Which of these upgrades should I make to my system?

[Hipper]

I put Symposium Svelte platforms under my speakers and they gave real benefits.

 

Effectively they reduce the noise floor so increasing clarity. Things like rhythm guitar and piano came more to for. It's the sort of improvement that speaker positioning, room treatment etc. cannot bring.

 

However, I highly recommend you investigate speaker/ear positioning and room treatment before anything else.

 

Probably your best investment would be the book 'Get Better Sound' by Jim Smith:

 

Get Better Sound - Get Better Sound

 

(Who the f... designed this word 'rhythm'? It p...s me off every time I have to write it!)

[Jud]

Elsdude and jwtrace,

 

Well I guess we are going to have to "agree to disagree" on this.

 

The fact that the OP hears a clear difference between USB cables means that the OP will benefit from the REGEN/Corning combination. The impact is not subtle and the benefits are far beyond what I would label a tweak. If the the OP is looking for the biggest SQ benefit for the buck, it is hard to think of better value per dollar. The reproduction chain is only as good as it's weakest link. The standard USB cable is that weak link. An investment in the REGEN/Corning cable combination strengthens that link in a way that will impact both a $300 USB DAC and DACs costing 10 to 20 times more. I have tried this solution on both. Reports of these benefits have been confirmed many times by some of the most qualified people on CA.

 

If you haven't tried it yourself, you should. For a total cost of $300 this solution delivers terrific bang for the buck, and the investment will continue to deliver as adjacent components are upgraded in the future.

 

Hi, lmitche. As you know, both jtwrace and I own and like the Regen. I'm about to take delivery of a Corning cable (got it used for $85). But is this combo the best way for the OP to use $200-$300 to improve his system? Will it make a bigger difference than better speakers or a new and better DAC?

 

Different situations I think call for different solutions. With apologies to mistersprinkles, I think new speakers first, then possibly new DAC when he has the budget, leads to a better outcome in his specific system than tweaks, even tweaks I like.

[jabbr]

It is due to the limited budget I suggest one be very careful to invest resources into things certain to make a difference. The Regen is a tweak. At this point as jtwrace has said, tweaks are not your best bang for the buck.

 

It actually pains me that such has become a common event. Someone with a rudimentary system gets the idea these esoteric tweaks are worth spending money on for the 'big improvement'. That this is the path for fixing rather mundane issues. Maybe some mercy with the tweakery and hyperbole related to it is in order. Sorry to be so humorless about it, but I see it as a very real problem in computer audio.

 

How many devices and connections are you guys going to end up with to replace the simple act of connecting a computer via USB to a DAC? It has become an entire realm of equipment to do this simple thing. If the stuff works half as well as it gets talked about I expect to see a big obvious improvement in the analog output of the DAC so 'seriously' connected. Won't hold my breath on that one though.

 

+1

 

In my case, when I've turned the gain up on my headphone amp I can hear various types of hum when various things are connected to the system or turned on e.g. plasma TV. This is without any music playing. I then do various things to minimize this background noise/hum. I was getting a noticeable hum as soon as I connected the USB cable. The regen, for example, didn't fix that but the Corning optical cable eliminated it. Good evidence that this is some type of ground loop or noise transmitted through the ground.

In some cases good engineering is tweaking, but tweaking to reduce noise and eliminate ground loops is not esoteric.

[esldude]

Elsdude and jwtrace,

 

Well I guess we are going to have to "agree to disagree" on this.

 

The fact that the OP hears a clear difference between USB cables means that the OP will benefit from the REGEN/Corning combination. The impact is not subtle and the benefits are far beyond what I would label a tweak. If the the OP is looking for the biggest SQ benefit for the buck, it is hard to think of better value per dollar. The reproduction chain is only as good as it's weakest link. The standard USB cable is that weak link. An investment in the REGEN/Corning cable combination strengthens that link in a way that will impact both a $300 USB DAC and DACs costing 10 to 20 times more. I have tried this solution on both. Reports of these benefits have been confirmed many times by some of the most qualified people on CA.

