http://innovativeaudiovideo.com/2016/05/06/meet_the_innovators_spectral/
Anybody attended this demo?
Anybody attended this demo?
Spectral SDR-4000SV
- Thread starter ack
- Start date
Mr Fryer was up here at Goodwin's the day before for a private demo to a select few, and since I wasn't invited, I went into the store that Saturday to listen to it. The player sounds incredible, a tiny bit better than the Rossini DAC, and I am intrigued enough to bring it in home this weekend, and I can post more details at that point.
I don't know, honestly. But if the new SHHA3 modules are pluggable into the older preamps, then there is a chance this is the case here as well. But as you may have read, the SHHA modules are not the only changes in it. I gotta tell you also that one of the reasons I didn't care to buy the 4000SL ever was also the control logic, which would often lock up the player; as you may have noticed, one of the upgrades is in the software related to that... amen.
We already have a reference to the player in Stereophile - see: http://www.stereophile.com/content/spectral-audio-debuts-reference-cd-processor-new-yorks-innovative-audio#sUXrc4BPHXZphzmW.97
Richard Fryer words are challenging :
"Just as vinyl and turntables are supposed to be antique and obsolete, we know they are not," Fryer explained during his two-hour presentation. "If you know what is considered obsolete in digital—which is the compact disc—you have the option to rip it or download it. But I submit that this is the ultimate form in how you play a 44.1 recording. If you want to hear the best possible performance from a musical medium you go to its native format and [for digital] recordings that is compact disc and 44.1.We can show you why playing [compact discs] in a physical player and the physical medium will outperform any file or download."
Richard Fryer words are challenging :
"Just as vinyl and turntables are supposed to be antique and obsolete, we know they are not," Fryer explained during his two-hour presentation. "If you know what is considered obsolete in digital—which is the compact disc—you have the option to rip it or download it. But I submit that this is the ultimate form in how you play a 44.1 recording. If you want to hear the best possible performance from a musical medium you go to its native format and [for digital] recordings that is compact disc and 44.1.We can show you why playing [compact discs] in a physical player and the physical medium will outperform any file or download."
Interesting product. I will have to find time to listen next time I travel. I am not aware of any spectral dealers in my area but it's pretty courageous to offer a CD player in today's market. I have a Naim CD555 using two 555PSDR power supplies. It's also cd only and I do enjoy my sessions with it. Will be curious how the two compare. most of my listening is from files stored on my NAS, including many Hirez so likely not the next product for me but very interested to hear how others find the SQ
Yes, you have. And I have been very impressed with dCS players spinning CDs. But I clearly remember a demo of the Magico Q5 at Goodwins where they started with CD, then digital files, finishing with LPs. I, and it seemed everyone else at that demo, definitely preferred the files to the CD and the LP to the files. It was a very interesting demo. I can't remember what the digital sources were, but the analog was a Basis turntable. Perhaps the digital was a Spectral player and a Berkley Alpha DAC, but I can't be certain.
Wouldn't it be funny if the physical CD starts to make a comeback?
Caution: RBCD files, or hi-rez files? big difference. If RBCD, then you have to make sure they are fed to same quality DAC as the RBCD player - almost impossible to assert. What we have been saying is that to get the most out of CD you need a player - but that doesn't mean ANY player will be better, only the proper implemented ones. As such, sure, even an RBCD file may sound better than a player, depending on the components involved. Effectively, apples and oranges, in most cases. The challenge for RBCD files is to beat the *properly* implemented players.
CD sales have declined but never seriously stopped. Just look at all the CDs available at Amazon. Classical is still practically almost all CDs as far as I know, not downloads/MP3s.
The demise of the CD has been exaggerated, in our little world also by audiophiles who are into hi-rez (talking about an agenda here, while hi-rez is a ridiculously low market share).
No comeback to be had here, as far as I am concerned.
Sure, quality of players matters and direct comparisons are difficult. I thought you were at that same demo at Goodwins. It was standard RBCD, physical disk (I think played through a Spectral CD player) then High Rez files of some sort (I think played through a Berkeley Alpha DAC and iPad interface). I remember it was "good", then "better", then "best" with LP. The others in the audience seemed to agree. But that was years ago, and I am sure much has changed since then.
I also agree the notion of "proper implementation." Much has been written about that in the analog forums about different drive types and by Al M. in the digital forums regarding dCS and digital playback.
Al, I was referring more to audiophiles returning to RBCD listening instead of the current trend toward files, not to the population in general. Yes, many CDs are still being produced and sold. Sorry for the lack of clarity.
Well, you just said it yourself: high rez files; so apples and oranges. Sure, hi rez will always beat RBCD. But I (as well as Fryer) have been talking about how to get the max out of *RBCD material*, and that's through a properly implemented player.
It is not clear to me that hi rez will always beat RBCD, especially today. Perhaps it did back then. It might come down to implementation now. The best digital that I have heard to date has been physical CDs through the dCS Vivaldi and Rossini, though I don't know enough about what happens to that signal in the DAC regarding resolution and (conversion?). Perhaps this new Spectral will be another outstanding digital source component. What is clear to me is that there is a lot of information on RBCD, and we are just now starting to hear it. I am optimistic about digital, though I don't know anything about the technology.
Last edited:
Seriously? The best hi rez may not beat the best RBCD?????? So RBCD is as good or better than hi rez, therefore, RBCD is at least hi rez itself??? I don't think so. Simply feeding hi rez into my Alpha beats its RBCD performance quite obviously, in fact.
Richard Fryer words are challenging :
"Just as vinyl and turntables are supposed to be antique and obsolete, we know they are not," Fryer explained during his two-hour presentation. "If you know what is considered obsolete in digital—which is the compact disc—you have the option to rip it or download it. But I submit that this is the ultimate form in how you play a 44.1 recording. If you want to hear the best possible performance from a musical medium you go to its native format and [for digital] recordings that is compact disc and 44.1.We can show you why playing [compact discs] in a physical player and the physical medium will outperform any file or download."
I just assumed that "any file or download" includes hi rez, and perhaps the best hi rez. I'd like to do a direct comparison.
Nope, he doesn't mean hi rez. He's talking specifically about RBCD physical media in a player vs RBCD delivered any other way.
Thanks for that clarification, ack. It was obviously not clear to me what he meant. I would still like to hear some direct comparisons. The RBCD physical media through the Rossini and Vivaldi is still the best digital that I have ever heard. I'll be interested in hearing about your direct comparison of the new Spectral player to your heavily modified Berkeley Alpha DAC.
Will post details asap. Meantime, I am eager to play this CD I've had for decades, on a cutting-edge player:
Only with the advent of the 30SV have I done it justice at home, but at the same time, the real reason I want to try it on the Spectral is because there is a lot of "digital noise" (for lack of a better term) that I hear when he strikes the keys hard, sort of a woosh before the decaying notes, and I don't know if it's the mastering or true noise from my DAC. It's very interesting what I hear: an initial loud, sharp key strike, followed by a whoosh, followed by note decay; it's as if the key strike raises the noise floor abruptly and then the noise masks the initial note decay with its "whoosh".
The other area of improvement I would expect from the 4000SV is with respect to the rather dry sound from the Alpha, as compared to my analog.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |