The All Purpose Advice Thread

Bingo. Although much depends on what you'd like in terms of bass performance. But if you're looking for a 5.1 system of modest quality to try out, you might try to track down a used Logitech Z-5500. Mine has served me ably for years.

 

It's really more for movies and other stuff that is specifically recorded or processed to have all the proper channels. If it's just for music, you're smashing it through a processor to kludge out all those extra channels that never existed in the first place.

 

I know some people swear by 4.0 and 5.1 mixes, but there are so few of those out there that I don't see the benefit in making your main system be set up specifically for those to sound the best. If it's for home theater, then don't worry so much about audiophile room treatments and such.

 

I had one for several years. To be honest, the best thing I ever did was replace it with a decent 2 channel system...'modest quality' is over selling it IMO.

 

Where would you place the actual music or source files?

 

After reading everyone's impressions of the Yggdrasil, my end game is a bit more confused now, as it was originally:

Headphone: stax SR-009
Amp: Nano KGHSS
DAC: Lyra 1 or Lynx Helio

I'm looking for transparency / clarity (to the furthest extreme possible) in my DAC as opposed to upgradability (or fiddling with capacitors or mods aside from a one off build up or out.) So has there been any hard measurements and listening reviews done of the Yggdrasil against mastering reference gear? And I've heard that the Soekris dam1021 can go head to head with the Yggdrasil for about a 4th of the price... Is this true?

 

Assuming lossless PCM, and a WASAPI or ASIO interface, the files are essentially irrelevant.

 

If I was doing this allover again - start with the best speakers you can afford - 2 channel and receiver. Something like the ELAC Debut B6.

 

SBAF has plenty of measurements

http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/schiit-yggdrasil-measurements.413/

The dam1021 has a good reputation but needs some DIY skills and doesn't have the closed form filter the Schiit DACs have. I would just get the Modi MB if you are considering the dam1021.

Also look up Vinshine Audio to see an implementation of the dam1021.

 

I had been eyeing the Elac's until I hit upon this review*:
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/89-sp...harmonic-chane-musichall-elac-energy-kef.html

That's now changed for the Affordable Accuracy monitors:
http://www.superbestaudiofriends.or...hilharmonic-affordable-accurate-monitor.2924/

Less expensive, it's basically an assembled Dayton BR-1 kit (with very little in terms of markup for the trouble), and has some degree of rubber stamping from the SBAF gods.

* The author of the comparo was seemingly just about the least enthused with the B6 from the whole line in the comparo, and most impressed with the performance-price ratio of the AAs.

 

Those do look excellent indeed. Well then just a receiver with some good room EQ and you are good to start playing around. After that...dual subs.

 

Assuming the highest quality from a technical standpoint, yes, but a well mastered version of an album will sound alot better than a say, highly compressed / "loud" of the same. Still curious where Skippy or yourself would see audio fitting in the chain.

 

@Matasho - you can't do a lot about how the album is mastered. I wouldn't avoid the latest Radiohead because their mastering engineer wasn't the shieeeeet. The audio chain mentioned was over factors you have control over.

 

Well we have quality as is affected by the file itself (so to speak), and then quality as is affected by the production process. We can control fidelity of the file, but unless we know the recording, mixing and mastering engineers we have no control over the production.

Here's my opinion, YMMV etc.

Release Quality:
Well, there's only so much you can do. Be wary of hi-res stuff that purports to be 'better' - it may well not be. There's nothing wrong with Red Book. If I get a hi-res version it is because there's improvement in production quality or because I can't get it any other way. I don't do hi-res because it's technically 'better'.

File format:
I rip using Exact Audio Copy with AccurateRip verification, and I keep logs of everything. I can tell you exactly what the degree of accuracy was for any rip, I know the correct drive offset and so on, so I can get accurate rips as much of the time as possible. That said, I have a few CDs out of print that have some damage that I've been content to rip with errors because, well, that's the only option and I can't get another copy unless at ridiculous expense. Old scratched CDs of mine I haven't bothered to replace for one or two errors because that's just too frigging anal...but I do know exactly what is accurate and what has errors. Anything else like HiRes is just a file copy of course and soesn't have the wonky process of ripping to contend with. I don't rip Vinyl...maybe one day, in the far distant future, but not today.

I keep an archive of everything I get in the original format I got it in. I make effort to get basic metadata right, but I don't add album art or any of that stuff. This is just the "in case shit happens" archive.

I then compress the item (album typically) into FLAC. For non-PCM sources this of course involves transcoding to PCM, say from DSD. DSD freaks will shudder, I really could care less to be honest... DSD MQA or whatever it is is fringe stuff in my book, the vast majority of available music is PCM. PCM material is kept at its original sample rate and bit-depth. This is my HQ library, and this is where I focus my attention to metadata: Accuracy in album and track names, release dates, album art and genre assignment consistently for everything. This is on an external drive and is used for 'serious' listening at home or where I have the option, like at the office.

I then take that library and 'publish' a version in high quality MP3 using the LAME Extreme preset. JRiver MC makes it easy to keep such a copy library in sync with the master library. This inherits metadata from the FLAC master library. I keep a copy on MicroSD on my phone, so I have a copy of all my stuff wherever I go. When traveling, commuting, working in a noisy location, hijacking the playlist at a friend's house etc., this is a perfectly decent source of perfectly enjoyable music.

Overall, a shitty MP3 will sound shit on any equipment. A good one will likely be indistinguishable from the Red Book in all but dedicated listening circumstances. So, don't do shitty MP3, and don't go broke buying hi-res. Learn how to rip a CD properly. If that's not good enough, get a second mortgage and invest in vinyl .

 

@GoodEnoughGearBeing Able to access well mastered versions of otherwise overly loud albums was the one strong argument I've heard for vinyl and SACD, with the former kinda forcing you to stick to anything released in the mid 90s or earlier. But yup, our opinions are about the same on file formats. Death to DSD? hehe

You can avoid shitty masters or find a version that is better than the rest. I had to do that with Adele's albums (21 which was passable, but 25 was baaaaaad,) by resorting to live versions. I mean, I'd argue that its possible many artifacts people construe as "bright" or "thin" or whatnot, could be due to the recording as opposed to the equipment. (And yes, why its important to use the same exact release when demoing any equipment.)

 

Is it possible to have speakers/headphones that sound "squashed" despite driving them to "listenable levels" without reaching max on the volume knob?

I'm asking because I was playing around with a set of speakers (not mine, with permission) and decided to see if my Oppo HA-2 with phone as source could power them. They could, it was loud enough, but it also sounded like shit (like someone put the notes in a blender). Then I added a portable amp (don't remember what it was) that was lying around through the Oppo line out and the sound immediately filled the room like speakers are supposed to.

If anyone could enlighten me that would be grand. I tried to Google about this but I think I'm using the wrong keywords.

 

I had the Z-5500 before I blew the subwoofer and after that the newer replacement Z906. Both were nice for some 5.1 chunes and I still at times crave the immersion of being basically inside the song but for 2.1 it's just a horrible gimmick to have some sounds come out the back speakers and it sounded like shite (hyped high end etc)

 

Congrats, you have finally found out what it means to drive a transducer inadequately. (And I'm not being sarcastic here.)

 

So I'm looking through some articles... And I'm still confused. What I got from them is that impedance isn't a constant but will change depending on what's playing. I'm guessing my HA-2 was enough to power the lower threshold but unable to put out enough for the rest? And I suppose this is something I need to worry with headphones as well?

 

Ha ha, fair enough. I agree that a 2-channel system is the way to go. Just wanted to give the OP a 5.1 alternative I could vouch for, if they still wanted to go in that direction.