or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › ADA Cinema Reference Mach IV
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

ADA Cinema Reference Mach IV - Page 9

post #241 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post

Hi Edorr, I'll look at adding the 25 pin input card to the ADA.


The UMT's shown above are Oppos BDP103 and 93 that are stripped completely bare.

I am looking for oppo performance but with superior reliability, therefore I need the best power supplies, and I need the mechanical isolation the MSB housing provides.

I will heed your advice then and go to the lesser dacs from MSB namely the PLATINUM DACS. But I will preserve the Diamond Power supplies.

Thanks for the advice guys.

In the Europa system we will require digital in out from the Reference.


Before committing to the MSB DACs as analog input source, I would run the UMT digitally into the digital input card of the ADA and see how it compares. I suspect it will be better, even if it downsamples digi outs to 48/16 as per HDMI license restriction.

I can see how you want to stay away from a DIY mod from a garage operation in Czech Republic (Oppo + vanity93 board), although it would meet your functional needs and avoid the downsampling.
post #242 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post

Hi Edorr, I'll look at adding the 25 pin input card to the ADA.


The UMT's shown above are Oppos BDP103 and 93 that are stripped completely bare.

I am looking for oppo performance but with superior reliability, therefore I need the best power supplies, and I need the mechanical isolation the MSB housing provides.

I will heed your advice then and go to the lesser dacs from MSB namely the PLATINUM DACS. But I will preserve the Diamond Power supplies.

Thanks for the advice guys.

In the Europa system we will require digital in out from the Reference.

Glad I could help in anyway on your out-of-this world projects. Yes, if you can get the Reference modified to have both digital in and out, then you might be very close to have the ultimate processor. However, I think you can fully match, and exceed, the feature set of a Reference modified with digital in and out by instead going with a Datasat and Trinnov MC 16 combination. With the Datasat Trinnov combo, I think you would get virtually everything you get in a modded Reference plus the following features:

1. Dirac (may redundant with Trinnov, but doesn't hurt to have)
2. DTS Neo X processing.
3. Support for Auro3D processing in the near future
4. I believe a overall lower price

On the other hand, I don't see anything that a modded ADA Reference has that the Datasat/Trinnov MC16 combo would not have (other than simplfying connections with a single box). Plus, the Datasat & Trinnov MC 16 are off the shelf products you can buy now, whereas Reference would need to be modified for both digital in and out.
post #243 of 296
think so,I'd like to collect as many information and impressions as possible.thanks lt6Lgn
post #244 of 296
I got CINEMA REFERENCE digital kit on Wednesday. Will attempt surgery tomorrow.
post #245 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINERAMAX View Post

I got CINEMA REFERENCE digital kit on Wednesday. Will attempt surgery tomorrow.

Cool. I have confirmation from MSB that the UMT plus transport digital outputs do NOT downsample anything, so going digital into the ADA is a no brainer IMO. I will try one myself shortly into my Trinnov.

I personally would get a custom made DB25 to AES/EBU (for mains) and S/PDIF (for other channels). You can probably reterminate the AES/EBU connectors to S/PDIF on the standard cable.
post #246 of 296
When is the 103 mod available?
post #247 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

When is the 103 mod available?

Pavel @ audiopraise mentioned he started design early June. Not sure how long this will take. Best to shoot him an email. If I end up going the UMT transports route I'll have a Oppo with Vanity93 + Linear Powersupply for sale, but I presume you'll want the 103.
post #248 of 296
I think I'll go with the newer model 103 Oppo. I am committed to the MC and plan on a fall installation.

I could also use some suggestions for some new LCRs (small) and surrounds (small). I may do a whole room audio change out with some new subs. But LCRs and surrounds must be on the more compact size yet hit reference levels. Active or Passive I'll consider. I am planning on adding 2 more front side speakers for a 9.2 system.

Thanks
post #249 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

I could also use some suggestions for some new LCRs (small) and surrounds (small). I may do a whole room audio change out with some new subs. But LCRs and surrounds must be on the more compact size yet hit reference levels. Active or Passive I'll consider. I am planning on adding 2 more front side speakers for a 9.2 system.

If you're willing to go acitve ...

These are very nice for LCR duties:
http://www.professionalhomecinema.com/loudspeakers/scr-12sm/

All of these make nice surrounds:
http://www.professionalhomecinema.com/loudspeakers/scrs-8ai/
http://www.professionalhomecinema.com/loudspeakers/scrs-5iw/
http://www.professionalhomecinema.com/loudspeakers/scrs-25iwa/
post #250 of 296
I can attest that the pro audio tech gear is seriously good, ESP if you want to go to reference and beyond with absolutly no distortion. I have heard a full pro audio 15.4 system at Genesis Tech with about £100k worth of pro audio amps. Jaw dropping performance.

