How many systems -- more than one , or one is enough.

[RogerD]

Im actually following your project and very curious to see how it comes together. One thing I’m not messing with is digital crossovers, might use a an analog one if needed but tend to use what the manufacturer had for that particular horn/driver system.
david

Hi david,
I knew I would cross this bridge...lol. The 3415 bass array can use a custom designed passive crossover made by the original CTO. I can certainly use that in the config. I also can use the QSC processor as that enables any driver combinations to set delay etc.
I am not to concerned with the digital side...as you know. My LT plans are to use my VAC rennasiance amps with the TAD 4001 CD's
My hope is to have the noise floor as low as possible...like my first system...should be able to do that as I will have the signal chain of source,processor,amplifier and speakers.
My goal is to have the bass both powerful and have weight to pressurize the room at moderately normal volume levels. I'll have plenty of clean power....should be interesting.

 

[DaveyF]

David, you bring a good point to why we should consider multiple systems. In your case, you greatly prefer horns..and all that they do well. In other cases, I think that a horn based system could well be off-set with one based on dynamic drivers and then one based on stat's and/or planars. The difference in 'flavor' of these systems would be great to have under one roof.
Recently, I heard a Maggie based system, and while I think they bring some great attributes to the whole, they have flaws like all speakers. Different flaws to horns, different to box speakers etc.,
Yet they also bring some very strong attributes...so, you pay your price and you pick your flavor...Unless you have multiple systems, that is.

 

[ddk]

David, you bring a good point to why we should consider multiple systems. In your case, you greatly prefer horns..and all that they do well. In other cases, I think that a horn based system could well be off-set with one based on dynamic drivers and then one based on stat's and/or planars. The difference in 'flavor' of these systems would be great to have under one roof.
Recently, I heard a Maggie based system, and while I think they bring some great attributes to the whole, they have flaws like all speakers. Different flaws to horns, different to box speakers etc.,
Yet they also bring some very strong attributes...so, you pay your price and you pick your flavor...Unless you have multiple systems, that is.

Davey,
Some clarification is needed, I like certain vintage horns but I haven't found any current ones that I can live with, there's not much in common between the two. I assure you if setup correctly those vintage ones have none of the negative horniness attributed to modern ones, they don't even have a color or horn signature besides unlimited dynamics. I'll go with a SET friendly dynamic speaker if I didn't have access to vintage horns.

david

 

[RogerD]

Davey,
Some clarification is needed, I like certain vintage horns but I haven't found any current ones that I can live with, there's not much in common between the two. I assure you if setup correctly those vintage ones have none of the negative horniness attributed to modern ones, they don't even have a color or horn signature besides unlimited dynamics. I'll go with a SET friendly dynamic speaker if I didn't have access to vintage horns.

david

Interesting! Ok david where would the signature difference lay? Driver or design...

 

[DaveC]

Ciao Gian,

I understand your comment very well and aside from a very few exceptions I have a hard time listening to modern speakers, most sound mechanical in comparison specially in the bass, the modern cones are just too heavy and too slow given how much more travel they have. Some designers are now trying to compensate with half active designs which imo don't work. Then there's the cabinet design which they moved from instrument like lively resonant boxes to stiff and now to so called inert ones. The sound character changes when it comes from a dead, lifeless box. They were designed with a different soul in the Golden Era of Audio with very different sensibilities and I guess as we age our nature get's drawn more to the easy natural sound of the vintage beauties. The mistake that a lot of people make is that use old, darker sounding electronics that over the years have lost most of the even limited sparkle that they had and get a woolly sound and think that's what vintage is about but it's only when you match them with first rate electronics like Lamm SETs that you'll realize the full abilities of the golden beauties and their timeless sound. For me still the purest most natural sound is a top vintage horn and a Lamm SET. You're welcome to stop by if you ever travel to this area and you'll hear it for yourself.

david

OTOH, vintage type woofers with very light cones can't be pushed past very small excursion levels without lots of distortion and they can't reproduce transients with the kind of accuracy a harder coned woofer can. And even with limited excursion the vintage woofers have a lot of distortion vs some modern alternatives. Heavier cones can be compensated for with stronger motors, to a point. I can certainly see personal preference for vintage woofers in resonant boxes but there's a lot of distortion that goes with that kind of sound. I also think when you reduce distortion in the bass frequencies too much it can sound different, probably much different vs speakers used to master many recordings, especially older ones, and this can lead to a lean sound on some recordings that has more fundamental and not enough harmonics to sound as real as possible. So there are some trade-offs. I'd like to think I've hit a happy medium with my choice of woofer... it's sort of in between a vintage and more modern design.

