AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Theta CB III HD in the house (with my ADA Mach IV)!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Theta CB III HD in the house (with my ADA Mach IV)! - Page 2

post #31 of 271
5/3/12 at 9:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by edorr View Post

Here is an idea. If you can get your hands on a six shooter, you can use it as a 6 channel input switcher. You would run the ADA into the balanced input #1 and set it at unity gain - this should be very close to fully transparent. Your CBIII output runs through the pass through input #3.

You can now switch between ADA and CBIII HD in real time with the CBIII remote control (assuming you have an HDMI source with dual outputs - if not you should get an Oppo 93 which has this feature).

I'm sure one of the estimeeded members of the forum still has a six shooter gathering dust (Steve?), that they would be willing to volunteer for this experiment.

If possible, this idea would really make the comparison between the two more practical, especially if attempting a blind test.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #32 of 271
5/3/12 at 10:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sierraalphahotel View Post

If possible, this idea would really make the comparison between the two more practical, especially if attempting a blind test.

It is definitely possible. There is no difference between feeding the Six Shooter 6 analog channels from an ADA and 6 channels from a Universal player. You can even do it in 7.1 mode if you have two six shooters, but I believe the second six shooter would have to be special configured. BD did this at some point and may even still own such a SS combo.
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 271
5/3/12 at 2:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by edorr View Post


if you have two six shooters, but I believe the second six shooter would have to be special configured. BD did this at some point and may even still own such a SS combo.

I used 2 Six shooters for several years. Sold them both and all of the cables. Now all I think about is multiple Gen 8s.. Not sure it will happen but I am thinking of running at least 4 channels that way. The only reason I bought a prepro in the first place was the promise of multichannel high resolution music. Finally it's possibly to do it at a truly audiophile level.
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 271
5/3/12 at 3:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogger View Post

I used 2 Six shooters for several years. Sold them both and all of the cables. Now all I think about is multiple Gen 8s.. Not sure it will happen but I am thinking of running at least 4 channels that way. The only reason I bought a prepro in the first place was the promise of multichannel high resolution music. Finally it's possibly to do it at a truly audiophile level.

If MCH music was taking off in a big way (including a great catalogue of BR concert discs) I would divert more funding to my MCH system in a heartbeat as well. As it is, all the content is moving to 2 channel high rez. Even labels like Chesky are releasing their MCH SACD's as high rez 2 channel downloads, and probably ship very few MCH discs anymore. This is unfortunate, because in my experience, 2 channel cannot hold a candle to well recorded native MCH. The upshot is if you're a 90% music guy, it makes little sense to spend inordinate amount of money on your MCH system, simply because the content is not there.

These reservations about investment in MCH hardware did not stop me for getting a $18K active center channel, but that is only because I made a low ball offer and much to my surprise the guy accepted. I got to say this was a huge step up on all my MCH music and money well spend.
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 271
5/3/12 at 3:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogger View Post

I used 2 Six shooters for several years. Sold them both and all of the cables. Now all I think about is multiple Gen 8s.. Not sure it will happen but I am thinking of running at least 4 channels that way. The only reason I bought a prepro in the first place was the promise of multichannel high resolution music. Finally it's possibly to do it at a truly audiophile level.

You could put a 4 channel Trinnov digital in/out between the digi out card and 2 Gen VIII's. This should be as good as it gets.... Of course, if/when Dirac arrives, this would do pretty much the same in one box, at lower cost.
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 271
5/3/12 at 7:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

I've said any SSP over $10K is a waste, so I'm excited to see if my theory holds.

Anyone say "PLACEBO"?

An April Fool's joke a month late?
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 271
5/3/12 at 11:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bruzonsky View Post


An April Fool's joke a month late?


That CB-IIIHD looks really nice in his rack and all, but until some of those other AVSers show up at Jeff's place to verify it actually exists , I can't help but think, has It been PhotoShopped in? :-)
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 271
5/4/12 at 3:14am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbrother52 View Post

That CB-IIIHD looks really nice in his rack and all, but until some of those other AVSers show up at Jeff's place to verify it actually exists , I can't help but think, has It been PhotoShopped in? :-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bruzonsky View Post

Anyone say "PLACEBO"?

