weak point of my system? thought?

[brett_s]

I was hoping that you would be able to offer a critique of my system. I'd like to know what you feel is holding my system back and which component upgrade would offer the most improvement.

Background:
This system is used for both HT and 2 channel audio. I want to improve the 2 channel. I think it's great right now, but each step I take has been so much better than the last. I'm at the point that I don't know which part I should be targeting. I'd love your thought as I don't want to spend time (and money) on the wrong items. I'm just looking for direction. I've assembled a good sounding system off of used components, and will likely continue down that path for further improvement.

System:
-JBL XPL200a speakers (these I'm keeping)
-cambridge audio AZUR 640R AV receiver as front end
-Acurus A125X5 amp for biamping the xpl's
-Ashly XR1001 crossover
-Denon DVD1940CI DVD/SACD as my CD player (hooked up optical to receiver)
-Decent interconnect cables and 12 gauge speaker wire.

Where would you target for improvement as my next step? Better amp? better crossover? Dedicated stereo preamp? Better CD player? I don't know which way to go and I'd appreciate your suggestions.

Please, help a newbie out! Where would you spend my money?
Brett

[richluvsound]

Brett,
Keep the Denon till last , it has a very good DAC and analogue section in it . I use a DVD player too !

Get a superb amp -pre amp set up . Forget the bi-amping for the time being . In my experience , unless you are spending serious money , bi-amping just introduces a whole mess of low grade electronics into the signal path .

Next step is to work out your budget for the up-grade ....?

report back and we can start from there !

Rich

[brett_s]

Rich,

Thanks for your quick response. Right now, I don't have a budget for the next update. I guess it depends on what the next weak link is.....Basically, I'm just looking to see what should be my next target, so I can start the research. From there I'll formulate a plan.

As for the biamping, even with the lesser equipment that I used, the difference was stunning between bi-amp and non-biamp set up. I'm a believer in it now (with these speakers anyway), and I really think it's going to stay. My buddy did just pick up a 300wpc mac amp that I'd like to try in standard configuration as a comparison in the near future. Too bad that amp weighs so much as it is a total PITA to move.

So we have one vote for a pre-amp and one vote to remove the bi-amp.

Who else has thoughts on this?
Brett

[MikeBrewster77]

System:
-Denon DVD1940CI DVD/SACD as my CD player (hooked up optical to receiver)

Keep the Denon till last , it has a very good DAC and analogue section in it .

Brett:

Have you tried A-B'ing between optical connection of the Denon vs. standard RCA connection? I don't know anything about the DACs in the Cambridge, but my experience with the DACs in Denon products is the same as Rich's (I think mine has Burr-Brown's, and they're commendable.)

Just a thought.

[4313B]

In my experience , unless you are spending serious money , bi-amping just introduces a whole mess of low grade electronics into the signal path .

One should be able to build their own using top shelf power supply components and op-amps for a couple hundred bucks. The biggest purchase should be a decent chassis to mount the boards in. Of course there won't be any muting relays or myriad other "convenient" features but the sound quality will be top-shelf and that's the end goal.

You're probably right in that any off the shelf solution worthy of home hi-fi use is going to cost some cash. The usual suspects don't appear to cut it. The Ashly is fine for an introduction to bi-amping. It should be replaced as soon as practical.


BTW - I think G.T. is now using Pass Labs active filters with his Everest II's. They replaced his venerable DX-1's. I think the former President of JBL Consumer went the same route. I ended up with his DX-1's. If I'm not mistaken he is now responsible for ramping up JBL China.

[brett_s]

Mike,

I did try the A/B between the optical and analog connection on the DVD player. The Dennon has burr-brown DAC while the Cambridge has Crystal CS43122 for the front two channels. I went back and forth, with my friends and wife listening, and it was so close it wasn't funny. The consensus was that it sounded slightly better (a bit softer and clearer) with the optical connection and the CA doing the DAC work. It was really close in sound either way. Nothing dramatic either way.


4313B, if you ever feel like parting with the dx-1, keep me in mind. As you know, they are difficult to find. As you stated, the Ashly was just to see if it made a difference, as I was skeptical and didn't feel like spending a wad of cash to test it.

Keep the ideas coming guys!
Brett

[Mr. Widget]

Burr Brown this and Crystal that... phooey!

The chip sets do matter, but not nearly as much as how they are implemented or how their integrated analog sections are designed and built. I commend you for doing the audition work... that is exactly what I would recommend, however until you make improvements in your electronics, their sonics will mask changes... enough that a $5K DAC brought into the system would likely only sound slightly better.