 

If you haven't tried it yourself, you should. For a total cost of $300 this solution delivers terrific bang for the buck, and the investment will continue to deliver as adjacent components are upgraded in the future.

 

No problem disagreeing on this. If you think a USB tweak of $300 is the best bang for the buck on a $250 DAC, then we don't agree.

 

I would ask for a list of your dates so I can catch you when you are at the Comedy club in my town though. :)

[mistersprinkles]

Most of what you guys are talking about goes way over my head...

 

I bought Auralex Mopads today to isolate the monitors. Massive improvement.

[Hierge]

Most of what you guys are talking about goes way over my head...

 

I bought Auralex Mopads today to isolate the monitors. Massive improvement.

 

I never heard of this until you mentioned it. Can you please discuss your decision to buy these, why you bought this particular brand, and can you describe the massive improvement you hear...

[mistersprinkles]

I never heard of this until you mentioned it. Can you please discuss your decision to buy these, why you bought this particular brand, and can you describe the massive improvement you hear...

 

It's just high density foam padding about 2.5" thick that "decouples" the speakers from the desk. Bass doesn't annoyingly resonate any more and is much cleaner. So are some midrange frequencies. My table used to vibrate a lot from the speakers but now it doesn't.

 

There are a lot of brands of this foam insulation. I bought cheap ones. You can find all sorts of them on amazon. I think they are more for near field listening than they are for actual audiophile use.

[Hierge]

It's just high density foam padding about 2.5" thick that "decouples" the speakers from the desk. Bass doesn't annoyingly resonate any more and is much cleaner. So are some midrange frequencies. My table used to vibrate a lot from the speakers but now it doesn't.

 

There are a lot of brands of this foam insulation. I bought cheap ones. You can find all sorts of them on amazon. I think they are more for near field listening than they are for actual audiophile use.

 

Thanks, you sold me. I don't want to spend more than twenty bucks. I found a bunch on Ebay in that price range. There are cables that go with the ones you ordered. What is that all about?

[Shadorne]

Speaker isolation pads can provide a genuine benefit.

 

I know it isn't popular, but the POS cables you have now work just as well as any others suggested. Ditto for USB.

 

Yup. +1

Wise advice.

A piece of wire is the least important part of your setup. If your equipment is half decent and well matched then bits of wire are the least of your concerns. Engineers design equipment to play music and the affects of wires between components are deliberately minimized by design to have as little impact as possible. If a manufacturer tells you that you need special wires then you should return that advice with a question as to why the manufacturer didn't make the equipment more robust and accurate to the source instead of the wires running between components...

[lmitche]

No problem disagreeing on this. If you think a USB tweak of $300 is the best bang for the buck on a $250 DAC, then we don't agree.

 

I would ask for a list of your dates so I can catch you when you are at the Comedy club in my town though. :)

 

When investing in upgrades, my bias is to start upgrades at the source end of the chain, keeping in mind that garbage-in is garbage-out.

 

Recently, I auditioned the Corning cable ($109) running with a wall wart powered Cambridge Audio DacMagic 100 ($250). The combination gave my Auralic Vega $3500 a run for the money on SQ. It was embarrassing. A smaller feature set for sure, but the SQ was great.

 

Add the REGEN and you will get another boost in sound quality.

 

I know nothing about the ARCAM rPAC USBDAC, or it's chipset (Burr-Brown PCM5102) but my experience leads me to expect that it too would benefit from this approach.

[esldude]

When investing in upgrades, my bias is to start upgrades at the source end of the chain, keeping in mind that garbage-in is garbage-out.

 

Recently, I auditioned the Corning cable ($109) running with a wall wart powered Cambridge Audio DacMagic 100 ($250). The combination gave my Auralic Vega $3500 a run for the money on SQ. It was embarrassing. A smaller feature set for sure, but the SQ was great.

 

Add the REGEN and you will get another boost in sound quality.

 

I know nothing about the ARCAM rPAC USBDAC, or it's chipset (Burr-Brown PCM5102) but my experience leads me to expect that it too would benefit from this approach.