An April Fool's joke a month late?

You guys are kidding, right?. April Fools in May?
Reply
Reply
post #39 of 271
5/4/12 at 3:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

Actually, if you go back and read my posts, you'll see my biggest issue with the Theta (and its owners) was that there was no way this piece was as good as a full HDMI processor (Halcro) where all processing was done with the great Halcro DACs whereas the those still using the Theta and BLu Ray had to use BD player DACs and bypass the Theta all together!

Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

No PEQ in ADA.

Using QSC DSPs which I can bypass. But I will try CBIII vs ADA with and without EQ.

I've never understood paying for highend DACs in a processor, then bolting on a QSC for EQ which re-samples at 16bit/48Khz.
Reply
Reply
post #40 of 271
5/4/12 at 4:15pm
Thread Starter 
Because room correction trumps DACs. The QSC DACs are solid. The theory is of interest but fails real world sound tests on the typical Blu Rau movie soundtrack. My system is better sounding with the QSC in.
Reply
Reply
post #41 of 271
5/4/12 at 4:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

Because room correction trumps DACs. The QSC DACs are solid. The theory is of interest but fails real world sound tests on the typical Blu Rau movie soundtrack. My system is better sounding with the QSC in.

Then why even try the CBIII HD? If you're convinced of this, getting the 8 channel ADA/Trinnov room correction system to go with your ADA should give you far more bang for the buck than sinking 26K into a processor because it might have better DACs.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 271
5/4/12 at 4:30pm
Guys; neither statement is completely accurate. This situation isn't as cut and dried as it may seem: yes, correcting for room/loudspeaker interactions is generally more effective than changing DACs. BUT once that correction has taken place (even better when it's digital all the way from the source) then DAC quality does make a difference.

Amir has argued with me before regarding that statement, but I definitely heard differences between the DACs used in the RS20i and the Rhapsody/TEQ when I did my comparisson. If there's anyone that can sympathize with what Jeff is about to do, it's me. I've said before, I just might call Jeff Hipps and see if I cant compare a CBIII HD to our Reference.

Might be a cool comparo- especially when we see the results thebland gets.

Can't wait, Jeff, best of luck to you.

Dan
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 271
5/4/12 at 4:38pm
Thread Starter 
Precisely. An ADA/TRINNOV would come in lower than a CBIII and best it, too.
But I have the Theta so I'm going to set it up and try it. I have nothing to lose and am curious to hear what a full, top shelf CBIII HD does in my room all on its own. Either I'll be surprised or it'll confirm my suspicions about room correction being #1 in importance - even at 48/16 (where most Blu Rays are).
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 271
5/4/12 at 4:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanFrancis View Post

Guys; neither statement is completely accurate. This situation isn't as cut and dried as it may seem: yes, correcting for room/loudspeaker interactions is generally more effective than changing DACs. BUT once that correction has taken place (even better when it's digital all the way from the source) then DAC quality does make a difference.

Amir has argued with me before regarding that statement, but I definitely heard differences between the DACs used in the RS20i and the Rhapsody/TEQ when I did my comparisson. If there's anyone that can sympathize with what Jeff is about to do, it's me. I've said before, I just might call Jeff Hipps and see if I cant compare a CBIII HD to our Reference.

Might be a cool comparo- especially when we see the results thebland gets.

Can't wait, Jeff, best of luck to you.

Dan

In my (limited) experience, they are two completely different - and complementary - pieces of technology in the chain. Room correction addresses specific problems that no DAC can ever address, and better DACs improve overall sound quality in a way that no RC system ever can. Still, if you believe "Room correction trumps DACs", it makes more sense to throw money at room correction.
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 271
5/4/12 at 4:48pm
Thread Starter 
Agreed.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 271
5/4/12 at 6:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by edorr View Post

Then why even try the CBIII HD? If you're convinced of this, getting the 8 channel ADA/Trinnov room correction system to go with your ADA should give you far more bang for the buck than sinking 26K into a processor because it might have better DACs.