 

[ddk]

Interesting! Ok david where would the signature difference lay? Driver or design...

Depending on the speaker Roger I would say one or of all of the above Roger. The challenge starts with woofers than can keep up with compression drivers, then you have the horn designs of some of these speakers, a piece plastic stuck on so standard driver, that's a design for a megaphone not a high end speaker and some come with a bunch.

david

 

[RogerD]

Depending on the speaker Roger I would say one or of all of the above Roger. The challenge starts with woofers than can keep up with compression drivers, then you have the horn designs of some of these speakers, a piece plastic stuck on so standard driver, that's a design for a megaphone not a high end speaker and some come with a bunch.

david

Ok ....makes sense. Altec and EV used a metal material for their horns,some vintage used wood. Today fiberglass or phenolic. After listening for thousands of hours of different horns...what material do you prefer.

 

[ddk]

OTOH, vintage type woofers with very light cones can't be pushed past very small excursion levels without lots of distortion and they can't reproduce transients with the kind of accuracy a harder coned woofer can. And even with limited excursion the vintage woofers have a lot of distortion vs some modern alternatives. Heavier cones can be compensated for with stronger motors, to a point. I can certainly see personal preference for vintage woofers in resonant boxes but there's a lot of distortion that goes with that kind of sound. I also think when you reduce distortion in the bass frequencies too much it can sound different, probably much different vs speakers used to master many recordings, especially older ones, and this can lead to a lean sound on some recordings that has more fundamental and not enough harmonics to sound as real as possible. So there are some trade-offs. I'd like to think I've hit a happy medium with my choice of woofer... it's sort of in between a vintage and more modern design.

Why do you want to push them Dave, the whole point is that they're light and fast and need very little power to come to life and blend with the lightning fast compression driver that will honk & sound like s**t with a high powered amp. It's a question of application. You have to get more specific Dave I don't hear distortion with better vintage woofers driven properly and I'd certainly like to know modern alternatives to vintage Klangfilm, JBL, TAD, Tannoy, Grundig, Telefunken, Vitavox vintage cones with the same efficiency, speed, dynamic and tonal texture of these vintage drivers when driven with the right electronics. The real issue here is that no one I'm aware of is making woofers of that nature anymore and you're forced to accept what you call a happy medium, but it's not for me. I can easily live with a full range ss driven dynamic speaker or a SET friendly one but not with any hybrids, different sensitivities and goals.

As far as resonant boxes go again we need to get specific, can't nix them all because of current thinking and current driver technology which is based on a different science. For me none of my favorite vintage drivers sound right in a stiff inert box, the resonant box & that driver need to match one another otherwise it will be a horrible sonic mess. We can't judge without considering the application, context and the chain. I start with a SET as the center of my system and build around it, the best results come from vintage horns and sensitive dynamic speakers but same beloved Bionors would be the first thing out the door if I built my system around a solid state amp and listened more to a different type of music. Context is everything...

david

 

[ddk]

Ok ....makes sense. Altec and EV used a metal material for their horns,some vintage used wood. Today fiberglass or phenolic. After listening for thousands of hours of different horns...what material do you prefer.

My preferred speakers mostly have metal horns but there's a number that I love that have wooden horns, just not the plastic type.

david

 

[DaveyF]

Davey,
Some clarification is needed, I like certain vintage horns but I haven't found any current ones that I can live with, there's not much in common between the two. I assure you if setup correctly those vintage ones have none of the negative horniness attributed to modern ones, they don't even have a color or horn signature besides unlimited dynamics. I'll go with a SET friendly dynamic speaker if I didn't have access to vintage horns.

david

David, I guess I may never have heard a vintage horn set up correctly ( or for that matter, any current horn), because to my ears, they all display a certain "negative horniness" ( BTW, I'm not sure I like this term, but you did post it...and it seems to work, LOL) The very shape of a horn would lead me to speculate that the product has a certain failing even from the start. As you may tell, I am no fan of horn speakers, although I grant you that they do bring a certain 'tonal impact' to the SQ that most other designs fall down with. Problem is, that for me, this is not enough to get over all of the other problems that I hear with this type of speaker....and maybe I have not heard a vintage horn set up correctly. ( although, I have heard numerous examples of this type of speaker over the many years).
Which brings up a question for you...what do you think of Maggies or Stats or other planar type speakers? Plus,are there any current dynamic driver/box speakers that you would consider in your second ( or maybe third or forth or??) system.
I personally would consider Maggies ( not Stats...as I used to own both Maggies and Stats and I think Maggies are now far easier to live with) in a second system.

