I'm not one to closely follow the latest "audiophile" discussions. I
bought my last equipment over 10 years ago: Rotel RC-990BX/RB-990BX
preamp/amp combo driving a pair of Vandersteen 2's; fed by a Marantz
CD-63SE CD player. Nothing fancy -- not hi-end audiophile by any means
-- but still reasonably good sound. It's served me well, and so the
last decade I've not really kept up with audiophile developments.

This year Santa brought me a SqueezeBox 3 (from Slim Devices), and it
is exactly what I've been looking for: a convenient means to feed my
stereo system with computer audio files (e.g., losslessly compressed
WAV files ripped from my audio CDs using EAC.) Currently I'm using the
SB3 *analog* output (using its built-in Burr Brown DAC) to input into
the analog Rotel duo.

Obviously, though, what would be better (from my perspective) is to go
completely digital: feed the *digital* output of the SB3 into a
digital amplifier, like those made by Tact Audio and quite a few other
companies, where conversion to analog occurs only at the very end of
the chain: the speakers.

So being a frugal person who also likes good audio (thus my choice of
Rotel/Marantz/Vandersteen back in 1995 -- the Rotel components were
slightly used), combined with the desire to go "nearly all digital,"
what are my options? I'd consider an amplifier with a suggested retail
price under $1500-$2000. (Only interested in 2-channel audio, not the
many-channel "surround sound/theater" stuff of late.)

Thanks!

Mark.

(p.s., also interested in DIY kits/schematics for higher-end all
digital amplifiers.)

Mark wrote:

So being a frugal person who also likes good audio (thus my choice of
Rotel/Marantz/Vandersteen back in 1995 -- the Rotel components were
slightly used), combined with the desire to go "nearly all digital,"
what are my options?

Welcome to rec.audio.insult. If you have not already done so, you
may want to slightly modify your query and post it to
rec.audio.high-end; please read its guidelines first.

--124

In article ,
Mark wrote:

So being a frugal person who also likes good audio (thus my choice of
Rotel/Marantz/Vandersteen back in 1995 -- the Rotel components were
slightly used), combined with the desire to go "nearly all digital,"
what are my options? I'd consider an amplifier with a suggested retail
price under $1500-$2000. (Only interested in 2-channel audio, not the
many-channel "surround sound/theater" stuff of late.)

It's a lot harder to find an integrated amp with an on-board DAC than to
find an A/V receiver! There's a Bryston that's out of your price range
at about $3500.

You could do worse than receivers such the Arcam AVR 300 or AVR 250.

A cheapskate option wouldd be to find a used pre/processor (Rotel, Sony
ES, etc) and use your present amp.

Stephen

"Mark" wrote in message
...
I'm not one to closely follow the latest "audiophile" discussions. I
bought my last equipment over 10 years ago: Rotel RC-990BX/RB-990BX
preamp/amp combo driving a pair of Vandersteen 2's; fed by a Marantz
CD-63SE CD player. Nothing fancy -- not hi-end audiophile by any means
-- but still reasonably good sound. It's served me well, and so the
last decade I've not really kept up with audiophile developments.

This year Santa brought me a SqueezeBox 3 (from Slim Devices), and it
is exactly what I've been looking for: a convenient means to feed my
stereo system with computer audio files (e.g., losslessly compressed
WAV files ripped from my audio CDs using EAC.) Currently I'm using the
SB3 *analog* output (using its built-in Burr Brown DAC) to input into
the analog Rotel duo.

Obviously, though, what would be better (from my perspective) is to go
completely digital: feed the *digital* output of the SB3 into a
digital amplifier, like those made by Tact Audio and quite a few other
companies, where conversion to analog occurs only at the very end of
the chain: the speakers.

So being a frugal person who also likes good audio (thus my choice of
Rotel/Marantz/Vandersteen back in 1995 -- the Rotel components were
slightly used), combined with the desire to go "nearly all digital,"
what are my options? I'd consider an amplifier with a suggested retail
price under $1500-$2000. (Only interested in 2-channel audio, not the
many-channel "surround sound/theater" stuff of late.)

Thanks!

Mark.

(p.s., also interested in DIY kits/schematics for higher-end all
digital amplifiers.)

Try searching for gainclones.

IMO anything including recievers that is THX certified will be perfectly
fine.
One of my friends bought a Pioneer receiver that is digitally powered and
THX certified and the sound is as good as any other high quality, low
distortion, flat frequency response amp.

"Mark" wrote in message
...
I'm not one to closely follow the latest "audiophile" discussions. I
bought my last equipment over 10 years ago: Rotel RC-990BX/RB-990BX
preamp/amp combo driving a pair of Vandersteen 2's; fed by a Marantz
CD-63SE CD player. Nothing fancy -- not hi-end audiophile by any means
-- but still reasonably good sound. It's served me well, and so the
last decade I've not really kept up with audiophile developments.

