Your "World's Best Audio System" . . . 2012 Edition

LL21 · Jun 22, 2011

Originally Posted by Bruce B

Forget Servers... you want the best source playback, use the workstation that recorded it in the first place!! Use a Sonoma or Pyramix workstation!

Ron Party said:
Jeff, Bruce's suggestion should be given serious thought.

i just looked Bruce's suggested Sonoma's up. i am a techno-phobe...but they are very intriguing!!!

I suspect there is a reason Emm Labs added the retail element to his business when i believe they had previously produced largely for the commercial end. The consumer appetite (and willingness to pay) for the highest resolution/quality playback has gotten to a level where being 'back in the studio' is not beyond [some] consumer's budgets.

The above products are well within the price bounds of today's consumer high-end. The full Scarlatti deck costs MORE than the highest price model listed.

LL21 · Jun 22, 2011

Bruce B said:
Sonoma 8 DSD ~ $21k
Sonoma 24 DSD ~ $67k
Pyramix MassCore DSD/DXD ~ $36k

*converters included

Bruce, as a techno-phobe, these essentially operate like computer servers? So if i wish to play my music, i load the tracks up onto the hard drive and press play on the screen? Does the unit have selection menus, etc for whats on the hard drive? And i can hook Sonoma up to my Preamp via XLR or SE as in the consumer audio world?

Do i need all those 8-track editions if i am only going for playback and not recording? So would i just get the "basic model"...or is there a reason for ordinary playback i would need to add on 2 or 3 8-track to get to 24- or 32-track versions of the Sonoma? thanks for an explanation to a non-techie!!!

Phelonious Ponk · Jun 22, 2011

The consumer appetite (and willingness to pay) for the highest resolution/quality playback has gotten to a level where being 'back in the studio' is not beyond [some] consumer's budgets.

A good pro DAC and a set of active studio monitors would do a lot more to get you "back in the studio" though.

The above products are well within the price bounds of today's consumer high-end. The full Scarlatti deck costs MORE than the highest price model listed.

...and that speaks volumes.

Tim

Jeff Fritz · Jun 22, 2011

Steve Williams said:
Jeff

as you might already know, this site is laden with analog gurus. To that extent would you give any consideration to offering a second TWBAS, one with tubes rather than solid state. I would bet it would be well received not only here but also wherever the article will be read such as your ultraaudio

I would certainly be open to it, but only if it fit the system model of high fidelity -- I'm looking for the most accurate, highest-resolution audio system I can find. Could that incorporate tubes? Perhaps so . . .

Jeff Fritz · Jun 22, 2011

lloydelee21 said:
Smokes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now THAT is a server! Would love to hear it. Are there contact details to stay in touch with them?

I will keep you updated if I find out anything. Right now, not a commercial product and no plans to make it one.

Jeff Fritz · Jun 22, 2011

Bruce B said:
Sonoma 8 DSD ~ $21k
Sonoma 24 DSD ~ $67k
Pyramix MassCore DSD/DXD ~ $36k

*converters included

Trying to wrap my head around this . . . does it use Meitner DACs? It seems to include that for the $21k model.

Phelonious Ponk · Jun 22, 2011

devert said:
I agree, but if you're trying to maximizing 16/44.1, and because of lifestyle considerations are into headphone listening, the Benchmark is a wonderful DAC.

Not to mention the audibility of sample-rate conversion is pretty questionable. Some think up-conversion sounds better. Some think it sounds worse. Some don't hear a difference. Has anyone consistently differentiated them in blind testing? At the least, any differences that exist are very, very small. One might even say insignificant enough to put the issue on that fine line between what's best and what's just more expensive. I am maximizing 16/44.1 - in headphones and speakers. 16/44.1 is the overwhelming majority of my music collection, as it must be in any large digital music collection.