 

[DaveC]

Why do you want to push them Dave, the whole point is that they're light and fast and need very little power to come to life and blend with the lightning fast compression driver that will honk & sound like s**t with a high powered amp. It's a question of application. You have to get more specific Dave I don't hear distortion with better vintage woofers driven properly and I'd certainly like to know modern alternatives to vintage Klangfilm, JBL, TAD, Tannoy, Grundig, Telefunken, Vitavox vintage cones with the same efficiency, speed, dynamic and tonal texture of these vintage drivers when driven with the right electronics. The real issue here is that no one I'm aware of is making woofers of that nature anymore and you're forced to accept what you call a happy medium, but it's not for me. I can easily live with a full range ss driven dynamic speaker or a SET friendly one but not with any hybrids, different sensitivities and goals.

As far as resonant boxes go again we need to get specific, can't nix them all because of current thinking and current driver technology which is based on a different science. For me none of my favorite vintage drivers sound right in a stiff inert box, the resonant box & that driver need to match one another otherwise it will be a horrible sonic mess. We can't judge without considering the application, context and the chain. I start with a SET as the center of my system and build around it, the best results come from vintage horns and sensitive dynamic speakers but same beloved Bionors would be the first thing out the door if I built my system around a solid state amp and listened more to a different type of music. Context is everything...

david

I think the downside of light paper-coned woofers is often a speaker that sounds different at low vs high SPLs, and may have a sweet spot instead of being able to reproduce equally well at all SPLs. I do understand the way around this is to use multiple drivers and/or horns but this is not practical for many folks due to size and cost.

I've tested a handful of woofers for my speaker in a 5 cuft BR cab, JBL 2226 and Acoustic Elegance TD15M for the light paper-cone high efficiency and the AE TD15H and TD15H+ for more modern designs, with the 15H being somewhere in the middle and H+ being the heaviest and stiffest cone with a much larger motor and x-max capability. All have paper cones and none are subwoofer-heavy, the H+ is still under 150g and 94 dB/1W. I have listened to them and measured distortion of some of them. The 2226 and 15M are basically interchangeable, and sound similar. They have a characteristic sound of vintage high efficiency low-excursion, light paper coned woofers, which is on the warm side, fast and articulate but certainly much more distortion and they don't do transients at higher SPLs as well. The H+ is far cleaner sounding and plays at much higher SPLs cleanly as well. The H is in the middle.

Anyways, I've found good results and achieved a seamless integration but I don't use CDs for mids/highs, it's a very light-coned full range 4.5" driver with a low-gain horn that linearizes the driver, which also allows it to cover a lot more range. Efficiency is only about 102 dB as well, not CD level but high enough my 6W SET amp works well.

I do appreciate the qualities of vintage woofers but there are some really good modern ones imho... and personal preference plays a large role too!

 

[ddk]

David, I guess I may never have heard a vintage horn set up correctly ( or for that matter, any current horn), because to my ears, they all display a certain "negative horniness" ( BTW, I'm not sure I like this term, but you did post it...and it seems to work, LOL) The very shape of a horn would lead me to speculate that the product has a certain failing even from the start. As you may tell, I am no fan of horn speakers, although I grant you that they do bring a certain 'tonal impact' to the SQ that most other designs fall down with. Problem is, that for me, this is not enough to get over all of the other problems that I hear with this type of speaker....and maybe I have not heard a vintage horn set up correctly. ( although, I have heard numerous examples of this type of speaker over the many years).
Which brings up a question for you...what do you think of Maggies or Stats or other planar type speakers? Plus,are there any current dynamic driver/box speakers that you would consider in your second ( or maybe third or forth or??) system.
I personally would consider Maggies ( not Stats...as I used to own both Maggies and Stats and I think Maggies are now far easier to live with) in a second system.

Of all the panel speakers I owned I liked Apogee & Soundlab best and I'd go with Soundlab again if I was in the market for a stat today. Maggies were always too colored for my taste but I haven't heard one in years. If you're not married to a SET and are good with ss amplification there are dozens of very fine dynamic speakers for most budgets and bargains galore on the used market, some are even beautiful works of art like some Estelon and Kharma speakers but the field shrinks radically if you're after easy to drive sensitive speakers. A few weeks ago I put in a pair of Kharma Midi Grand Exquisites with the new F drivers for a friend and if not for my horns I'd probably end with a pair of Kharmas with the F driver. There's a natural ease and liveliness with these Kharmas that I haven't heard in a very long time from dynamic boxes.

david

 

[ddk]

I think the downside of light paper-coned woofers is often a speaker that sounds different at low vs high SPLs, and may have a sweet spot instead of being able to reproduce equally well at all SPLs. I do understand the way around this is to use multiple drivers and/or horns but this is not practical for many folks due to size and cost.

