Next stop for me is to try the Echole cables, a sister company to Absolare. That will be interesting.
Oh yes. I have the Echole Omnia RCA and it is outstanding. As is the Omnia power cable
More expensive feedback I'm afraid... LOL
Guillaume
Next stop for me is to try the Echole cables, a sister company to Absolare. That will be interesting.
Oh yes. I have the Echole Omnia RCA and it is outstanding. As is the Omnia power cable
More expensive feedback I'm afraid... LOL
Guillaume
Hi Jep .... What do you think is better in terms of SQ ... RBCD via the CEC or files from the Aurrender . I am thinking about the new CEC transport , so would be interested in knowing . Thanks
Jazzhead, if you have, or are considering a C1 DAC, then I suggest you consider trying a CH Precision D1 transport. The synergy comes from their proprietary CH-Link connection between the two (C1-D1). RBCD from the D1 vs. the same file played from a computer over USB vs. the same file streamed from the network are very close in sound quality using the CH products. However, as I stated here before, the transport sounds ever so slightly better to me in my system followed very closely by network followed by USB.
Congrats JP.
I am very happy with my X1 units.
I'm using a Nagra transport when spinning physical discs which is very good, but the D1 with CH link is on my wish list.
Chris
Happy new year.Hello JP,
Did you get your X1? How does the C1+X1 compare to C1 w/o X1 in your system?
Thanks,
VPN
Hi guys, i was able to attend a CH demo yesterday in the south of France on a full CH system.
We did extensive listening and compared C1 and L1 with and without X1, well i can tell you C1 with X1 makes a huge difference, it's as if the speakers were upgraded.
For the C1 if i were you i would definitely add the X1, there's no way back.
Regarding the L1 the difference without the X1 was not as impressive.
The system consisted of L1+X1, C1+X1 and one M1, speakers Wilson Sabrinas.
The C1 had the streaming option.
Hi guys, i was able to attend a CH demo yesterday in the south of France on a full CH system.
We did extensive listening and compared C1 and L1 with and without X1, well i can tell you C1 with X1 makes a huge difference, it's as if the speakers were upgraded.
For the C1 if i were you i would definitely add the X1, there's no way back.
Regarding the L1 the difference without the X1 was not as impressive.
The system consisted of L1+X1, C1+X1 and one M1, speakers Wilson Sabrinas.
The C1 had the streaming option.
Thieliste, thanks for the report on your CH Precision demo session. You left out one VERY IMPORTANT DETAIL. What was the Champagne??????? Pol Roger? Krug? Tattinger? Bollinger Le Grande Annee? Salon? I'll bet you only get Salon if you buy the whole system....and then maybe not even then!
I have a full CH Precision system: D1/C1/L1/P1/A1 and three X1s. Speakers are Wilson Alexia. Dedicated X1s on the P1 and L1. The C1/D1 share an X1 with two regulator boards. Each time I've added an X1, the system improved bass (depth and foundation of the music), soundstage became broader (front to back, left to right), details were more evident. The least improvement came from connecting the D1 to the X1. I use the D1 as a transport using the CH-Link and clock cards in the C1/D1. Small improvement in noise floor. The P1/C1/L1 all improved significantly in my system with the addition of X1s. The L1 is a PHENOMINAL component on its own and its even better with the X1. The P1/X1 is one of the best phono stages I've ever heard, C1/X1 is among the best digital front-ends available. That's been my experience. Yes, it is expensive though.
I would hope to get the Champagne if i purchase a full CH system lol.
If ever i have the budget to start in the CH world i would start with C1+X1+one M1.
Would add L1 and another X1 later on.
Hi Elliot
I've mixed and matched D1, L1 and C1 on a dual board X1, two of each at a time. I'd definitely say there are no penalties of note and as I've said before, dual mono all the way as I've experienced just a few weeks ago in Tokyo was great but IMO not a necessity. This coming from somebody that would stand to make a lot of money pushing dual mono.
Now here is the curveball when it comes to the C1. I happened to hang out with Thierry for a bit and we were discussing the T1 clock. He feels that the improvements wrought by the new clock were alt least at par with with X1. While the X1 brought improvements to clarity and fine detail, the improved timing brought improvements unexpectedly in the musical foundation.
Hmmmm. This gives me a rack space problem. When queried Thierry (The H in CH, physicist and mathematician) about max length of the clock BNC he simply said that the T1 can be placed over 10 meters away. At 10 m or less you can use a square wave clock stream, above that the sine wave, both selectable via CH App or T1 front panel. Asked about the effects of vibration on vibration sensitive clocks and whether or not I'll need to provide another expensive filter system, he said that it has been taken care of internally. Within the massive CH chassis, the clock floats and enjoys multiple degrees of freedom. Alternatively, the D1 can be stacked on the T1 via the built in mounting system.
In summary, says Thierry the ideal set up without going full mono and requiring a larger router would be, D1 to C1 via CH Link, NAS to C1 via ethernet board, D1 and C1 powered by X1 and D1, X1 slaved to a T1. Done.