Please review my first HiFi setup

[Buckchester]

I would cross everything off your list and start saving for a sovereign. Even the Guinness Book of Records already wrote "…Music in live quality..."

Like for reals, get a load of THIS:

To vividly describe the size of the power supply unit and the amount of energy stored in the capacitors of our THE SOVEREIGN amplifier many writers have tried comparisons such as: "If one would set free the energy stored in the capacitors at once it would be the equivalent of about 1 kg TNT explosives". Or: "One single simple plate capacitor of this capacity needed to have an overall surface in which one could wrap the planet earth like a Mozart ball."

THE SOVEREIGN ® The ultimate monaural High End power amplifiers, in twin tower design

Ultra high precision and high power monaural power amplifiers. THE SOVEREIGN ® The best High End mono power amplifier twin towers. Ultimate Precision from Germany with no equals. Absolute State of the art technology by Thomas and Marita Hoehne. Elze, Germany

www.sovereign-amplifiers.com

 

[rdenney]

The only thing I see missing is tuning the system to your listening environment, which entails some or all of: moving that sub around, moving the speakers around, blocking some unfavorable reflections, and equalizing the system to 1.) flatten the on-axis response of the speakers (based on anechoic data--and which may not be needed) and 2.) helping with resonant room modes (though that's mostly about moving the sub around and treating the walls).

That's the only problem I see--that Yamaha integrated amp does not provide an easy way to adjust equalization. Probably you can make a lot of that work by moving the sub around. The measurement tool for that is Room Equalization Wizard (Windows software--free), a calibrated mic, and a laptop. An upgrade amp would have a processor loop of some type, or use a separate preamp that has a processor loop or integrated parametric equalization.

Rick "But this will likely sound good even without that additional capability" Denney

 

[Steven Holt]

Your system is surpurb, I wish I had done as well on my first system. Over time, you may want to make a few upgrades BUT DON'T BE IN A HURRY. What I would do (this is just me, keep in mind) replace the Q1's with the LS50's and -- it breaks my heart to say this, I love Yamaha -- replace the 501 with the WiiM Ultra. This will not give you better SQ but will give you better features, EQ, inputs/outputs, ect.....Again, congrats on an excellent system your first try.

 

[napfkuchen]

Nice setup I have so say.
Since you surely want to save some money (if possible), why not go for the Sennheiser HD560S headphones? 130 Euro new, maybe cheaper used or refurbished (check the official sennheiser store regularly for discounts) ... They adhere quite closely to the Harman Target, take EQ well, and are relatively undemanding in terms of amplifier power. I use them for PC gaming and also like them for their light weight and comfortable fit (open design).

Yep, and @Steven Holt 's proposal.
Have several pairs of them in use, even nearly mint-condition examples can be had for around 600-700 euros per pair. Combined with subwoofer support, they are a very good choice, provided you don't have a huge room to fill with sound.

 

[MaxxC]

It's getting "rave reviews" because people fall for the marketing hype word R2R. There is no inherent audible difference between Delta Sigma (DS) and R2R DACs. Even the best R2R designs are technically inferior to most good DS DACs, but that distinction is only about the measured performance - not audible differences.

The main point is that many R2R DACs also offer a NOS mode, which most DS DACs don't do. There is a multitude of good reasons not to use NOS, it is a broken operating mode and results in bad non-reconstruction of the original audio, unless you upsample the signal correctly in your source before sending it to the DAC. NOS mode when used incorrectly with non-upsampled 44.1 or 48 kHz material will result in a treble roll-off which is likely audible and might be pleasing to some people. It inherently also comes with copious amounts of ultrasonic noise and, as mentioned, does not faithfully reconstruct the original audio signal, though. Therefoere, I would never recommend to use NOS mode outside of some edge cases like scientific lab experiments where actual square waves are the desired signal.

I use R2R with NOS mode on.

I don’t want oversampling and digital filtration like Sigma Deltas Over sampling is basically the computer

It's getting "rave reviews" because people fall for the marketing hype word R2R. There is no inherent audible difference between Delta Sigma (DS) and R2R DACs. Even the best R2R designs are technically inferior to most good DS DACs, but that distinction is only about the measured performance - not audible differences.