Too try and prove a point. He's position is already fixed. His result are already predetermined. I would welcome a true comparison from someone with sincere intentions.There's a former, CBIII HD with Xtreme dacs,owner that chose to buy a Meridian 861V6 over the Casablanca. There is not a single component that everyone will prefer. I don't know it this is true but an engineer told me that a lot of the differences are actually voicing of the processors. Some companies like Theta voice more for music reproduction. While others voice for razor sharp effects. You can have two guys showing clear preferences, one for music the other for intense special effects, chose different processors. It doesn't prove one is better. It just shows preference. As I said, I don't know if this is true but my experience leads me to believe it could be.
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 271
5/4/12 at 6:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by rabident View Post

I've never understood paying for highend DACs in a processor, then bolting on a QSC for EQ which re-samples at 16bit/48Khz.

It's like a chain. The chain is only as strong as it's weakest link. The CBIII HD does not currently have room correction. So, if you believe it's that's the most important thing and trumps everything else, why would you even try it? Crazy!! Crazy to stick cheap QSC EQ on the end period. Just buy the Trinnov already! Especially if you feel it's addition trumps everything else.
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 271
5/4/12 at 6:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by edorr View Post

in my (limited) experience, they are two completely different - and complementary - pieces of technology in the chain. Room correction addresses specific problems that no dac can ever address, and better dacs improve overall sound quality in a way that no rc system ever can. Still, if you believe "room correction trumps dacs", it makes more sense to throw money at room correction.

+1. Oh and thanks for the Jriver recommendation. I didn't realize how much better it sounds than Itunes. It's not subtle. Never would have imagined that. Guess I will have to take that Computer Audiophile a lot more seriously.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 271
5/4/12 at 7:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogger View Post


+1. Oh and thanks for the Jriver recommendation. I didn't realize how much better it sounds than Itunes. It's not subtle. Never would have imagined that. Guess I will have to take that Computer Audiophile a lot more seriously.

Try Pure Music or Amarra , they sound even better to my ears.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 271
5/4/12 at 7:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

Precisely. An ADA/TRINNOV would come in lower than a CBIII and best it, too.

Having not even heard the comparison, you already know that it will best a Casablanca with Dirac live? What's the asking price of the unit you have in your rack? It's only going to be a couple of thousand more for Dirac Live. How much is the 8 channel Trinnov?
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 271
5/4/12 at 7:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mani View Post

Try Pure Music or Amarra , they sound even better to my ears.

Damn, Mani! Just went I thought I had found a solution. I'd have to switch to a Mac to run Pure Music or Amarra?
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 271
5/4/12 at 7:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by edorr View Post

If MCH music was taking off in a big way (including a great catalogue of BR concert discs) I would divert more funding to my MCH system in a heartbeat as well. As it is, all the content is moving to 2 channel high rez. Even labels like Chesky are releasing their MCH SACD's as high rez 2 channel downloads, and probably ship very few MCH discs anymore. This is unfortunate, because in my experience, 2 channel cannot hold a candle to well recorded native MCH. The upshot is if you're a 90% music guy, it makes little sense to spend inordinate amount of money on your MCH system, simply because the content is not there.

These reservations about investment in MCH hardware did not stop me for getting a $18K active center channel, but that is only because I made a low ball offer and much to my surprise the guy accepted. I got to say this was a huge step up on all my MCH music and money well spend.

Yeah. I was just considering the hardware side. I believe that as technology advances, you may not need 5.1 or 7.1 mixes. Hey room correction is finally getting there! Who knows, DSP spatial effect could as well? I have never been opposed to these techs, only the current state of reproduction.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 271
5/4/12 at 8:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogger View Post

+1. Oh and thanks for the Jriver recommendation. I didn't realize how much better it sounds than Itunes. It's not subtle. Never would have imagined that. Guess I will have to take that Computer Audiophile a lot more seriously.