I've tested a handful of woofers for my speaker in a 5 cuft BR cab, JBL 2226 and Acoustic Elegance TD15M for the light paper-cone high efficiency and the AE TD15H and TD15H+ for more modern designs, with the 15H being somewhere in the middle and H+ being the heaviest and stiffest cone with a much larger motor and x-max capability. All have paper cones and none are subwoofer-heavy, the H+ is still under 150g and 94 dB/1W. I have listened to them and measured distortion of some of them. The 2226 and 15M are basically interchangeable, and sound similar. They have a characteristic sound of vintage high efficiency low-excursion, light paper coned woofers, which is on the warm side, fast and articulate but certainly much more distortion and they don't do transients at higher SPLs as well. The H+ is far cleaner sounding and plays at much higher SPLs cleanly as well. The H is in the middle.

Anyways, I've found good results and achieved a seamless integration but I don't use CDs for mids/highs, it's a very light-coned full range 4.5" driver with a low-gain horn that linearizes the driver, which also allows it to cover a lot more range. Efficiency is only about 102 dB as well, not CD level but high enough my 6W SET amp works well.

I do appreciate the qualities of vintage woofers but there are some really good modern ones imho... and personal preference plays a large role too!

That's true of a lot drivers Dave, their sound will change at high SPLs but not always and not all of them, true of paper, ceramic, leather or fiber. I only know the 2226 and it doesn't sound like anything I'm talking about nor is it an easy to drive speaker like vintage woofers it still likes a lot of current to come to life, which it really doesn't. Your challenge is the same as everyone else building highly efficient horn speakers to find a matching bass unit that 6w-20w SETs can properly drive.

david

 

[DaveyF]

Of all the panel speakers I owned I liked Apogee & Soundlab best and I'd go with Soundlab again if I was in the market for a stat today. Maggies were always too colored for my taste but I haven't heard one in years. If you're not married to a SET and are good with ss amplification there are dozens of very fine dynamic speakers for most budgets and bargains galore on the used market, some are even beautiful works of art like some Estelon and Kharma speakers but the field shrinks radically if you're after easy to drive sensitive speakers. A few weeks ago I put in a pair of Kharma Midi Grand Exquisites with the new F drivers for a friend and if not for my horns I'd probably end with a pair of Kharmas with the F driver. There's a natural ease and liveliness with these Kharmas that I haven't heard in a very long time from dynamic boxes.

david

David, I recently heard a new pair of Maggie 1.7's. They were significantly better than the Maggie's that i remember from the past ( and the one's that I had owned). The tweeter was pretty much SOTA. Very capable of producing the highest notes with aplomb. No ringing, no glare, no beaming and pretty much spot on as to timbre reproduction. While they were a superior sounding speaker to their past brethren, they still had planar issues...but still an impressive speaker. ( particularly for the money).
In fact, the owner of these commented that it would be hard, and maybe impossible, to better them at the price....to which I agree.

 

[the sound of Tao]

The Maggie’s and the Harbeths are gone... I’m down from two to zero sound systems and my lovely dedicated listening space is now a bedroom sigh... am auctioning the house I designed and built back in 1999 and have now joined the ranks of the uninformed masses with only a telly. Have the video below of the listening spaces formerly graced with music but the speakers are packed and a faint memory. The downstairs living space has played host to some great speakers including the Animas which did steal my limbic and my heart... though at least the next space will have room for some horns as well. I’ll miss this house tho, has been a fantastic living space and much music and fun has happened here.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GPh_FXPP7xw

 

[mullard88]

Thanks for the video. It's a cozy and wonderful house to live in.

 

[the sound of Tao]

Thanks Sam,
I managed to luck it with two good spaces for sound in this house... I’m planning the next one but hope I am just as lucky.

 

[Echolane]

I’m chiming in (doesn’t that sound musical LOL) and coming very late to this party but I couldn’t resist because early on someone wondered if there were any females with stereo systems. I am female and I have accumulated 4 stereo systems over many years, a main one in the living room centered around my Quad ESL-63s, another in my TV room featuring Spendor, and two more at the two Windows desktop computers.