The main point is that many R2R DACs also offer a NOS mode, which most DS DACs don't do. There is a multitude of good reasons not to use NOS, it is a broken operating mode and results in bad non-reconstruction of the original audio, unless you upsample the signal correctly in your source before sending it to the DAC. NOS mode when used incorrectly with non-upsampled 44.1 or 48 kHz material will result in a treble roll-off which is likely audible and might be pleasing to some people. It inherently also comes with copious amounts of ultrasonic noise and, as mentioned, does not faithfully reconstruct the original audio signal, though. Therefoere, I would never recommend to use NOS mode outside of some edge cases like scientific lab experiments where actual square waves are the desired signal.

I use an R2R Dac with NOS turned on. Last count I have a Peachtree Audio DacIt X. A Bifrost, Musical Paradise Tube, Gustard X26 Pro and a Gustard R26.

Sigma Deltas are very complex and and it takes a lot of work to get them to sound right

Oversampling is the primary culprit. It looks ahead to anticipate then tries to digitally correct or simply stated it shapes and alters the sound trying to correct it. It’s similar to Autotune.

Sigma Deltas were not embraced because they sounded good They were embraced because you could make a dirt cheap CD player or Dac. Manufactures ate it up. Case in point you can get a Sigma Delta DAC for under $50. The Fiio at $319 is the cheapest R2R on the market.

People are Embracing and going back to R2R because it sounds a lot like vinyl Warm, Relaxed, natural tone Sigs tend to sound a little cooler on the more analytical side.

I will concede this. Sigs have their advantages. The claims are they are cleaner, have more detail , resolution and are more dynamic. Not by much but it’s there Mostly true of well designed higher quality models But that does not offset the cooler, more analytical, brighter sound of Sigma Deltas.

To each their own. Live and let live.

 

[MaxxC]

Actually, this is completely believable since a normal copper wire of short (say less than 200 feet) length is totally capable of handling all audio signals with no distortion. So the expected result is not hearing any difference. What's actually a bit surprising is your friend didn't get caught up in cognitive biases based on price - it happens a lot.

For $40 you can get a copper wire with really nice connectors and everything, but that still sounds a little pricey to me.

Audiophiles is just a label to paint some one as snobby or a know it all. Jealously IMO. It’s more like an Audio Enthusiast They love and audio gear. Like some people love cars. Some want to tinker with them or make them faster.

I don’t see Audiophiles being the problem on forums generally. Mostly seems to be Newbies, wet behind the ears looking for a fight. 20 years ago some of the behavior on forums now would have been unheard of.

Most Audiophiles. I’ve seen on forums are eager to help the newer ones. You won’t get a comment like I wouldn’t let my Dog listen to those speakers. But there are some who are just complete jerks. Like some clown saying you have to spend at least 50k to have a “descent” system. I bet he has a lot of friends

Personally I don’t care about the price. What ever gets the job done for the least amount of money.

 

[Buckchester]

I use R2R with NOS mode on.

I don’t want oversampling and digital filtration like Sigma Deltas Over sampling is basically the computer

I use an R2R Dac with NOS turned on. Last count I have a Peachtree Audio DacIt X. A Bifrost, Musical Paradise Tube, Gustard X26 Pro and a Gustard R26.

Sigma Deltas are very complex and and it takes a lot of work to get them to sound right

Oversampling is the primary culprit. It looks ahead to anticipate then tries to digitally correct or simply stated it shapes and alters the sound trying to correct it. It’s similar to Autotune.

Sigma Deltas were not embraced because they sounded good They were embraced because you could make a dirt cheap CD player or Dac. Manufactures ate it up. Case in point you can get a Sigma Delta DAC for under $50. The Fiio at $319 is the cheapest R2R on the market.

People are Embracing and going back to R2R because it sounds a lot like vinyl Warm, Relaxed, natural tone Sigs tend to sound a little cooler on the more analytical side.

I will concede this. Sigs have their advantages. The claims are they are cleaner, have more detail , resolution and are more dynamic. Not by much but it’s there Mostly true of well designed higher quality models But that does not offset the cooler, more analytical, brighter sound of Sigma Deltas.

To each their own. Live and let live.

Have you tried a sovereign? In your set-up I truly believe it would be like an episode of placebos gone wild!

 

[kemmler3D]

Personally I don’t care about the price. What ever gets the job done for the least amount of money.

+1

 

[RandomEar]

I use R2R with NOS mode on.