There subs are something else. Really do delivery a rock solid punch.
post #251 of 296

Quote:
Originally Posted by djnickuk View Post

I can attest that the pro audio tech gear is seriously good, ESP if you want to go to reference and beyond with absolutly no distortion. I have heard a full pro audio 15.4 system at Genesis Tech with about £100k worth of pro audio amps. Jaw dropping performance.

There subs are something else. Really do delivery a rock solid punch.

Thanks for the suggestions. I'm going to check them out.
Paul Hales who's at his company apparently designed speakers for QSC and started out with speakers similar to what I own (compression drivers and pro drivers). Right up my alley.


Also, What is the OVATION Digital Cinema Processor from Trinnov? Looks to have Trinnov processing and digital inputs.
post #252 of 296
Funny, I'm listening to this interview with Paul Hales of PHC. Checking out the suggestions in a bit more in depth way. It's about a 40 min interview.. He is not a fan of DSP and EQ like many have implemented here.
http://twit.tv/show/home-theater-geeks/164

Oddly, he recommends that his speakers are not ideal for Trinnov and Auddysey or room correction in general. He says, for one, that a microphone, in general, is not the best way to measure for human hearing. Moreover, because the PHC speakers by design are narrow field of dispersion, such room correction algorithms tend to average the response about the entire freq response thus since the tweeters are narrowly dispersed, they get averaged in with the mids and bass and after DSP, are boosted and increase the higher frequencies - making things shrill and strident. He specifically says EQ over 200 Hz is NOT recommended.

When they demo their speakers, they use no outboard DSP. I believe their amps have some, however.

What is he getting at? Seems to fly in the face of most opinions here...
Edited by thebland - 8/9/13 at 12:01pm
post #253 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

What is the OVATION Digital Cinema Processor from Trinnov?
It is their 8-16 channel equalizer for commercial cinemas, so it includes things like a dedicated input for the hearing impaired channel (closed captions), a dedicated input for the visual impaired channel (spoken description), AES DCI inputs, 8 balanced inputs for calibration mics, etc. These are all things that are useful in commercial cinemas, but not the typical home theatre, where you would be better off with one of their pro-audio units (MC Processor) or high end consumer units (Magnitude 32).
post #254 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

It is their 8-16 channel equalizer for commercial cinemas, so it includes things like a dedicated input for the hearing impaired channel (closed captions), a dedicated input for the visual impaired channel (spoken description), AES DCI inputs, 8 balanced inputs for calibration mics, etc. These are all things that are useful in commercial cinemas, but not the typical home theatre, where you would be better off with one of their pro-audio units (MC Processor) or high end consumer units (Magnitude 32).

Gotcha. Thanks for the explanation.smile.gif
post #255 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

Funny, I'm listening to this interview with Paul Hales of PHC.
Oddly, he recommends that his speakers are not ideal for Trinnov and Auddysey or room correction in general.

I'm using Paul's speakers (the larger 2115 units for the fronts and the 12sm units for the rears) with ADA Reference Trinnov processing and it works very, very, nicely. It sounds a lot better with Trinnov than without.

Having Curt from Trinnov and Remi from Keith Yates' shop help with the calibrations ensured I didn't do any silly corrections.
Edited by Brucemck2 - 8/9/13 at 7:43pm
post #256 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

What is he getting at? Seems to fly in the face of most opinions here...
Hales' comments make it clear that he isn't aware of how some of the newer/better room corrections systems work.

Like when someones says they don't use surround processing with 2-channel music because they don't like hearing vocals coming behind them. Makes it clear that they haven't actually used it AND aren't aware of how modern surround processing works.

There is a short thread about the podcast interview with Hales if you're interested:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1478854/the-science-of-the-room-with-paul-hales
post #257 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

...Moreover, because the PHC speakers by design are narrow field of dispersion, such room correction algorithms tend to average the response about the entire freq response thus since the tweeters are narrowly dispersed, they get averaged in with the mids and bass and after DSP, are boosted and increase the higher frequencies - making things shrill and strident....

Jeff, this would seem to be another example of Mr. Hales lumping all RC together, with unfortunate consequences.  Trinnov, for example, doe not average the entire frequency response, but allows the user to determine "how the room's energy response is smoothed, and modifies the behavior of the EQ performed"  Smoothing is user adjustable from 1/12th to 3 octaves.

post #258 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brucemck2 View Post

I'm using Paul's speakers (the larger 2115 units for the fronts and the 12sm units for the rears) with ADA Reference Trinnov processing and it works very, very, nicely. It sounds a lot better with Trinnov than without.

Having Curt from Trinnov and Remi from Keith Yates' shop help with the calibrations ensured I didn't do any silly corrections.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Hales' comments make it clear that he isn't aware of how some of the newer/better room corrections systems work.

Like when someones says they don't use surround processing with 2-channel music because they don't like hearing vocals coming behind them. Makes it clear that they haven't actually used it AND aren't aware of how modern surround processing works.