Tim

docvale · Jun 22, 2011

Steve Williams said:
Jeff

as you might already know, this site is laden with analog gurus. To that extent would you give any consideration to offering a second TWBAS, one with tubes rather than solid state. I would bet it would be well received not only here but also wherever the article will be read such as your ultraaudio

Steve,

There's some tube-based amplifications that are candidate here

VTL, Lamm, Shindo...
Some gear, either tubed or solid state, is really beyond any comparison between tubes and SS

Then, I guess that whether Jeff will decide to pick the speakers as first component (like I would do) the choice of the amplification will be inevitably "restricted".
I'll really in favor of adding an analogue source to the system: currently it seems that the fanciest analogue is R2R, but, being Studer & Co out of production, the chances to see some tapes is low...

Bruce B · Jun 22, 2011

JackD201 said:
Granted you probably won't have the usual playlist, cover art and remote luxuries but the price of a Sonoma 8 inclusive of Converters is pretty compelling.

The only downfall I see with Sonoma is that it only does DSD. If you want to playback PCM, you'll need another platform. We use Pyramix for that.

Jeff Fritz said:
Trying to wrap my head around this . . . does it use Meitner DACs? It seems to include that for the $21k model.

Yes, you can use either Meitner, Mytek or Grimm. Anything with an ST-optical interface. The Sonoma 8 comes with the EMM Labs 8IV and ADC 8IV. We use the Playback Designs MPS-5 as a DAC for Sonoma.

lloydelee21 said:
Bruce, as a techno-phobe, these essentially operate like computer servers? So if i wish to play my music, i load the tracks up onto the hard drive and press play on the screen? Does the unit have selection menus, etc for whats on the hard drive? And i can hook Sonoma up to my Preamp via XLR or SE as in the consumer audio world?

Do i need all those 8-track editions if i am only going for playback and not recording? So would i just get the "basic model"...or is there a reason for ordinary playback i would need to add on 2 or 3 8-track to get to 24- or 32-track versions of the Sonoma? thanks for an explanation to a non-techie!!!

Yes, the basic 8 track Sonoma will do. I think Pyramix will go up to 256 tracks.

Just connect either the Pyramix or Sonoma to your DAC of choice and then to your pre via XLR.

docvale · Jun 22, 2011

ack said:
I am detracting a little bit from the main subject, but I am about to make a wild prediction... that, the Spectral 360 Series II and 30SS Series II preamp will remain in production for a very long time, co-existing with new Spectral monos of higher power (and model number) along with a super $20K preamp (also with a high model number).

If my predictions are correct, I expect Spectral to reward me with a free combo

3 years ago (before I moved to the USA) a reviewer of the Italian magazine Audio Review visited the Spectral factory. In his reportage, he wrote that Spectral was working on a new preamp, not to be a substitute of the DMC-30 series, named DMC-40: the plan was to build a 2-chassis unit (separate PSU) with an internal phono stage.
More recently, through a NY retailer and a Spectral Italian enthusiast (who, I guess, is in contact with the company), I've heard about the constantly postponed announcement of a stand-alone phono stage.

ack · Jun 22, 2011

@docvale: I am drooling all over. I hope they fix the heat issues they had the previous built-in phono section of the DMC-20, which would give the board only roughly a 10-year lifespan.

JasonI · Jun 22, 2011

Quested, Meyer, and Klein & Hummel speakers deserve a spot in the best of list. Maybe ATC too.

mauidan · Jun 22, 2011

Phelonious Ponk said:
Not to mention the audibility of sample-rate conversion is pretty questionable. Some think up-conversion sounds better. Some think it sounds worse. Some don't hear a difference. Has anyone consistently differentiated them in blind testing? At the least, any differences that exist are very, very small. One might even say insignificant enough to put the issue on that fine line between what's best and what's just more expensive. I am maximizing 16/44.1 - in headphones and speakers. 16/44.1 is the overwhelming majority of my music collection, as it must be in any large digital music collection.

Tim

I find it easy to hear the effects of real time sample-rate conversion, but you need a DAC that can turn it off & on, something the Benchmark doesn't allow.