I don’t want oversampling and digital filtration like Sigma Deltas Over sampling is basically the computer

You should look into that. Oversampling and the right reconstruction filter are the absolute best way to ensure a faithful reconstruction of the original signal. There is nothing "computery" or bad about oversampling or the filters. On the contrary, they are the best solution from an engineering point of view, by far.

I use an R2R Dac with NOS turned on. Last count I have a Peachtree Audio DacIt X. A Bifrost, Musical Paradise Tube, Gustard X26 Pro and a Gustard R26.

Sigma Deltas are very complex and and it takes a lot of work to get them to sound right

Both DAC topologies use pretty simple basic methods, but both require complex implementations to deliver the best results. R2R is not inherently simpler or even better.

Oversampling is the primary culprit. It looks ahead to anticipate then tries to digitally correct or simply stated it shapes and alters the sound trying to correct it. It’s similar to Autotune.

It absolutely isn't. You should read the post I linked above to get a better understanding of what oversampling and filtering are and why they are necessary and good for a faithful reconstruction of our music signals.

Sigma Deltas were not embraced because they sounded good They were embraced because you could make a dirt cheap CD player or Dac. Manufactures ate it up. Case in point you can get a Sigma Delta DAC for under $50. The Fiio at $319 is the cheapest R2R on the market.

R2R is a niche technology because it performs worse. Products using niche technologies are always more expensive due to the lacking economies of scale. There is also no audible advantage in spending more money - especially in this case, because you spend more money for a product which performs objectively worse (R2R).

This audiophile dream that more expensive things must sound better really has to die. It's nonsense.

People are Embracing and going back to R2R because it sounds a lot like vinyl Warm, Relaxed, natural tone Sigs tend to sound a little cooler on the more analytical side.

I will concede this. Sigs have their advantages. The claims are they are cleaner, have more detail , resolution and are more dynamic. Not by much but it’s there Mostly true of well designed higher quality models But that does not offset the cooler, more analytical, brighter sound of Sigma Deltas.

To each their own. Live and let live.

Again: There is zero audible difference between competently designed R2R and DS DACs using the same filter setting. Only using the broken NOS mode of some DACs can lead to slight differences in the treble.

Unless you tested with the absolute minimum amount of controls (precisely level-matched & blind), all you'll hear is bias. Ears are not precise instruments and hearing is neither reliable nor deterministic. If you rely on sighted, uncontrolled tests to distinguish DAC "sounds", you will never get reliable results. Ever.

 

[MaxxC]

You should look into that. Oversampling and the right reconstruction filter are the absolute best way to ensure a faithful reconstruction of the original signal. There is nothing "computery" or bad about oversampling or the filters. On the contrary, they are the best solution from an engineering point of view, by far.


Both DAC topologies use pretty simple basic methods, but both require complex implementations to deliver the best results. R2R is not inherently simpler or even better.


It absolutely isn't. You should read the post I linked above to get a better understanding of what oversampling and filtering are and why they are necessary and good for a faithful reconstruction of our music signals.


R2R is a niche technology because it performs worse. Products using niche technologies are always more expensive due to the lacking economies of scale. There is also no audible advantage in spending more money - especially in this case, because you spend more money for a product which performs objectively worse (R2R).

This audiophile dream that more expensive things must sound better really has to die. It's nonsense.


Again: There is zero audible difference between competently designed R2R and DS DACs using the same filter setting. Only using the broken NOS mode of some DACs can lead to slight differences in the treble.

Unless you tested with the absolute minimum amount of controls (precisely level-matched & blind), all you'll hear is bias. Ears are not precise instruments and hearing is neither reliable nor deterministic. If you rely on sighted, uncontrolled tests to distinguish DAC "sounds", you will never get reliable

 

[Steven Holt]

I wouldn’t let my Dog listen to those speakers.

Where I live, making your dog listen to the Zu Audio Dirty Weekend's is a third degree misdemeanor

 

[davidc]

Your setup looks good except for I would make one change. That in my opinion is absolutely essential and is the most important consideration of all. You need to use an amplifier or AVR that has room compensation. Meaning it needs to have either Audyssey or Dirac. I have been an audiophile since I was 12 years old and an indirect audio file since the early '60s via my father. In my opinion, the absolute most important change that has ever occurred in this hobby is loudspeaker/room compensation programs. As I mentioned. They make the biggest difference in quality of sound over anything.

