mgoldin

Bernard- Many thanks for your comprehensive comments about the sonics of the Devialet amplifier. If I purchase the Devialet amplifer, I would be setting it up similar to you, i.e. Mac Mini to Weiss Int 202 to Devialet. Could you detail how your setup would change if you utilize the Devialet's wi-fi capability? mgoldin

In revamping my system, I have become interested in the Devialtet amplifier because of its breakthrough Class A/Class D hybrid technology and my objective of reducing the number of 'boxes' and cables from my former 'separates' system towards this integrated preamp/amp/dac. Naturally, I do not wish to compromise on the sonics. In going through the threads on the Devialet amplifier, I have seen a lot of discussion on its technology but, unless I missed it, I have not read about its sonics from users who own one or from others who have auditioned it in an extended listening session. There are two dealers in my area who will be getting the Devialet amplifier in a few weeks so I will have an opportunity to make a decision with my own ears. However I would appreciate hearing from anyone, pro or con, who has extended experience with the sonics of this amp.

Thanks ferenc for the reply. The Devialet is on my short list to audition and your comment agreed with my impression that this is a very flexible integrated amp.

"think it will not have many users due to the price and the lack of flexibility for PC usage." Can you explain your comment on the Devialet's lack of flexibility for PC usage. Their website suggests using a Weiss Int-202 as the interface between a computer-based feed and the Devialet.

Paul- You did have useful comments, which I thank you for but I want to clarify my question. I am going to assume that the third party software discussed extensively in CA for Mac-based music servers do add to the sound quality. When I read the literature of some of the self-contained music servers, say Olive or Senore, I believe they are Linux-based and they do not identify what playback software they are using. I read from your comments that all servers will have to have playback software and, if they do their job correctly, they have the potential to sound as good as those which install the well-known third party software. Only a trial listen will tell.

This is kind of a newbie question so I may not have my facts completely accurate. Mac-based music servers using playback software such as Amarra or Pure Music have been praised on these pages for their sound quality. However, non-Mac based servers, say Linux-based, such as Sonore or the recently released Aurrender do not use such specialized playback software but they also seem to elicit praise for their sound quality. So the questions in my mind are what does Amarra/Pure Music add to the sound quality? Is their sound quality better than those designs which do not use it? How do the music servers which do not use this specialized playback software compare in sound quality to the Mac-based servers which do use them?

Good advice from those who replied. Thank you.

A person well versed in system setup has said that wireless routers contribute to noise pollution, if they are near your audio equipment, and should be turned off for critical listening. Any comments on this opinion?

Thank you for your thoughts.

I am in the process of putting together a computer-based 2-channel system, which I hope will be as good or better than the traditional analog system I've had for decades. When I look at the equipment profiles of subscribers to this site, I see an equal number of members who use a Mac mini/cable/external hard drive and an equal number of members who use a Macbook or Macbook Pro. I am looking for some comments on whether this choice is dictated by economics or sonic quality or convenience or neatness (i.e. Macbook/Macbook Pro not needing a connecting cable and external hard drive). mgoldin