I would agree 100% with what has been already said. I have been an advocate for separates for decades, though they are not the only way to go... there are excellent integrateds out there. The bottom line with electronics (everything in audio really) is you must audition them. Until you have heard the differences or lack of differences you are just blindly following a large herd that is following itself being driven by all manner of misconception. Just because a piece of gear is expensive, impressive looking, is massively over built, or even has a great reputation with a huge following... there is no guarantee that it will actually be an improvement over a less well know or less costly piece.

I have played around with active crossovers in many of my systems for decades. I have used a plethora of pro and semi-pro crossovers as well as numerous high end "audiophile" models... they can make a system sound better by giving you control that you wouldn't otherwise have, but in many cases they allow you to make the system sound "different"... often times it seems different is enough to please. Ultimately, if you are pleased, that is all that matters, but often folks in the DIY crowd get used to their rather unusual sonic flavor and then one day hear something a bit more accurate and are startled at what they have been missing. Of course I have no idea what your system sounds like and I am simply relating what I have noticed over the past 30 years or so as I have visited countless friend's homes.

In your system you mention a pair (I assume) of JBL XPL200s, but then a surround receiver and a moderately priced multi channel amp. I have heard quite a few AVRs and none have ever sounded as good as a decent pre and basic 2 channel power amp. I am not familiar with your amp, but in many cases these multi channel amps are simply receivers without the front end... they are not built like a quality basic power amp, but again listening is everything... if you compare it to a Hafler, or Bryston, a vintage Crown, or a Sumo, or GAS or something further up the food chain, you might be startled. The preamp cannot be ignored... there are many bargains out there from the 80s and early 90s... preamps that do not have the convenience of a remote, but don't have scores of rather nasty sounding chips doing all manner of sonic terror... now if your system is primarily a multichannel "home theater" rig, where you don't sit in the stereo sweet spot and seriously listen then, little of what I have said makes much of a difference.

So the short answer from me would be to try to borrow a variety of preamps and power amps... try them without the active crossover as you can not tell what you are listening to if you leave that in the mix... you can always add it back after you find something that you prefer. I would try to keep everything as simple as possible, less usually sounds better.

Widget

[brett_s]

Widget,

Thank you for your reply, your thoughts are greatly appreciated.

Just as a background the majority of my stereo's use is just that. 2 channel cd listening (I don't get the whole vinyl thing, but that's for another discussion). I want to keep improving on that aspect. However, it still needs to be capable of HT use for the rest of the family, hence the AV reciever. As long as the HT section works, and is fairly straightforward, it's good enough for me. That's about the extent of it. Front two speakers are also used in HT, but the primary use is 2 channel, and that's what I want to keep working on.

The equipment I assembled was done with this in mind along with a tight budget at the time.

I agree with you 100% about the need to audition things to find out what I like. However, I am at the point where I don't know the next step should be. Hence, the reason for the post, I need help to find the right "direction". It was almost overwhelming at this point.

From your post, I'll add another vote to preamp, one for amp, and another to revalidate the choice of biamping. Maybe I'll start another thread about recomendations for quality used 2 channel preamps, as this is something I have very little first hand experience with.

I like your idea of keeping it simple.
Brett

[jblnut]

Let me add something that I think no one has picked up on yet...

You're using an Ashly active crossover so that you can "biamp" your XPL200's. Yet (correct me if I'm wrong) the XPL's internal xovers are still in the mix, right? You're introducing a layer of somewhat questionable sonic purity where none is needed. Why not feed your two amps (or receiver and amp) directly into the XPL's? The receiver would feed the "highs" and the separate amp the "lows". The signal has to go through the speaker xovers inside the XPL anyway (with the high one rejecting the low frequency sounds and vice versa) so I'm really not sold on the benefits of the Ashly.
I've been doing exactly this for years with some special xovers in my 250Ti's (built by one of this thread's contributors) with *Excellent* results.

Maybe you tried this already and didn't like the results? Or maybe you assumed you had to use an outboard xover and never tried?

Let us know which it is and we can help from there.

Some of the most knowledgeable folks on this board have already given their $.02 and I can only agree with most of it. It's certainly worth trying a better preamp and amps and you will likely find (especially on the high end amp) that you may have been missing a lot of details. Those XPLs are very revealing and will let you know right away if you have made a move in the right direction.

And Widget - sometimes massively overbuilt gear with a long history and big following is actually worth it . I've got blue meter syndrome bigtime....and I'm not looking for a cure...


jblbut

[brett_s]

Jblnut,
I did test the setup as you suggested in a passive biamp set up. I could tell no difference between this and a single amp setup. In active biamp mode there was a dramatic difference. Much clearer, three dimensional, and powerful. Tidome did a simlilar test with the xpl (single amp, passive biamp, active biamp) in another thread with similar results, I did mine to confirm what he had found.

