"Old" vs. "new" digital equipment


Some recent posts about how far digital has come have got me thinking. I have a Theta DS Pro Gen III dac fed by a CEC TL5100Z as a transport. (The rest of the system is ARC LS2B Mk II into ARC VT-100 Mk II into Vandy 3a Sigs and 2WQ sub.)

I wonder what improvements I might hear if I were to go to a newer dac or newer cdp. In my current system, I hear grain when I listen to massed strings, some congestion on orchestral peaks, but otherwise most generally like what I hear.

Would newer digital stuff mitigate or eliminate these issues?

If I were to upgrade, where might I head next?

More generally, can anyone characterize the differences between my "old" Theta and newer digital equipment?

TIA.

David
Ag insider logo xs@2xbikecommuter

Showing 3 responses by eweedhome

I listen to a lot of orchestral music and, like you, noticed the grain in massed strings, and the congestion, exactly as you describe, and it began to drive me nuts. My system (at least an earlier version) was pretty similar to yours, except it started with a Linn CD12, and I used various different pre-amps...but same speakers and amp (except mine is a MK III).

I became more or less obsessed with trying to straighten out the string sound (some of which is reported in other threads). I thought the CD12 would do it, and was disappointed, etc., etc. Bottom line: I didn't get the grain and congestion under control to my satisfaction until finally (after 15+ years of disuse) I re-habbed my Linn LP12, bought a new Koetsu black, got an EAR phono-pre (can't rememeber the number -- the $1500 model) and started playing Decca, EMI, Phillips and other well-made Lps (including many Speakers Corner Lps).

Probably not really the answer you want to hear, but...And I should add that one of the CDP's I'm still working with is an EMM CDSA (which retrieved noticeably more info than the Linn CD12). But massed strings still don't (to me) sound quite right on it, compared to Lps. I think it must have to do with the limitations of the CD medium.

I did, however, just a few days ago order an EAR Acute CDP, based upon all the positive reports of its "analog-like" sound, and based upon my very positive reaction to the EAR phono-pre. I did that because in the last 6 months, I've hardly touched my CD collection, and I need some way to enjoy them. Too much good material out there...

(Isn't it kind of annoying that you spend a bunch of money on getting better and better gear, only to find that, at a certain point, maybe you're almost getting too much information?)
Re: Wadia, which some folks think is the answer, I agree that the 860 is pretty good, once it's been modified by Great Northern Sound. I thought it was too strident in stock condition. Because of that, a couple of years back I replaced the unmodified 860 with a Linn CD12 demo, which to me seemed to sound more rich and natural. Over time, however, it still, too often, seemed unnatural in the highs. As my frustration mounted, I decided to have GNSC modify the Wadia 860 (which I'd kept). I liked the results better than the Linn. During that process, I also got hold of a used Tri-Vista SACD player. Didn't much like it for CDs, but was impressed with the SACD sound. So I started thinking SACD might be the answer. I was about to sell the Linn, but took the time to compare it with an EMM CDSA. As noted above, the EMM gave the sense of retrieving more detail than the Linn for redbook. So I sold the Linn (and also the Tri-Vista), and eventually got an EMM demo. So now I have the modded Wadia, and the EMM. And yet, neither of them are as pleasant to listen to as many, if not most, Lps, particularly when it comes to massed strings.

If this sounds like the crazed wanderings of a music junkie, you can imagine what my wife has been thinking.

But, my point is, here's at least one listener that was frustrated by the problem described by David, decided to solve it, tried several of what are supposed to be amongst the best CDP's available, and remained unsatisfied. But thank goodness somewhere in the process I decided to give Lps another try (after 15 years of nothing but CDs).

I should add that I also tried various equipment changes to try to minimize my issues as well. Tried Avalon and Harbeth speakers in addition to the Vandys (and now use the Harbeth M30's), tried VTL, BEL, Cary, Joule, BAT and ARC electronics (that I can recall), and BEL, Audioquest, Purist Audio, Kimber, Cardas and some other cables (prefer the Cardas Cross, NOT Golden Cross), tried various methods of vibration control (now using Symposium stands with BEL hard rubber feet--the Symposium metal feet were too bright and hard sounding), several different power cords (now using Cardas Cross), and have a dedicated circuit, and use PS Audio Duettes (sp?)(mainly for surge protection).

(You know, looking at that list, my wife might be right...I might be crazy...certainly was determined...)

But here's something funny: Back in 2004, I moved to Holland for 18 months, and took with me only a one-box, 2 speaker, CD-only, Linn Classik system, which was fairly rolled-off seeming in the top. And night after night, I was quite happy listening to it. I could listen for hours. Fatigue was NEVER an issue. Which gets back to the point several folks have raised...the higher you go up the "hear everything accurately" chain, the more you buy trouble for a larger and larger percentage of the music you want to hear. Catch-22.

(And, in fact, it was after 18 months of music-listening happiness overseas that I came home and began the maddening quest described above.)
I agree with Rotarius that reproduction of massed strings is a weak area for the 3A's, at least with a digital source. That was my experience. In fairness, it's a weak area for lots, if not most gear. (Especially if your reference is Carnegie Hall, or Symphony Hall in Boston.) The Harbeth M30's proved to be, for me, significantly easier and more pleasant to listen to for massed strings. That having been said, I don't necessarily disagree with Bigtree that the 3A's are better than a lot of speakers in that area. I suspect that most manufacturers don't voice their speakers with hard core classical listeners in mind...and, because the recording of massed strings seems to be a tough and imperfect art, an issue of concern is balancing between forgiving speakers and detailed speakers. The 3A's were what I would call very revealing speakers. For me, in fact (in the long run), TOO revealing. (One dealer, when I told him I'd gotten the Harbeths, said "But they aren't high end!?" I don't agree with him, but that sure got me thinking, maybe I don't really WANT "high end." At least not what a lot of people refer to as "high end."