This year Santa brought me a SqueezeBox 3 (from Slim Devices), and it
is exactly what I've been looking for: a convenient means to feed my
stereo system with computer audio files (e.g., losslessly compressed
WAV files ripped from my audio CDs using EAC.) Currently I'm using the
SB3 *analog* output (using its built-in Burr Brown DAC) to input into
the analog Rotel duo.

Obviously, though, what would be better (from my perspective) is to go
completely digital: feed the *digital* output of the SB3 into a
digital amplifier, like those made by Tact Audio and quite a few other
companies, where conversion to analog occurs only at the very end of
the chain: the speakers.

So being a frugal person who also likes good audio (thus my choice of
Rotel/Marantz/Vandersteen back in 1995 -- the Rotel components were
slightly used), combined with the desire to go "nearly all digital,"
what are my options? I'd consider an amplifier with a suggested retail
price under $1500-$2000. (Only interested in 2-channel audio, not the
many-channel "surround sound/theater" stuff of late.)

Thanks!

Stick with a good analog amplifier, if you have one.
The advantages of digital are not with respect to quality.
For example, the Tact has an extremely low damping factor at high frequency.
The advantages of digital relate to economies in the manufacturing process,
and the cost of raw materials.

The best way to do digital to analog conversion is to conventional
interconnect level, for connection to a conventional amplifier.

In article ,
MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Mark wrote:

So being a frugal person who also likes good audio (thus my choice of
Rotel/Marantz/Vandersteen back in 1995 -- the Rotel components were
slightly used), combined with the desire to go "nearly all digital,"
what are my options? I'd consider an amplifier with a suggested retail
price under $1500-$2000. (Only interested in 2-channel audio, not the
many-channel "surround sound/theater" stuff of late.)

It's a lot harder to find an integrated amp with an on-board DAC than to
find an A/V receiver! There's a Bryston that's out of your price range
at about $3500.

You could do worse than receivers such the Arcam AVR 300 or AVR 250.

A cheapskate option wouldd be to find a used pre/processor (Rotel, Sony
ES, etc) and use your present amp.

I forgot about this one until the Audio Advisor newsletter arrived!:

http://www.audioadvisor.com/store/pr...=MHMAMBO&loc=5

I haven't heard the Music Hall Mambo, but there are reviews at
Stereophile (in the Sam Tellig column) and on 6moons.com.

Stephen

124 wrote:

Welcome to rec.audio.insult.

Jerk!

8)

He did say he wants to have an all-digital chain and toward that end ,
the Gainclones are not helpful. Although they are a reasonable amp,
they are analog.

I don't think all-digital amplifiers are economically valid yet. As
time goes on I am sure that will change, but as yet I know of no
reasonable ones.

I don't think all-digital amplifiers are economically valid yet.

I'm not sure they're CONCEPTUALLY valid -- it strikes me as being a
classic nuclear-powered-flyswatter approach to design -- but we'll see
what happens in another decade or so.

wrote in message
nk.net...

One of my friends bought a Pioneer receiver that is digitally powered and
THX certified and the sound is as good as any other high quality, low
distortion, flat frequency response amp.


You are imagining things.
Watch out for those sneaky expectation effects!
We are all sure that you have duly compared
that amp to all other 'high quality, low distortion,
flat frequency response amps". Blind
and level matched, of course.
Oh! I forgot! You are a special person.
You don't need to do that!.
You 'know' that they will sound the same,
without actually having to listen to them!!!!!



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

"Joe Kesselman" wrote in message
. ..
I don't think all-digital amplifiers are economically valid yet.

I'm not sure they're CONCEPTUALLY valid -- it strikes me as being a
classic nuclear-powered-flyswatter approach to design -- but we'll see
what happens in another decade or so.

What is meant by amplification when the signal is digital?

On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 00:04:43 GMT, dizzy wrote:

124 wrote:

Welcome to rec.audio.insult.

Jerk!

Why? He was obviously correct.

paul packer said:

Welcome to rec.audio.insult.

Jerk!

Why? He was obviously correct.

That's 'borg humor, paulie. dippyborg was trying to be funny. You could
give him a break in honor of the holidays.

mc wrote:
What is meant by amplification when the signal is digital?

Multiplication by a constant?

"Joe Kesselman" wrote in message
...
mc wrote:
What is meant by amplification when the signal is digital?

Multiplication by a constant?

By the way, I think I know what he has in mind... Do all the signal
switching and level adjustment with digital signals. Render to audio at the
last step, near the speakers. That way you do not risk hum or other
corruption of the signal from all the early stages of the processing.

