Review Cambridge Audio EVO 150

[Deleted member 48437]

Hey, the OP lead me to a new thought. What if the problem I am experiencing is resolution? What if the Cambridge CXN was able to decode higher (in reality not spec) than the internal dac on the new EVO 150? Is there a way to measure that?
Tomorrow I will plug in a CD player or my NAS and check that!
My brother says his music sounds like he is in the front row. He used an Arender, USB to high res re-timer then a PS-A dac. He uses an older high power McIntosh and Celestions. A light is coming on that this just cd be the culprit??

 

[Killingbeans]

Does that make more sense?

Not likely. When people talk about "high resolution" files, it's actually only a question of ultrasonic information and ridiculously high dynamic range.

The former is not audible, and most tweeters can't reproduce it anyway. The latter is bottlenecked by both the reproduction gear and the source material.

 

[Deleted member 48437]

Are you saying that beyond 16/44.1 there is mo audible difference to you?

Not likely. When people talk about "high resolution" files, it's actually only a question of ultrasonic information and ridiculously high dynamic range.

The former is not audible, and most tweeters can't reproduce it anyway. The latter is bottlenecked by both the reproduction gear and the source material.

 

[JSmith]

Are you saying that beyond 16/44.1 there is mo audible difference to you?

See if you can tell any difference between 8-bit and 16-bit audio first.

The 16-bit v/s 8-bit Blind Listening Test

Can you hear a difference? Of course... you can't.

www.audiocheck.net

JSmith

 

[Killingbeans]

Are you saying that beyond 16/44.1 there is mo audible difference to you?

I'm saying that it's very unlikely that any of us can hear a difference if both files are converted correctly from the same master, and the test is done blind.

Our ears can't detect anything worth mentioning above 22kHz, and you'd need to listen to a PA line array inside an anechoic chamber to make use of the extra dynamic range.

Also, the recordings, we listen to, makes both a moot point. Absolutely no information of importance at 22kHz and beyond, and none of them make full use of 16 bits of dynamic range. Most of them not even remotely so.

The only scenario I can think of, where so called "hi-res" files are useful, is when you need lots of headroom for heavy DSP. Hardly ever the case, unless you work in a studio.

 

[Deleted member 21114]

Are you saying that beyond 16/44.1 there is mo audible difference to you?

This might help https://archive.is/H9R1R

 

[Rottmannash]

By a Benchmark AHB2 and rest assured your amp isn't the problem. Or any well designed Purifi based amp.

 

[Deleted member 48437]

Very interesting article.

 

[4Real]

Maybe what you are telling is true, however this looks more like a very subjective review from an "audiophile" rather than a test supported by a rigorous approach. Have you performed all the testd at the same SPL from the two devices? Was it a blind test carried out multiple times with the help of an external operator? I also llike toroidal transformers, however on ASR you can find plenty of amplifiers with nice toroidal transformers that perform really bad (Naim, Hegel just to name two brands) and a number of Class AB or Class D devices with different type of power supplies with much better results.

lmao

 

[GiBo61]

lmao

Why arrogant (...In My Arrogant Opinion)?