I’m in the process of introducing network streamers so they can all play high res music for me. It turns out to be ridiculously expensive to outfit four systems, so we’ll see if I can realize it for all four, but I’m on my way with a Naim Uniti Core planned for the living room though I still have to choose the DAC between the Naim and my tube amp.

I bought my first audio gear in 1973 or 1974 , a real beautiful beast of a stereo receiver at 125W per channel, a Pioneer SX-1050. Those were the days when it was all about watts as I recall. I still have it, used now only as a Phono Stage for another oldie, a Bang & Olufsen Beogram 4004 Turntable. I need to find another home for them one of these days!

The Pioneer was shoved aside sometime in the early 80s I think when I bought my Quad ESL-63 Speakers. I imported them from England along with a Quad Amp and Preamp and at a time when the dollar to the pound was extremely favorable and all three pieces cost me less than the speakers alone would have cost me in the US. So I was on my way. I added the Beogram about that time along wirh a Meridian 508.24 CD Player that I splurged on because absolutely nothing I listened to could come close to the way it sounded to me on my kind of music. (I’m an opera and classical music lover.). The Quad amp and Preamp were eventually sold to make way for a very sweet sounding Audiomat Arpege tube integrated amp and later an Audiomat Prelude Reference MKII tube integrated amp. More recently I put the Beogram to one side in favor of a mid-priced Rega Turntable and Audio Note Phono Stage. The Meridian was reluctantly replaced when I couldn’t find a replacement transport for it by a Triode TRV-CCD5SE CD Player. I think I’m about to make that pricey Triode nearly obsolete by adding streaming capability! When the Naim is finally delivered and the DAC selected I will have to make room in the stereo cabinet, so I will be setting aside an old Magnum Dynalab FM Tuner that I never play and maybe the Nakamichi DR-1 tape deck will go too.



My TV room stereo started up in 1984 with the purchase of a Sony Profeel 25” Monitor. I bought it especially to watch the 84 Olympics because it had such a stunning picture. The separate TV Tuner was a wonderful Luxman product, I think the model number might have been TR7? Anyway it was also a switcher so I could switch between the VHS Player and the Pioneer CLD-99 Laser Disc Player, and later a Rega Planet CD Player. I also bought some really nice sounding Spendor FL-6 floor standing speakers. Voila, a second stereo system was born! Of course that system has evolved considerably. Nothing but the Spendors and the Laser Disc Player are the same. The Sony Profeel was replaced wirh a 52” Sony Bravia and more recently a Vizio 4K 60” TV. The Luxman Tuner/Switcher was replaced with a two channel AV Receiver, the Arcam SR250. I’ve turned off all digital processing that I can and use the analog section whenever possible (no processed surround sound for me!). While the sound is more than decent, it doesn’t equal the seriously wonderful sound my previously displaced Audiomat Arpege is capable of, so the Arpege displaces the Arcam when I listen to my music and opera DVDs. Right now my DVD Player is an OPPO BDP-83SE. The SE stands for Special Edition and it has a special section devoted to analog audio which I wanted for my music listening. I am waiting with both anticipation and nervousness for its replacement, an OPPO UDP-205 with it’s precious to me special analog section. I’ve added my email address to OPPO’s webpage to be notified when they make their last production run. I noticed with elation that they recently changed it from “might” have inventory in June to “will” have inventory in August. I hope so! I’m planning to use the OPPOs ability to speak UPnP to convert this system to accept digital high res music streams. Hopefully, I won’t have to buy a separate network streamer.



Soon the computer age came along and my Windows desktop cried out for decent sound. I bought a used Musical Fidelity A3cr Preamp and an Adcom Amp and wonderful Spendor S3/5 speakers. I’ve just bought a much raved about Audio Alchemy DDP-1 to use as USB DAC external sound card. I might add a network streamer here too if I have to.

Lastly, there is my husband’s Windows desktop computer. It has a nice ASUS Xonar Essence ST sound card, Meridian 551 Integrated Amp and Bowers and Wilkens Solid bookshelf speakers, making it my fourth stereo system.

I do sometimes wish my main living room system had evolved to include the TV and other video necessities. It would’ve been a lot cheaper to have done it that way.

 

[ddk]

Nice system! There must have been a record player or two in your past !

david

I’m chiming in (doesn’t that sound musical LOL) and coming very late to this party but I couldn’t resist because early on someone wondered if there were any females with stereo systems. I am female and I have accumulated 4 stereo systems over many years, a main one in the living room centered around my Quad ESL-63s, another in my TV room featuring Spendor, and two more at the two Windows desktop computers.