"mc" wrote in message

"Joe Kesselman" wrote in
message ...
mc wrote:
What is meant by amplification when the signal is
digital?

Multiplication by a constant?

By the way, I think I know what he has in mind... Do all
the signal switching and level adjustment with digital
signals. Render to audio at the last step, near the
speakers. That way you do not risk hum or other
corruption of the signal from all the early stages of the
processing.

That's the future - and the amps are in the speaker 'cause the crossover is
digital, too.

That's the future - and the amps are in the speaker 'cause the crossover
is digital, too.

This suggests that the ancient practice of designing the amp and the speaker
as a system (instead of designing a perfect amp and, separately, a perfect
speaker) might even come back...

"mc" wrote in message

That's the future - and the amps are in the speaker
'cause the crossover is digital, too.

This suggests that the ancient practice of designing the
amp and the speaker as a system (instead of designing a
perfect amp and, separately, a perfect speaker) might
even come back...

It's here, at least in audio production and sound reinforcement.

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"mc" wrote in message

That's the future - and the amps are in the speaker
'cause the crossover is digital, too.

This suggests that the ancient practice of designing the
amp and the speaker as a system (instead of designing a
perfect amp and, separately, a perfect speaker) might
even come back...

It's here, at least in audio production and sound reinforcement.

And at Meridian for a few years now.

Stephen

Arny Krueger wrote:
snip

That's the future - and the amps are in the speaker 'cause the crossover is
digital, too.

It may be someone's future, but not mine. I still drive cars with
carburetors though. I can fix them myself.

Bret Ludwig wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:
snip

That's the future - and the amps are in the speaker 'cause the crossover is
digital, too.

It may be someone's future, but not mine. I still drive cars with
carburetors though. I can fix them myself.

Aside from old wrecks, where do you find a car with a carburettor these days ?

Graham

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...


Bret Ludwig wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:
snip

That's the future - and the amps are in the speaker 'cause the
crossover is
digital, too.

It may be someone's future, but not mine. I still drive cars with
carburetors though. I can fix them myself.

Aside from old wrecks, where do you find a car with a carburettor these
days ?


Even a Logan is fuel injected.
Maybe in China.



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

paul packer wrote:

(smiley restored)

dizzy wrote:

Jerk!

8)

Why? He was obviously correct.

Did you not see the smiley?

George M. Middius cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net
wrote:

paul packer said:

Welcome to rec.audio.insult.

Jerk!

Why? He was obviously correct.

That's 'borg humor, paulie. dippyborg was trying to be funny. You could
give him a break in honor of the holidays.

True, I'll never be as funny as the guy with the "tubed" DAC... That
was a real knee-slapper.

Clyde Slick wrote:

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...


Bret Ludwig wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:
snip

That's the future - and the amps are in the speaker 'cause the
crossover is
digital, too.

It may be someone's future, but not mine. I still drive cars with
carburetors though. I can fix them myself.

Aside from old wrecks, where do you find a car with a carburettor these
days ?


Even a Logan is fuel injected.
Maybe in China.

Originated in Renault-Dacia's *Romanian* factory !

AFAIK you simply can't meet modern emissions regs with a carb.

Graham

"Pooh Bear" wrote
in message
Clyde Slick wrote:

"Pooh Bear"
wrote in message ...


Bret Ludwig wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:
snip

That's the future - and the amps are in the speaker
'cause the crossover is
digital, too.

It may be someone's future, but not mine. I still
drive cars with carburetors though. I can fix them
myself.

I fix my cars myself, but they've all had computers since 1982.

Aside from old wrecks, where do you find a car with a
carburettor these days ?

Good question.

Even a Logan is fuel injected.

Maybe in China.

If so, not for long.

Originated in Renault-Dacia's *Romanian* factory !

AFAIK you simply can't meet modern emissions regs with a
carb.

I drove many a miile in a car with one of the last carbureted engines made
in the US, and its FI sequel. Same engine block. What a positive difference!

dizzy wrote:

True, I'll never be as funny as the guy with the "tubed" DAC... That
was a real knee-slapper.

How about a belt-drive CD player?

--124

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 01:10:47 GMT, dizzy wrote:

paul packer wrote:

(smiley restored)

dizzy wrote:

Jerk!

8)

Why? He was obviously correct.

Did you not see the smiley?

That's a smiley? I thought it was an 8 trapped by a )

124 wrote:

dizzy wrote:

True, I'll never be as funny as the guy with the "tubed" DAC... That
was a real knee-slapper.

How about a belt-drive CD player?

Only if it had a 10 kg platter. 8)