If I can borrow a really good 2 ch amp, I'd retest it without the active crossover again to see the difference, per Widgets suggestion. I'd much prefer not to run them bi-amped as it is that much simpler. But it was dramatically different, so I'm going down that path for right now, untill/if I find something better.

However, I see another vote for a stand alone preamp in your selection. Seems to be a trend. I need to find out if a seperate 2ch pre-amp makes that big of a difference. Unfortunatly, none of my friends have seperate 2 ch pre-amps, and it's a bit of a hike to any decent stereo stores around here. I'll have to keep my eyes open.

Keep the info coming guys!
Brett

[grumpy]

I'd suggest a review of the manual:

http://www.jbl.com/resources/Brands/...l/XPL200om.pdf

as there are at least four wiring configurations (normal, bi-wire, dual-amp, and bi-amp)...
it's the last one which requires an electronic/external crossover... Figure 3 in the manual)

Note that the optimized DX-1 XPL200A crossover cards are -not- the same slopes as the
Ashly's 24dB/oct, so the voicing will not be identical (although the approximation -might- be
both an improvement over passive networks between the LF and LMF drivers as well as
"good enough" for now.

(ah... you replied while I was typing).

Note also I've heard TiDome's XPL200's with and without the DX-1 ... as well as swapping
in "higher-end" (whatever that is) 2-ch preamps in his K2 system. Both "upgrades" were
noticeable and positive... the DX-1/XPL combo perhaps more so. If I had the privilege of
owning an XPL200 system, I'd be looking to duplicate that custom DX-1 response.

[jblnut]

I'd like to see some description of the signal path. I'm not entirely sure how the crossover is playing into this. Normally you'd do something like:

Source-Preamp-crossover-crossover output low - low amp - bass driver
-crossover output high - high amp - upper drivers

How this is currently hooked up with an HT receiver is a bit of a mystery to me...

Also the point about how the speaker's internal xover settings are being used is very imporant to understand as well....

jblnut

[Titanium Dome]

In the case of the XPL200A, once the bi-amp switch is flipped on the back the woofer and midbass drivers are taken out of the internal network and controlled completely by the DX-1 (or any other crossover you stick in the chain, for better or worse). The internal passive crossover still functions between the 095Ti and 046Ti which IMO is excellent as it is.

Given the way the biamp switch operates, the DX-1 with the proper cards is hard to beat, especially since the designer built the cards.

I can imagine that a reasonable facsimile for the performance gain could be realized with another active crossover, but getting it as good would take some work. However, I believe that even a so-so active biamp will make things better, because I frankly was not that fond of the XPL's bass and midbass in stock form, regardless of the preamp and amp used with them. My Citation 5.0 pre is really nice, but even it could not make me like the XPL bottom end. With the DX-1 attached to it, it's just amazing, and two big pro amps driving it all is like unlimited power and headroom.

Funny, whenever I ask what's the weak point in my system, everyone always gets very quiet and looks at me. What do you think that means?

[brett_s]

jbl nut,

I think I understand your confusion. Here's how I have it hooked up.

The CA AV receiver acts as my processor/preamp. All digital equipment goes to it and I select between items that way.

I then take the preamp outs of the CA and run them to the Ashly crossover. Ashly seperates hi/lo signal. These are sent to at Acurus 5 channel amp (I only use four channels). 2 channels high, 2 channels low to XPL with biamp switch flipped on speakers.

The av receiver does nothing but process the signal as well as drive the surround speakers for HT use. No amplification is done in the receiver for the 2 channel setup. This is left to the Ashly and Acurus.

Likely not the best way to go, but that's the battle of trying to mix HT and audio.

I hope that clears it up.
Brett

[jerry_rig]

My two cents:

I use a current model Denon AV receiver costing three times the unit you are using (and it is 150 wpc). BUT, I only use it for watching TV or movies. When I want to listen to music, I switch speaker cables (at the speaker) and use a high end pre-amp, power amp(s) and various high-end front end components (outboard DAC, phono pre-amp, etc.). The difference in sound quality is night and day. No matter how you cut it, the AV receiver is no match. Both with respect to D/A conversion and power quality.

I thought I could get great sound out of AV gear, and I'm sure many people would be happy with such a set up. The truth is that simple, dedicated separates will yield far better results. So I guess I'm with Widget.

Jerry