A Visit to AudioArts - NYC to hear CH Precision - FM Acoustics - Zellaton

[microstrip]

DSD to PCM direct conversion at 705.6kHz with selectable low-pass filters.

Sounds like a good approach to me.

How many bits in the PCM and what is the technique behind the PCM converter?

 

[rsorren1]

thanks. that upsampling of dsd to PCM is what stopped me on the C1 last time.

for better or worse I'm a native format kind of guy. after living with both the Trinity dac and the Lampi GG for a few months together with my 15 terabytes of music; time and time again native was best no matter what. these were cases where the mastering made the format change, not the gear. playing digital files back in the format it started has brought me closest to the music.

the MSB Diamond (IV?......if it was a V then that would be more significant) comparison for dsd means little as, while very good, it's not a reference for dsd playback to my ears. which is not to say that CH Precision is not at the very top of dsd (and 2x + 4x) performance, but I would need to hear that for myself at some point. maybe their approach tears down the advantage of native playback? I'm only speaking here about my personal perspective.....and could see myself enjoying the whole CH approach on so many levels. the D1 is a very attractive part of this equation but again the PCM conversion for SACD halts me. an investment on this level will require a deeper investigation on exactly how this dsd question plays out.

Mike, I like you, was skeptical at the CH approach on DSD. In fact, when I owned the MSB Diamond DAC iv, I did not use up sampling on redbook. I felt the use of up sampling added an artificial "air" around the music. I wanted native playback on everything. I listened to the MSB Diamond DAC IV/Diamond IV power supply (which I owned) vs Diamond V/diamond V power supply in my room. UMT plus (which I owned) was used with both. Both had fetmo clock. The Diamond V had latest USB input. The improvements to me were not worth the amount of the upgrade which was significant. The greatest difference was the latest USB input and I was trying to get away from having a computer in my listening room. Then on a trip to NYC I heard the CH C1. I had to hear it in my room so Gideon sent me the CH system I now own on loan. The agreement was I pay the shipping back to NYC if I don't like it. Gideon also took this approach with a friend of mine. As you suggest, at this level of investment, the only way to truly evaluate is to hear for yourself in your room and I've read from many on this forum that your set-up is truly world class. If you decide to take the C1 for a test drive, I highly recommend the X1. The C1/D1/X1 with CH-Link, clock synch card, ethernet card and USB card was the best digital front end I had ever heard in my room so I purchased.

 

[Folsom]

How many bits in the PCM and what is the technique behind the PCM converter?

D/A Conversion

Conversion type: Linearized R-2R, 4x PCM1704 per channel, 24 bit / 705.6kHz & 768kHz
DSP processing: CH-HiD upsampler, synchronous, DSD to PCM conversion
and resolution enhancer

I'm sure many DAC's are not very good at converting DSD to PCM, and ending up with something as good. But even though I've learned some biases, I'm always open to anything that can produce the sound because no matter what I believe, if it's the sound it's the sound. I may be sceptical but I'll at least listen with an open mind.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Mike, I like you, was skeptical at the CH approach on DSD. In fact, when I owned the MSB Diamond DAC iv, I did not use up sampling on redbook. I felt the use of up sampling added an artificial "air" around the music. I wanted native playback on everything. I listened to the MSB Diamond DAC IV/Diamond IV power supply (which I owned) vs Diamond V/diamond V power supply in my room. UMT plus (which I owned) was used with both. Both had fetmo clock. The Diamond V had latest USB input. The improvements to me were not worth the amount of the upgrade which was significant. The greatest difference was the latest USB input and I was trying to get away from having a computer in my listening room. Then on a trip to NYC I heard the CH C1. I had to hear it in my room so Gideon sent me the CH system I now own on loan. The agreement was I pay the shipping back to NYC if I don't like it. Gideon also took this approach with a friend of mine. As you suggest, at this level of investment, the only way to truly evaluate is to hear for yourself in your room and I've read from many on this forum that your set-up is truly world class. If you decide to take the C1 for a test drive, I highly recommend the X1. The C1/D1/X1 with CH-Link, clock synch card, ethernet card and USB card was the best digital front end I had ever heard in my room so I purchased.

thank you Ralph, for your helpful feedback and advice. at this level of gear we are surely talking degrees of superlatives.

this is a CH Precision thread so I will ponder my next step.

 

[microstrip]

D/A Conversion

Conversion type: Linearized R-2R, 4x PCM1704 per channel, 24 bit / 705.6kHz & 768kHz
DSP processing: CH-HiD upsampler, synchronous, DSD to PCM conversion
and resolution enhancer

I'm sure many DAC's are not very good at converting DSD to PCM, and ending up with something as good. But even though I've learned some biases, I'm always open to anything that can produce the sound because no matter what I believe, if it's the sound it's the sound. I may be sceptical but I'll at least listen with an open mind.

Thanks. Are they time-staggering the DACs, as the Trinity DAC does?

 

[Folsom]

I haven't seen a schematic, couldn't say. My guess is no.

 

[SterlingReznor]

SterlingReznor, no problem ! The ASR integrated I heard at AudioArts back in March was very impressive. I said it was tubelike in its presentation and I was very impressed with the quality of bass that was reproduced out of the Zellaton Legacy speaker. I can also tell you that in the smaller room, the soundstage was wide and deep and imaging was good. Not as laser focused as CH Precision or FM Acoustics but very good. I've not heard the Emotion but based on the synergy I heard with the smaller Zellaton, I believe this might be an outstanding pairing.

Rsorren: Again, apologize for coming to the show late, but wanted to thank you for all the input. I'm upgrading to the ASR. Not only that but also the Zellaton Grands. My wife knows about the former, but not the latter (yet). Shhh. Really excited to get the system fired up and broken in. Stay tuned for further updates.

 

[rsorren1]

Rsorren: Again, apologize for coming to the show late, but wanted to thank you for all the input. I'm upgrading to the ASR. Not only that but also the Zellaton Grands. My wife knows about the former, but not the latter (yet). Shhh. Really excited to get the system fired up and broken in. Stay tuned for further updates.

Congratulations! We will eagerly await your listening notes and impressions as you become familiar with your new ASR / Zellaton system. Let us know what you will be using for source. All the best

 

[gian60]

M1 mono arrived.
Now i have M1 for low and mid and i use A1 in mono for tweeter.
Because my speaker i can biamp or triamp,even if is stupid to use A1 in mono for tweeter on my speaker that is 98 DB,but i have,so now i use in this way.
Idea is to sell A 1 and take other M1 for mid and tweeter and one for low.
I tested M1 against A1 in mono and difference are:
M1 is similar sound to A1,because amp is the same,but M1 has much bigger image and depth,
voices and instrument are bigger and there is more space between instruments,more dynamic,
and sound seems more natural and go out from speaker more easy and more natural,and low is also better
Really incredible

 

[SterlingReznor]

Congratulations! We will eagerly await your listening notes and impressions as you become familiar with your new ASR / Zellaton system. Let us know what you will be using for source. All the best

A couple of points before "naming my source." First, recall from some of my prior posts that I am migrating from what I call one "philosophy of sound" to another, and, second, given my prior experiences, my inclination is to get the amplification and loudspeakers right first, then hone in on the source. Assuming all goes well with the ASR & Zellaton Grands, my next upgrade will be my source. But for now, it is digital only, and comprised of an Antipodes DX music server feeding a Line Magnetic 502 CA DAC. And, believe it or not, my files are almost exclusively Redbook. When my local record store finally closes its doors – which, alas, it will surely do – then I will delve into other formats.

 

[rsorren1]

M1 mono arrived.
Now i have M1 for low and mid and i use A1 in mono for tweeter.
Because my speaker i can biamp or triamp,even if is stupid to use A1 in mono for tweeter on my speaker that is 98 DB,but i have,so now i use in this way.
Idea is to sell A 1 and take other M1 for mid and tweeter and one for low.
I tested M1 against A1 in mono and difference are:
M1 is similar sound to A1,because amp is the same,but M1 has much bigger image and depth,
voices and instrument are bigger and there is more space between instruments,more dynamic,
and sound seems more natural and go out from speaker more easy and more natural,and low is also better
Really incredible

Gian60 - congratulations on adding the M1 amps to your system. Thank you for providing us with a comparison of the A1 and M1. Very helpful. All the best and enjoy what must be an extraordinary system.

 

[gian60]

Thanks,
its a pity we are too far.
If you will come to Italy one day you are Welcome

 

[tunes]

The guys that have been interested in the CH P1 will find a lot of detailed info in Richard Mak's new review of the various P1 configurations. An excellent review and matches my experience but i am only familiar with the P1 and P1/X1 stereo configs.

One small edit to Richard's detailed review. The optional EQ boards actually add 4 additional curves (emi, columbia, decca, teldec) to the standard riaa and eriaa that come preinstalled. (Not only 2 selected additional curves)

http://www.monoandstereo.com/2016/12/ch-precision-4-chassis-p1-phono-stage.html?m=1

 

[rsorren1]

The guys that have been interested in the CH P1 will find a lot of detailed info in Richard Mak's new review of the various P1 configurations. An excellent review and matches my experience but i am only familiar with the P1 and P1/X1 stereo configs.

One small edit to Richard's detailed review. The optional EQ boards actually add 4 additional curves (emi, columbia, decca, teldec) to the standard riaa and eriaa that come preinstalled. (Not only 2 selected additional curves)

http://www.monoandstereo.com/2016/12/ch-precision-4-chassis-p1-phono-stage.html?m=1

Hi Tunes. Yes I saw it and like you his conclusions match my own experience with a single P1/X1. I think the same conclusions can be applied to the L1/X1 vs dual L1/X1s, a set-up a good friend of mine now has. He read the article too and suggested that the conclusions reached by Richard's review of the P1 and its configurations are similar to his experience with L1/X1 vs dual L1/X1s. Not surprising. CH Precision stereo configurations are among the best I've heard and the mono configurations seem to ratchet things up another notch. Thanks to Richard Mak for the excellent and thorough review.

It does occur to me that if one decided to purchase the mono C1.5 DAC, D1 transport, T1 clock, mono L1 pre-amps, mono P1 phonos, and mono M1 power amps with the associated dedicated X1 power supplies, we are talking about 17 boxes total!!!!! I think I got that right. 17 CH Precision boxes! YIKES!

 

[gian60]

In my case arrive at 19 boxes because i have also A1 mono,
incredible

 

[gian60]

 

[JackD201]

Hi Tunes. Yes I saw it and like you his conclusions match my own experience with a single P1/X1. I think the same conclusions can be applied to the L1/X1 vs dual L1/X1s, a set-up a good friend of mine now has. He read the article too and suggested that the conclusions reached by Richard's review of the P1 and its configurations are similar to his experience with L1/X1 vs dual L1/X1s. Not surprising. CH Precision stereo configurations are among the best I've heard and the mono configurations seem to ratchet things up another notch. Thanks to Richard Mak for the excellent and thorough review.

It does occur to me that if one decided to purchase the mono C1.5 DAC, D1 transport, T1 clock, mono L1 pre-amps, mono P1 phonos, and mono M1 power amps with the associated dedicated X1 power supplies, we are talking about 17 boxes total!!!!! I think I got that right. 17 CH Precision boxes! YIKES!

I'm a CH distributor and I can't do the math regarding how many power cords and outlets these total out to LOL. Fortunately a lot of these PCs will just be for display and control and are out of the signal path completely. So good PCs for just the X1s and 2 good 15A and 2 good 20As for a pair of M1s. Unlike the source and pre the 15A in the M1s are for the power independent Class A signal stage and the 20A for the output stage. Then again....with the slave board it would be VERY interesting to stack 2 pairs of M1s! Okay I'll stop now. These crazy thoughts are giving me ideas my body can't cash! LOL!

 

[JackD201]

View attachment 30043

WOW! I almost fell off my chair! What speakers are those Gian? They are showstoppers!

 

[Mike Lavigne]

WOW! I almost fell off my chair! What speakers are those Gian? They are showstoppers!

Attention Bonzo, we have a destination for you!

 

[gian60]

Dear Mike,
don't worry about Mr. Bonzo.
Already booked the ticket to come to visit me and my friend half december.