I own a Beresford MK3 and it is awesome. My SB3 is plugged through it
via optical (The COAX does not work on my SB3 and I can't be bothered
to send the unit to the States for repair).
Stanley Beresford's DAC have made a whole lot of difference I believe.
I can hear greater detail, tighter bass
I own a MK V and while I can hear a difference in some songs and now
listen only through it and enjoy it I haven't made a final judgment
yet, but would say that the Beresford certainly isn't a step back. ;)
Once I have set up the speakers right (position/decent cables) I will
do more a accurate
signor_rossi;220652 Wrote:
I own a MK V and while I can hear a difference in some songs and now
listen only through it and enjoy it I haven't made a final judgment
yet, but would say that the Beresford certainly isn't a step back. ;)
Once I have set up the speakers right (position/decent
The background noie is there only for few moments, after that I have no
disturbances whatsoever on the speakers, even with high volume and no
music playing.I will get a new power supply, but that task is not as
trivial as it seems here in Italy (most available can provide only less
than
that sounds like the caps charging ?
if you feel its an issue ...turn the dac on prior to starting up the
other items
the berrisford will benefit from a better psu [bigger transformer] just
like the sb3...
the ones supplied are just big enough to get the job done ...with no
extra
darrenyeats;210803 Wrote:
Phil,
Although in theory the SB3 should sound the same (or better) than my
Monarchy as a transport, to my ears it doesn't.
snip
I have tested this to death. The more I listen, the more I hear the
Monarchy is better.
tonyptony;210947 Wrote:
BAM! Darren, that's
I can vouch for the effectiveness of the src in this role...IMO it
should sound worse than with just one dac up stream of the sb3 ...but
it doesn't...
I've no experience of the great march dac
--
zanash
Acoustician and builder of interesting cables
opaqueice;220434 Wrote:
Scores of either 4-0 or 0-4 will happen by chance 1 in every 8 times,
which is unlikely but not enough to be sure there's something really
there.
Opaqueice,
I agree the point about whether the SB3 is really better than the
Monarchy is statistically unproved.
Sunday's
darrenyeats;220703 Wrote:
Opaqueice,
I agree the point about whether the SB3 is really better than the
Monarchy is statistically unproved.
Sunday's tests did prove one thing for me, though. I thought my CD
transport sounded consistently better than the SB3, and now I can be
sure that's
Patrick Dixon wrote:
opaqueice;220730 Wrote:
Yeah, absolutely, it does demonstrate that, and it's very useful
information.My view is that it absolutely doesn't do this reliably!
I think the only thing you can reliably determine from a A/B test
(blind or otherwise), is whether you can
Patrick Dixon;220735 Wrote:
My view is that it absolutely doesn't do this reliably!
I think the only thing you can reliably determine from a A/B test
(blind or otherwise), is whether you can determine a difference. You
need to listen over a longer period, with a wider, more representative
opaqueice;220742 Wrote:
If he thought while doing a sighted A/B comparison that the CD player
sounded significantly better in some aspects, and then in a later blind
test preferred the SB instead 4/4 times, that clearly invalidates the
original impression. You don't seem to be disputing
Robin Bowes;220741 Wrote:
Patrick Dixon wrote:
opaqueice;220730 Wrote:
Yeah, absolutely, it does demonstrate that, and it's very useful
information.My view is that it absolutely doesn't do this reliably!
I think the only thing you can reliably determine from a A/B test
(blind or
Patrick Dixon wrote:
opaqueice;220742 Wrote:
There may or may not be subtle differences (and as we all know, you
have a financial and vested interest in convincing us there are).
What is certain is that there are other changes which can be made
to the system - speakers, speaker placement,
darrenyeats;220770 Wrote:
Patrick, I think he was agreeing with you?
Yes - that was just my little joke.
darrenyeats;220770 Wrote:
But I am cautious: the blind test said nothing about whether the SB+ or
Transporter will blow away my SB3+ps/DAC combo. If we're about to have
a discussion
Robin Bowes;220769 Wrote:
I firmly believe that the source is important - as important if not
more
so than the other factors you mention.
I find that my ears can adjust to relatively major deficiencies such
as
imperfect frequency response, but I can't listen to a poor digital
source
darrenyeats wrote:
I am also not in the all digital sources are the same camp.
Nevertheless, I am in the if you can't tell blind then you can't be
sure camp.
can't be sure of what?
R.
___
audiophiles mailing list
Patrick Dixon;220773 Wrote:
Yes - that was just my little joke.
D'oh.
Patrick Dixon;220773 Wrote:
No that wasn't my point at all. I think what was significant about
your test was that you were reasonably consistent (within the limits
stated elsewhere here) at telling one source from
Robin Bowes;220779 Wrote:
darrenyeats wrote:
I am also not in the all digital sources are the same camp.
Nevertheless, I am in the if you can't tell blind then you can't be
sure camp.
can't be sure of what?
R.
Well, I didn't mean that a switching A/B blind test can make me
Sorry to drag the SB+ into it. It's not relevant and it wasn't my
intention to bring it up. I don't have any agenda other than to
produce the highest fidelity sound with my system, and to understand
why.
On this issue of long-term versus short-term A/B comparisons, there is
some research on
darrenyeats wrote:
Robin Bowes;220779 Wrote:
darrenyeats wrote:
I am also not in the all digital sources are the same camp.
Nevertheless, I am in the if you can't tell blind then you can't be
sure camp.
can't be sure of what?
R.
Well, I didn't mean that a switching A/B blind test can
Patrick Dixon wrote:
Robin, I can only assume you are selling something too.
Just for the record Patrick, I got your little joke. Heh, must be an
english sense of humour!
R.
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
darrenyeats;220785 Wrote:
...if you can't tell blind then you can't be sure what is heard
sighted is free of influence from expectation, prejudice, peer
pressure, suggestion etc. Remove this possibility, and you are left
with the truth. Darren
Actually, what you are left with is (still)
Phil wrote:
Actually, what you are left with is (still) your
opinion - there is no absolute truth here. Your
ear/brain combo is deciding which you prefer.
Others may decide differently.
The key point is that your opinion is unfettered
by bias etc.
Agreed :-)
--
darrenyeats
Monarchy
Robin Bowes;220790 Wrote:
I don't like DBT. I don't think it is an appropriate way to choose audio
gear. Extended listening is the way to go.
Who cares if A is better than B - the only important thing is whether
you can live with whichever one you choose. So, listen to A for a long
time.
Now this I do not understand.
I play jazz over sqeeNetwork and it sounds great. Radio Iowa(?)
I play pandora sounds OK.
I play my CDs ripped and raw.
The net sounds better even though I have high quality gear. Same preamp
Tact XP (room corrected), 2 x 400 Watt Alner Hamblin amps.
Mains filters
Wondering if any one has compared the SB3 to the Airport Express? Just
using the built-in DACs.
--
lextek
lextek's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=12660
View this thread:
Just got one from Audiogon and can't wait to set it up with my SB3, MF
integrated, and AP Sparks.
--
mark-e-mark
mark-e-mark's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4726
View this thread:
Sometimes I wish my ears were better, sometimes I'm glad they're not! I
had a DLIII in my system for a couple of weeks, and although I did like
the sound, I wasn't blown away. I'm always jealous of people who do have
that OMG...OMG..WOW experience!
I returned my DLIII. One evening just after I
29 matches
Mail list logo