 

[davidc]

The only thing I see missing is tuning the system to your listening environment, which entails some or all of: moving that sub around, moving the speakers around, blocking some unfavorable reflections, and equalizing the system to 1.) flatten the on-axis response of the speakers (based on anechoic data--and which may not be needed) and 2.) helping with resonant room modes (though that's mostly about moving the sub around and treating the walls).

That's the only problem I see--that Yamaha integrated amp does not provide an easy way to adjust equalization. Probably you can make a lot of that work by moving the sub around. The measurement tool for that is Room Equalization Wizard (Windows software--free), a calibrated mic, and a laptop. An upgrade amp would have a processor loop of some type, or use a separate preamp that has a processor loop or integrated parametric equalization.

Rick "But this will likely sound good even without that additional capability" Denney

Absolutely! The one change you should make, and the most important thing of all is to make sure whatever amplifier or AVR you have has some sort of room compass compensation such as Dirac or Audyssey

 

[MaxxC]

Oh my. So your theory is if we want to hear music as the artist intended. We need to use oversampling, digital filtering, DSD Equalization and other digital processing. I see

I know enough about oversampling to know it alters the original wave form.

Niche product. It’s not relevant something is embraced by the masses if that’s your reference point them McDonalds makes the best Hamburgers in the world.

Woah. you said R2R DACs perform worse. Then a paragraph later you say ALL competently designed R2R and Sigma Delta sound identical. The “competently designed” kind of strikes me. If all DACs sound the same as you allege Then the competency of the designer and quality of the parts should not matter You are stating 3 contradictory things at the same time.

So your saying your ears and brain can’t be trusted to distinguish between good sound and poor sound or Natural sound from artificial sound. Highly control testing in a lab is how you make the determination?

 

[Karmacoma]

Personally since I bought some active studio monitors (advice from ASR actually), I always recommend that in that type of set up, best bang for buck imho.
Plenty dac/headphone amps of quality have been reviewed on ASR, best bang for buck will be from the chinese brands like topping and smsl.
What's your total budget?

 

[Karmacoma]

You are stating 3 contradictory things at the same time.

He's not stating 3 contradictory things but he didn't develop his point that's all.
R2R dacs are in general more expensive and perform usually not as good as delta sigmas on a bench test. It's also generally admitted that you won't be able to make a difference between both if they're both competently designed (and that's where the nuance lies), but the headphone amp can make a difference, depending on the headphones you plan to use.

 

[Buckchester]

Your setup looks good except for I would make one change. That in my opinion is absolutely essential and is the most important consideration of all. You need to use an amplifier or AVR that has room compensation. Meaning it needs to have either Audyssey or Dirac. I have been an audiophile since I was 12 years old and an indirect audio file since the early '60s via my father. In my opinion, the absolute most important change that has ever occurred in this hobby is loudspeaker/room compensation programs. As I mentioned. They make the biggest difference in quality of sound over anything.

Room EQ is most definitely a necessity, but only below the room transition frequency ~200-400hz. Above that, good speakers are the most important thing. All this talk about DACs improving the sound, oh my.

 

[Holmz]

Your setup looks good except for I would make one change. That in my opinion is absolutely essential and is the most important consideration of all. You need to use an amplifier or AVR that has room compensation. Meaning it needs to have either Audyssey or Dirac. I have been an audiophile since I was 12 years old and an indirect audio file since the early '60s via my father. In my opinion, the absolute most important change that has ever occurred in this hobby is loudspeaker/room compensation programs. As I mentioned. They make the biggest difference in quality of sound over anything.

Those TDAI amps offer that.

Oh my. So your theory is if we want to hear music as the artist intended.
…

That is the biggest bunch of BS I usually hear.
Maybe it is true in some cases, but the artist makes music and they are not generally sitting at the mixing console where the audio/mixing engineer is sitting.
And in many cases they have no input into the final mix.

 

[Holmz]

Except the Q1 isn't a single driver - it's a 2-way coaxial, and it has a crossover.

Yep - it’s pretty obvious looking at the step function response that it is NOT time/phase coherent.
Whether that is important or not… whose to say… but it is not technically correct.

 

[Karmacoma]

but the artist makes music and they are not generally sitting at the mixing console where the audio/mixing engineer is sitting.
And in many cases they have no input into the final mix.

Oomph, there's a debate here, I'd say it depends on the artist, it's a case by case thing but I see what you mean this expression isn't the best, see it as a figure of speech.