 

Reading your experience makes me think you might wish to rethink the upgrade from source end philosophy. By your experience $359 makes for a contender vs a $3500 front end. Sounds like the extra $3k+ resulted in small improvements. That mirrors what I hear from current gear. Getting over a threshold to good quality happens at a low price level these days. Somewhere around $2-300. While it won't equal more expensive gear it certainly is nothing one would call garbage in.

 

Now find the $359 speakers that can give you second thoughts versus widely well regarded $3500 speakers. Things are good at the lower end these days. Better than ever. The shame is one can easily get the idea the reverse is the case. Speakers remain a bottleneck to the extent one can scrimp pretty hard on everything other than speakers and the amps needed to make the speakers happy.

 

Notice I am not saying upgrades to the source make no difference. Only that the difference is far less than money spent on speakers. I think this remains the case with systems costing well into the 5 figure range. Over a decade ago at the CES Wilson Audio played their Sophia speakers using a $1k amp and Ipod source hidden behind expensive gear not actually being used. No one complained of poor sound quality from them.

[Jud]

Over a decade ago at the CES Wilson Audio played their Sophia speakers using a $1k amp and Ipod source hidden behind expensive gear not actually being used. No one complained of poor sound quality from them.

 

*That's* why I never liked the sound of Wilsons!

[tranz]

*That's* why I never liked the sound of Wilsons!

 

It still is shocking how often something similar happens these days. Went to a show with >100K setup with Magico speakers, gold dust cables, etc. Sounded like shit, why? They had hooked up an off-the-shelf mac mini via USB as the source. Such a waste of good equipment.

[Shadorne]

I know that's not true, at least of analog cables. I noticed a HUGE difference between the 3 cables I used with my old system.

 

If enough people call it a duck, its a duck. Cables are definitely a duck.

 

 

Something wrong with your setup or equipment selection if you hear HUGE differences with analog cables. Don't blame bits of wire for poor equipment performance as wire should not make audible differences if equipment and setup is good.

[esldude]

*That's* why I never liked the sound of Wilsons!

 

So reading between the lines, you have only heard Wilsons with expensive amps. Not realizing all along that is what was ruining the sound.

 

Now I have heard Wilsons sound both wonderful, and horrid. A lot depends on setup.

[esldude]

It still is shocking how often something similar happens these days. Went to a show with >100K setup with Magico speakers, gold dust cables, etc. Sounded like shit, why? They had hooked up an off-the-shelf mac mini via USB as the source. Such a waste of good equipment.

 

Yeah, if only they had an iPod on hand instead.

[Paul R]

Reading your experience makes me think you might wish to rethink the upgrade from source end philosophy. By your experience $359 makes for a contender vs a $3500 front end. Sounds like the extra $3k+ resulted in small improvements. That mirrors what I hear from current gear. Getting over a threshold to good quality happens at a low price level these days. Somewhere around $2-300. While it won't equal more expensive gear it certainly is nothing one would call garbage in.

 

Now find the $359 speakers that can give you second thoughts versus widely well regarded $3500 speakers. Things are good at the lower end these days. Better than ever. The shame is one can easily get the idea the reverse is the case. Speakers remain a bottleneck to the extent one can scrimp pretty hard on everything other than speakers and the amps needed to make the speakers happy.

 

Notice I am not saying upgrades to the source make no difference. Only that the difference is far less than money spent on speakers. I think this remains the case with systems costing well into the 5 figure range. Over a decade ago at the CES Wilson Audio played their Sophia speakers using a $1k amp and Ipod source hidden behind expensive gear not actually being used. No one complained of poor sound quality from them.

 

I pretty much agree, excepting too much concentration on the speakers results in ulcers. Part of the problem is the "higher end" the speaker, the *more* unique it's sound. And often it seems, the more sensitive the beastie is to the subtle differences in upstream gear. Now take a good old solid pair of Advents, and while it has a few sins, they are pretty much all of omission. They also image magnificently, and don't get up on their high horses if you use a $1000 amp vice a $10K one. That makes it much easier to judge upstream equipment, because you are hearing more of the effect of the upstream equipment and less of the speaker's reaction to it.