I wasted 4 hours trying to get the JPlay (http://jplay.eu/) plugin for JRiver to work. This is supposed to take things up another notch. Problem is my library is on a NAS and Jplay somehow can't authenticate and get to the files on the NAS. Very frustration. However, since you're into this stuff, I suggest you download the Jplay for Jriver trial version and give it a whirl - you may have better luck than me.
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 271
5/4/12 at 8:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogger View Post

Yeah. I was just considering the hardware side. I believe that as technology advances, you may not need 5.1 or 7.1 mixes. Hey room correction is finally getting there! Who knows, DSP spatial effect could as well? I have never been opposed to these techs, only the current state of reproduction.

Same here. If someone manages to synthesize acceptable 5.1 from a 2.0 mix, I'm all in. I have not heard it yet, but I am open to persuasion.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 271
5/5/12 at 3:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

Because room correction trumps DACs.

I'm not questioning room correction or even DAC quality. I question the value in pairing a high end DAC with no frills ADC/DAC stage latter in chain.

The QSC may be solid, but it's already restricting the performance of your Ada. I understand system wide it offers a net gain, and that's why you use it, but it has short comings. Until those short comings are addressed in your system, I don't see how anyone could expect better upstream DACs (in the CBIII) to make any difference.
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 271
5/5/12 at 5:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogger View Post

Too try and prove a point. He's position is already fixed. His result are already predetermined. .

Naaa.. I think Jeff would be honest. If he notices a substantial improvement in his room due to the Theta, he would gladly say so.
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 271
5/5/12 at 5:16am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by adidino View Post

Naaa.. I think Jeff would be honest. If he notices a substantial improvement in his room due to the Theta, he would gladly say so.

Of course.. Really, who lies about this stuff with folks looking on? I have a history of equipment owned as long as my arm. I'm not married to any piece.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rabident View Post

I'm not questioning room correction or even DAC quality. I question the value in pairing a high end DAC with no frills ADC/DAC stage latter in chain.

The QSC may be solid, but it's already restricting the performance of your Ada. I understand system wide it offers a net gain, and that's why you use it, but it has short comings. Until those short comings are addressed in your system, I don't see how anyone could expect better upstream DACs (in the CBIII) to make any difference.

My system sounds awesome. It is great as is even with the QSC DACs.

But I agree the DACs are dated (like those in the CBIII HD and can use improvement). I have UMR coming by next month (tweaks my Lumis) and he's going to set my internal PEQ. So, the QSC DACs are gone. I'm curious to see the improvement.. Theoretically things should be better but with Blu Ray soundtracks I just don't know. Now the PEQ won't do what the Trinnov does but I'll get a taste of the type of improvement I might get with it.

We finally bought a log home up north after years of looking and my budget is ait'sit crimped right now as we are furnishing it but I'd like to add a Trinnov in the fall.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 271
5/5/12 at 5:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by adidino View Post

Naaa.. I think Jeff would be honest. If he notices a substantial improvement in his room due to the Theta, he would gladly say so.

Ahhh if it were that simple, just about sound quality. It's most definetly NOT. Jeff was rebuffed by Theta for wanting a free processor in exchange for his wife's expertise at marketing. The next day, he started attacking Theta and it has never stopped. The CBII that he used as a basis of comparison for his first years of attack used old Superior I dacs. Every discussion, it seemed I was pointing this out. I realized quickly it was not about the truth. Anyone with experience with the processor knows that the dacs make quite a difference. I think his set-up now with good enough dacs to make an accurate assessement. I would rather Xtreme dacs on all channels but I am not unreasonable. But back to reality. There isn't going to be anything honest about this comparison as far as The bland is involved. IF he gets somenone else present, that is neutral, I would take their comments more seriously.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 271
5/5/12 at 5:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

But I agree the DACs are dated (like those in the CBIII HD and can use improvement).

We are getting new ones.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 271
5/5/12 at 5:41am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogger View Post

We are getting new ones.

I've read as much. Should be good for you guys. Cost wise, between new DACs and a DIRAC upgrade, you'll be near $10K or more. This stuff was supposed to be coming down in price

But then again an 8 ch Trinnov and calibration is in the same neighborhood.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Theta CB III HD in the house (with my ADA Mach IV)!