I’m in the process of introducing network streamers so they can all play high res music for me. It turns out to be ridiculously expensive to outfit four systems, so we’ll see if I can realize it for all four, but I’m on my way with a Naim Uniti Core planned for the living room though I still have to choose the DAC between the Naim and my tube amp.

I bought my first audio gear in 1973 or 1974 , a real beautiful beast of a stereo receiver at 125W per channel, a Pioneer SX-1050. Those were the days when it was all about watts as I recall. I still have it, used now only as a Phono Stage for another oldie, a Bang & Olufsen Beogram 4004 Turntable. I need to find another home for them one of these days!

The Pioneer was shoved aside sometime in the early 80s I think when I bought my Quad ESL-63 Speakers. I imported them from England along with a Quad Amp and Preamp and at a time when the dollar to the pound was extremely favorable and all three pieces cost me less than the speakers alone would have cost me in the US. So I was on my way. I added the Beogram about that time along wirh a Meridian 508.24 CD Player that I splurged on because absolutely nothing I listened to could come close to the way it sounded to me on my kind of music. (I’m an opera and classical music lover.). The Quad amp and Preamp were eventually sold to make way for a very sweet sounding Audiomat Arpege tube integrated amp and later an Audiomat Prelude Reference MKII tube integrated amp. More recently I put the Beogram to one side in favor of a mid-priced Rega Turntable and Audio Note Phono Stage. The Meridian was reluctantly replaced when I couldn’t find a replacement transport for it by a Triode TRV-CCD5SE CD Player. I think I’m about to make that pricey Triode nearly obsolete by adding streaming capability! When the Naim is finally delivered and the DAC selected I will have to make room in the stereo cabinet, so I will be setting aside an old Magnum Dynalab FM Tuner that I never play and maybe the Nakamichi DR-1 tape deck will go too.

View attachment 41556

My TV room stereo started up in 1984 with the purchase of a Sony Profeel 25” Monitor. I bought it especially to watch the 84 Olympics because it had such a stunning picture. The separate TV Tuner was a wonderful Luxman product, I think the model number might have been TR7? Anyway it was also a switcher so I could switch between the VHS Player and the Pioneer CLD-99 Laser Disc Player, and later a Rega Planet CD Player. I also bought some really nice sounding Spendor FL-6 floor standing speakers. Voila, a second stereo system was born! Of course that system has evolved considerably. Nothing but the Spendors and the Laser Disc Player are the same. The Sony Profeel was replaced wirh a 52” Sony Bravia and more recently a Vizio 4K 60” TV. The Luxman Tuner/Switcher was replaced with a two channel AV Receiver, the Arcam SR250. While the sound is more than decent, it doesn’t equal the seriously wonderful sound my previously displaced Audiomat Arpege is capable of, so the Arpege displaces the Arcam when I listen to my music and opera DVDs. Right now my DVD Player is an OPPO BDP-83SE. The SE stands for Special Edition and it has a special section devoted to analog audio which I wanted for my music listening. No digitally processed surround sound music for me! I am waiting with both anticipation and nervousness for its replacement, an OPPO UDP-205 with it’s precious to me special analog section. I’ve added my email address to OPPO’s webpage to be notified when they make their last production run. I noticed with elation that they recently changed it from “might” have inventory in June to “will” have inventory in August. I hope so! I’m planning to use the OPPOs ability to speak UPnP to convert this system to accept digital high res music streams. Hopefully, I won’t have to buy a separate network streamer.

View attachment 41557

Soon the computer age came along and my Windows desktop cried out for decent sound. I bought a used Musical Fidelity A3cr Preamp and an Adcom Amp and wonderful Spendor S3/5 speakers. I’ve just bought a much raved about Audio Alchemy DDP-1 to use as USB DAC external sound card. I might add a network streamer here too if I have to.

Lastly, there is my husband’s Windows desktop computer. It has a nice ASUS Xonar Essence ST sound card, Meridian 551 Integrated Amp and Bowers and Wilkens Solid bookshelf speakers, making it my fourth stereo system.

I do sometimes wish my main living room system had evolved to include the TV and other video necessities. It would’ve been a lot cheaper to have done it that way.

 

[DaveyF]

Echolane, your systems are integrated into their surroundings so that in no way do they intrude on the space. ...That is something that I wish more of us could accomplish, including myself. Looks great!