitter: In essence all of the "1" and "0" are present and in the correct order but the word clock that tells the DAC WHEN to decode them is wrong. We're talking about fractions of a second here but our ears do pick up on it. Think of it this way. The world's best marching band all taking their time from a drummer with great rhythm vs. that same marching band with me on drums. The musicians haven't changed, their instruments haven't changed, and the sheet music is the same. But the rhythm won't be the same and things will start to sound sloppy and lax.

Re-sampling: CD's are at a sampling rate of 44.1kHz which means that every second is broken up into 44,100 slices with each slice being described by a series of 16 "1" and "0." Microsoft in their infinite wisdom decided that most of their products translate everything to 48kHz or 48,000 by adding essentially garbage in a part of the program called the "K Mixer." It's very, very, very difficult to bypass and unless the computer is ONLY used for music it can lead to some system instability. For the record Vista for all of it's OTHER failings is much better with audio.

For the record USB is capable of operating in a mode called asynchronous where jitter and the re-sampling issues become moot but there are only a very small number of products on the marked or coming to market that will do that trick. Wavelength DACS and the new Ayre DAC being the first to spring to mind. The draw back? They are considerably more that the products being discussed in this thread.

Something you might want to consider is the top of the line CA used, which should cost under your ceiling...VERY highly regarded. Another brand worth a listen is Rotel...

Quote:
Another brand worth a listen is Rotel...

Over the past week I gave a listen to the NAD 545BEE & 355BEE as well as the Rotel RA & RCD 1520 and the RA-1062 with the RCD-1072 - all via a pair of Epos M12i. All sounded good and all sounded different. I thought both the NAD and Rotel 1520 series had a warmer sound than the Rotel 1062/1072 combo but I had a preference for the 1520s. I guess it all depends on the speaker choice but I would have been happy with any of the models. A lot of help I was

I am using an old Rotel 1070 as a transport into a DAC-1 and really like the result. Both the Rotel and Benchmark were bought used and combined cost under the gents $1000 cap. I did spend some to have the DAC factory updated and I am using an ancient Audio Alchemy digital interconnect but all told it sounds good to me.

Give the Jolida JD-100 an audition. The tubes make for a really fine audio experience. Plus, you can have it modified down the road when you get the itch to upgrade.

My old amp was a Jolida 202...had it for a decade. Great sound from those EL34's BUT, my current PrimaLuna Dialog II with KT77's sounds WAY better...at 4 times the cost.