 

Maggie's are the same way, only much more so. They open up with enough power (okay, current supply really...) but they don't sound fundamentally different with different equipment. Consequently, it is easy peasy to hear the subtle differences in upstream equipment. The speaker sounds the same, so other differences are audible.

 

Some speakers are just too finicky for my taste. I love the sound of PSB Synchrony speakers; but compared to the Maggies or Advents, they need special care and feeding.

 

-Paul

[Hierge]

It's just high density foam padding about 2.5" thick that "decouples" the speakers from the desk. Bass doesn't annoyingly resonate any more and is much cleaner. So are some midrange frequencies. My table used to vibrate a lot from the speakers but now it doesn't.

 

There are a lot of brands of this foam insulation. I bought cheap ones. You can find all sorts of them on amazon. I think they are more for near field listening than they are for actual audiophile use.

 

Thank you for the response. I don't listen to my office system at higher volumes so perhaps I will hold off or get some cheapos to try it out. I have PSB Alphas which aren't as good as your speakers, but I'm doing the same thing asking opinions on monitors before I jump in. You are really smart to do this.

[Hierge]

Something wrong with your setup or equipment selection if you hear HUGE differences with analog cables. Don't blame bits of wire for poor equipment performance as wire should not make audible differences if equipment and setup is good.

 

I echo this on analog cables including speaker wire. Double blind tests prove that nobody can hear the difference between lamp cord and ten thousand dollar cables. I'm using a hideous thirty foot RCA cable now on my work system and will be replacing it soon when I dig out a buried box with better interconnects. Still, I bet that I won't hear a difference. The USB cable shouldn't be audible, but it most defintely is. It can make or break a DAC in my brief and humble experience. The trick is isolating the things that will make a real difference.

 

Devil's advocate talking against all the tweaks, please search and read up on audio myths and double blind testing. It's the only way to not get tangled up in the mess. Speaker placement, room treatment, percent of budget on speakers, headphone quality, USB cables, DAC... these are all real. Double blind tests prove amps make little if any difference in sound and all analog cables. There is a great article on this where Tom Nausiane from a major audio magazine turned the world its head with his double blind test. He made two systems one with the most expensive components available and put it up against a crap system with wires hanging out and lamp cord for speaker wire. Same speakers and transport. Nobody could tell the difference in a statistically significant manner.

 

People will swear on their grandmother's grave that certain things make a difference. Do your research and only believe double blind tests. Paul Barton from PSB and NAD does this. It's why he's on the audio panels with Gordon Rankin and other people. He's kind of a dry personality engineer guy, but you can take his word to the bank.

[Hierge]

Here's a link to a thread on Double Blind Tests. This is essential knowledge for any Computer Audiophile.

 

Are blind tests bogus? Examples of blind tests with positive results.

[Richard Dale]

I echo this on analog cables including speaker wire. Double blind tests prove that nobody can hear the difference between lamp cord and ten thousand dollar cables. I'm using a hideous thirty foot RCA cable now on my work system and will be replacing it soon when I dig out a buried box with better interconnects. Still, I bet that I won't hear a difference. The USB cable shouldn't be audible, but it most defintely is. It can make or break a DAC in my brief and humble experience. The trick is isolating the things that will make a real difference.

 

Devil's advocate talking against all the tweaks, please search and read up on audio myths and double blind testing. It's the only way to not get tangled up in the mess. Speaker placement, room treatment, percent of budget on speakers, headphone quality, USB cables, DAC... these are all real. Double blind tests prove amps make little if any difference in sound and all analog cables. There is a great article on this where Tom Nausiane from a major audio magazine turned the world its head with his double blind test. He made two systems one with the most expensive components available and put it up against a crap system with wires hanging out and lamp cord for speaker wire. Same speakers and transport. Nobody could tell the difference in a statistically significant manner.

 

People will swear on their grandmother's grave that certain things make a difference. Do your research and only believe double blind tests. Paul Barton from PSB and NAD does this. It's why he's on the audio panels with Gordon Rankin and other people. He's kind of a dry personality engineer guy, but you can take his word to the bank.

 

I thought you recently introduced yourself as some kind a 'HiFi Beginner' on this forum. But why are you now giving out (highly contentious) advice as though your are some kind of 'expert' ? Do you have any practical experience of listening to cables which are better than lamp cords, as opposed to just reading about what random people have posted on the internet?

[Hierge]

I thought you recently introduced yourself as some kind a 'HiFi Beginner' on this forum. But why are you now giving out (highly contentious) advice as though your are some kind of 'expert' ? Do you have any practical experience of listening to cables which are better than lamp cords, as opposed to just reading about what random people have posted on the internet?

 

I never represented myself as a HiFi Beginner as you state. I said I am new to Computer Audio which is something different. I started working for Myer-Emco the famous audio store in Washington DC in 1977 when I was in high school. By the contentious tone you are using, I'm sure you have little interest in my journey and sound a little defensive. I've read a lot on this. The basis for the lamp cord in my comments is well discussed territory and is not really contentious unless you are a purveyor of non double blind tests. I base the lamp cord on the following article from 1998 from Stereo Review. Argue with someone else if that's what your deal is. http://www.nousaine.com/pdfs/To%20Tweak%20or%20Not.pdf

[Daudio]

I have no idea what you're talking about. Why would I want acoustic dampening foam under a USB cable? I want these things for under my speakers.

 

Esldude doesn't believe in the audibility of cables and other audio tweaks mentioned here and elsewhere, so he is making fun of them.

 

Don't listen to him.

 

Also, take what other people are suggesting with a healthy grain of salt. I still think that you may not hear as much of a 'sound quality' (SQ) improvement as they do, with audio systems that have been refined over time, and you just starting out. They get excited about the latest 'hot' box, or tweak, and forget that you are just getting on board this train and may have a ways to travel yet, before catching up to where they are at now.

 

Try out the Subra USB cable and see what you hear (or don't), Get a feel for what works for you before jumping off into any expensive audio additions. There is a lot to learn about computer audio, and this site is great for that, but I would suggest that you rely less on Q&A's in the CA Forums, and more on doing some 'homework' in the 'CA Academy', C.A.P.S.* (from CA 'Home' link), and the great Well Tempered Computer site !

 

* As a PC hardware geek, you should be very intrigued, if not blown-away, with Chris Connecker's CAPS audio computer designs. Go check them out immediately (if not already done so).

 

Have fun !

[Hierge]

Testing audiophile claims and myths

 

2 - Effects of Cable, Loudspeaker and amplifier interactions, an engineering paper from 1991.

 

AES E-Library » Effects of Cable, Loudspeaker, and Amplifier Interactions

 

Twelve cables are tested from Levinson to Kimber and including car jump leads and lamp cable, from $2 to $419 per metre. The results are based on the theory that loudspeaker cable should transmit all frequencies, unscathed to any speaker from any amplifier and loss is due to resistance. There is an assumption that letting through more frequencies with less distortion will sound better. But that seems reasonable to me.

 

 

The best performance was with multi core cables. The car jump leads did not do well and cable intended for digital transmission did! The most expensive cable does not get a mention in the conclusions, but the cheapest is praised for its performance and Kimber does well. Sadly there is not a definitive list of the cost of the cables and their performance, so it is not clear as to whether cost equals performance, but the suggestion is that construction equals performance.

[Daudio]

Here's a link to a thread on Double Blind Tests. This is essential knowledge for any Computer Audiophile

 

Hierge,

 

Please, please, do not continue arguing about DBT's here. They have been discussed ad nausuem, till the cows come home, and then disgustingly, even more. They have been the cause of a number of members being banned, and of countless threads going down the toilet

 

Some people here believe in DBT's explicity. Some think they are OK when done by pro's. Some don't care for them at all. We pretty much know who thinks what, and nobody is going to change anyones mind from arguing in this thread. So, continued discussion can only come to grief

 

If you feel you must discuss them, start your own thread, but his one is about a totally different subject. OK ?

 

Thanks for your cooperation.