You should start a thread and tell us how you're maximizing 16/44.1 - in headphones and speakers.

amirm · Jun 22, 2011

Man, you all type so fast. I was on the first page and now here

.

Anyway, I was busy doing some homework on my proposal here.

I like to propose the Mark Levinson 53 as the amplifier. This thing should have ample power to drive any speaker load and take way its deficiencies as a contribution to sound. More importantly though, I have asked Harman and looks like a pair can be had on loan if the time frame is in July on. Let me know if you like to proceed with this path and I can get the ball rolling.

Phelonious Ponk · Jun 22, 2011

devert said:
I find it easy to hear the effects of real time sample-rate conversion, but you need a DAC that can turn it off & on, something the Benchmark doesn't allow.

You should start a thread and tell us how you're maximizing 16/44.1 - in headphones and speakers.

Oh, my simplistic approach would hardly be worth an entire thread -- galvanic isolation, re-clocking outside of the computer, a good DAC and, of course this would apply to hi-res as well -- active speakers in a well-controlled room.

Tim

docvale · Jun 22, 2011

amirm said:
Man, you all type so fast. I was on the first page and now here .

Anyway, I was busy doing some homework on my proposal here.

I like to propose the Mark Levinson 53 as the amplifier. This thing should have ample power to drive any speaker load and take way its deficiencies as a contribution to sound. More importantly though, I have asked Harman and looks like a pair can be had on loan if the time frame is in July on. Let me know if you like to proceed with this path and I can get the ball rolling.

Hi,
Do you know whether Harman is planning to come out with a new reference line preamp?

amirm · Jun 22, 2011

docvale said:
Hi,
Do you know whether Harman is planning to come out with a new reference line preamp?

I am not at liberty to talk about their future plans without their consent. If I find out something they would like me to share, I will do so

.

Jeff Fritz · Jun 23, 2011

Phelonious Ponk said:
A good pro DAC and a set of active studio monitors would do a lot more to get you "back in the studio" though.

...and that speaks volumes.

Tim

I know this may be a bit controversial to say, but I have seen many studios that use speakers that I think are inferior to the best speakers available to the audiophile market. Now I also know that the opposite is true as well. But I think it is inaccurate to say that just because it is used in a studio, or just because it is active, it is the best solution. (I'm not claiming that that is your claim, just using your post to make my point.)

docvale said:
3 years ago (before I moved to the USA) a reviewer of the Italian magazine Audio Review visited the Spectral factory. In his reportage, he wrote that Spectral was working on a new preamp, not to be a substitute of the DMC-30 series, named DMC-40: the plan was to build a 2-chassis unit (separate PSU) with an internal phono stage.

Now this is something worth looking into!

amirm said:
I like to propose the Mark Levinson 53 as the amplifier. This thing should have ample power to drive any speaker load and take way its deficiencies as a contribution to sound. More importantly though, I have asked Harman and looks like a pair can be had on loan if the time frame is in July on. Let me know if you like to proceed with this path and I can get the ball rolling.

The system is still some months out from being decided upon. I did speak with Kevin Voecks in Munich last year and we briefly discussed doing a No.53 review. It looks to be outstanding and is certainly a contender.

Jeff Fritz · Jun 23, 2011

Here is another requirement that I think should be placed on the system: it should be full range.

However (and this is something I plan to write about on Ultra Audio), I think it might be time to revise the definition of full range. Presently, it is considered to be 20Hz to 20kHz. But with the move towards higher-rez recordings, should that now be revised to 20Hz to 40kHz, to at least cover 88.2kHz sample-rate material?

lasercd · Jun 23, 2011

Jeff:

The amps are obvious...the upcoming Boulder 3050 monoblocks.

Your "World's Best Audio System" . . . 2012 Edition

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

[Industry Expert]

[Industry Expert]

[Industry Expert]

New Member

Well-Known Member

WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member

New Member

Member Sponsor

Banned

New Member

Well-Known Member

Banned

[Industry Expert]

[Industry Expert]

Member Sponsor

Similar threads