Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
The links to the various types of products seem to be missing.
The links to the various types of products seem to be missing.
Rotel & Michi nabbed some Class A recommendations. Nice!
The links to the various types of products seem to be missing.
Rotel & Michi nabbed some Class A recommendations. Nice!
The links to the various types of products seem to be missing.
Rotel & Michi nabbed some Class A recommendations. Nice!
The links to the various types of products seem to be missing.
Rotel & Michi nabbed some Class A recommendations. Nice!
The links to the various types of products seem to be missing.
Rotel & Michi nabbed some Class A recommendations. Nice!
I want this Storm and a full array of Genelec powered speakers. I hope the Storm will be at a show this year.
The DL-Art circuit alone reads like restoration technology from a nearby galaxy. I also like the statement about envelopment vs. immersion. Visual.
His insights into Dolby Atmos' various configurations lend a needed perspective to the discussion from a few months ago. Another killer review and I always feel Kal is always one step ahead of the rest of us luddites.
Kal, can you clarify what benefit the ISP Evo brings over the ISP Core 16, beyond the ability to choose your own DAC? As I type, I realize now the Evo has 32 channels of processing, but of course that's far beyond what even most "power users" would utilize. The Core 16 looks like it could do all your Arvus/Evo/Hapi chain can do, with what I imagine is only a small delta of the built-in DACs vs. the Hapi.
To Glotz's point above, all you'd need is some XLR cables to some Genelec 8040s, and you're in the high-end Atmos game for the same price as just the ISP Evo. Or is there another key differentiator I'm missing?
Sure, the Core 16 would probably have worked. The EVO was chosen for this review because I wanted to experience a full implementation of DIRAC-ART and Storm Audio suggested the EVO. That fit well with my system because it could easily connect with my HAPI via Ravenna.
I love the prospect of network-based connectivity and am working to implement it in my system now. Discrete wiring of multiple components becomes daunting as the channel count rises.
This article has ignited my tech nerd side. Looks like with the PoE/AoIP options a full "rack" for streaming would consist of nothing more than an Apple TV, this ISP Evo, and a network switch -- then just Cat 6 cables to suitable powered speakers.
In your Ravenna system, it looks like the Trinnov Amplitude16 would be a good fit. ICEpower similar to your NAD C 298 for 16 channels with DB25 connectors or optional AoIP. Could one box replace your Benchmark/NAD stack? The Class AB vs Class D purists would say no...
All a mental exercise for me right now, as space and funds don't allow a multichannel set-up for now. My only experience with Atmos vs. stereo is on my in-laws' mid-fi Sony/Klipsch theater set-up, where the difference was marginal. I'd love to hear something like that Genelec demo.
I want this Storm and a full array of Genelec powered speakers. I hope the Storm will be at a show this year.
The DL-Art circuit alone reads like restoration technology from a nearby galaxy. I also like the statement about envelopment vs. immersion. Visual.
His insights into Dolby Atmos' various configurations lend a needed perspective to the discussion from a few months ago. Another killer review and I always feel Kal is always one step ahead of the rest of us luddites.
Kal, can you clarify what benefit the ISP Evo brings over the ISP Core 16, beyond the ability to choose your own DAC? As I type, I realize now the Evo has 32 channels of processing, but of course that's far beyond what even most "power users" would utilize. The Core 16 looks like it could do all your Arvus/Evo/Hapi chain can do, with what I imagine is only a small delta of the built-in DACs vs. the Hapi.
To Glotz's point above, all you'd need is some XLR cables to some Genelec 8040s, and you're in the high-end Atmos game for the same price as just the ISP Evo. Or is there another key differentiator I'm missing?
Sure, the Core 16 would probably have worked. The EVO was chosen for this review because I wanted to experience a full implementation of DIRAC-ART and Storm Audio suggested the EVO. That fit well with my system because it could easily connect with my HAPI via Ravenna.
I love the prospect of network-based connectivity and am working to implement it in my system now. Discrete wiring of multiple components becomes daunting as the channel count rises.
This article has ignited my tech nerd side. Looks like with the PoE/AoIP options a full "rack" for streaming would consist of nothing more than an Apple TV, this ISP Evo, and a network switch -- then just Cat 6 cables to suitable powered speakers.
In your Ravenna system, it looks like the Trinnov Amplitude16 would be a good fit. ICEpower similar to your NAD C 298 for 16 channels with DB25 connectors or optional AoIP. Could one box replace your Benchmark/NAD stack? The Class AB vs Class D purists would say no...
All a mental exercise for me right now, as space and funds don't allow a multichannel set-up for now. My only experience with Atmos vs. stereo is on my in-laws' mid-fi Sony/Klipsch theater set-up, where the difference was marginal. I'd love to hear something like that Genelec demo.
I want this Storm and a full array of Genelec powered speakers. I hope the Storm will be at a show this year.
The DL-Art circuit alone reads like restoration technology from a nearby galaxy. I also like the statement about envelopment vs. immersion. Visual.
His insights into Dolby Atmos' various configurations lend a needed perspective to the discussion from a few months ago. Another killer review and I always feel Kal is always one step ahead of the rest of us luddites.
Kal, can you clarify what benefit the ISP Evo brings over the ISP Core 16, beyond the ability to choose your own DAC? As I type, I realize now the Evo has 32 channels of processing, but of course that's far beyond what even most "power users" would utilize. The Core 16 looks like it could do all your Arvus/Evo/Hapi chain can do, with what I imagine is only a small delta of the built-in DACs vs. the Hapi.
To Glotz's point above, all you'd need is some XLR cables to some Genelec 8040s, and you're in the high-end Atmos game for the same price as just the ISP Evo. Or is there another key differentiator I'm missing?
Sure, the Core 16 would probably have worked. The EVO was chosen for this review because I wanted to experience a full implementation of DIRAC-ART and Storm Audio suggested the EVO. That fit well with my system because it could easily connect with my HAPI via Ravenna.
I love the prospect of network-based connectivity and am working to implement it in my system now. Discrete wiring of multiple components becomes daunting as the channel count rises.
This article has ignited my tech nerd side. Looks like with the PoE/AoIP options a full "rack" for streaming would consist of nothing more than an Apple TV, this ISP Evo, and a network switch -- then just Cat 6 cables to suitable powered speakers.
In your Ravenna system, it looks like the Trinnov Amplitude16 would be a good fit. ICEpower similar to your NAD C 298 for 16 channels with DB25 connectors or optional AoIP. Could one box replace your Benchmark/NAD stack? The Class AB vs Class D purists would say no...
All a mental exercise for me right now, as space and funds don't allow a multichannel set-up for now. My only experience with Atmos vs. stereo is on my in-laws' mid-fi Sony/Klipsch theater set-up, where the difference was marginal. I'd love to hear something like that Genelec demo.