There is a short thread about the podcast interview with Hales if you're interested:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1478854/the-science-of-the-room-with-paul-hales

Quote:
Originally Posted by RUR View Post

Jeff, this would seem to be another example of Mr. Hales lumping all RC together, with unfortunate consequences.  Trinnov, for example, doe not average the entire frequency response, but allows the user to determine "how the room's energy response is smoothed, and modifies the behavior of the EQ performed"  Smoothing is user adjustable from 1/12th to 3 octaves.

Yeah, I thought the same. Averaging frequency responses? I was surprised that a man of his reputation and his excellent speaker designs didn't know better. I mean, he mentioned 'Trinnov' by name.

He seemed to be implying, however, that Trinnov processing (or any room EQ) was not required and, in fact, would degrade the excellent sound of his speakers. He says his speakers are 'tuned' using is own DSP - so other DSP isn't recommended.

I know Curt from Trinnov recommended looking at these speakers. I thought the interview was an odd irony.

He also designed speakers for QSC. When I looked their digital Cinema Line, they have similar drivers and specs - but not custom amplifiers.
post #259 of 296
It's odd his stance on RC. But after listening to his system at Genesis in a purpose built ICE install room with proper treatments I can confirm his speakers sound much better with Dirac engaged than without.
post #260 of 296
I preferred Procella to PHC significantly when I heard the two. Jeff should look into them as well. I don't think any loudspeaker that uses dome tweeters or traditional dynamic drivers is going to satisfy Jeff now that he's used the runts for so long.

Maybe look into Mark's creations as well, Jeff? Perhaps some bespoke items from Mark is tje way to go?.

Dan
post #261 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanFrancis View Post

I preferred Procella to PHC significantly when I heard the two.

Maybe look into Mark's creations as well, Jeff? Perhaps some bespoke items from Mark is tje way to go?.
Dan

Funny, I thought just the opposite, although I thought both were really outstanding and I'd have been happy with either line. Mark's are also very nice and worth checking out.

All three lines offer impressive dynamics and zero "horns shoutiness" that audiophiles rant about
post #262 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanFrancis View Post

I preferred Procella to PHC significantly when I heard the two. Jeff should look into them as well. I don't think any loudspeaker that uses dome tweeters or traditional dynamic drivers is going to satisfy Jeff now that he's used the runts for so long.

Maybe look into Mark's creations as well, Jeff? Perhaps some bespoke items from Mark is tje way to go?.

Dan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brucemck2 View Post

Funny, I thought just the opposite, although I thought both were really outstanding and I'd have been happy with either line. Mark's are also very nice and worth checking out.

All three lines offer impressive dynamics and zero "horns shoutiness" that audiophiles rant about


-Bruce, what are the dimensions of your room? I think the PHCs will run $50K including amps. I have to firm up a quote. I may do 12SMs all around or the PHC rep recommended the in-walls for my columns. We'll see. I'm going to get a quote and weigh things.


-Thanks Dan. I've heard the Procellas at CEDIA and liked them as well but would want the power of the P8 but it is too large for my columns - the P6 is too close to what I already have. That said, I really feel I need a compression driver for the top end and the Seatons do not employ such a driver.


Another speaker line I've been looking at is JTR speakers. They are similarly spec'd to the PHCs. They have similar sensitivity rating and similar, smaller dispersion patterns and no requirement for digital amps. I think I could do my room with speakers for under $25K (not including amps).
post #263 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

-Bruce, what are the dimensions of your room? .

Approximately 28' by 21' with a 10' ceiling. Front speakers are on the long wall.
post #264 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

That said, I really feel I need a compression driver for the top end and the Seatons do not employ such a driver.

In fact, they do. There is a 1" compression driver loaded into a shallow waveguide behind the dust cap of the 8" B&C midrange driver. The on board amplification allots 700 watts to the midrange and 300 watts to the compression tweeter. The other 1000 watt ICE module's power is split between the 2 12" woofers. Of course, this is all active and highly efficient.
post #265 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudda View Post

In fact, they do. There is a 1" compression driver loaded into a shallow waveguide behind the dust cap of the 8" B&C midrange driver. The on board amplification allots 700 watts to the midrange and 300 watts to the compression tweeter. The other 1000 watt ICE module's power is split between the 2 12" woofers. Of course, this is all active and highly efficient.

You're right, but I do not have power at my columns - have power up front in the LCR region.

Is there a remote way or specialized cord to plug these into? I'd have to route all power back to my equipment room as this is where the outlets are.

Thanks
post #266 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brucemck2 View Post

Approximately 28' by 21' with a 10' ceiling. Front speakers are on the long wall.

OK. Similar to mine but you're a bit more volume (I'm 17' X 26 X 9.5 tall). Screen on short wall.

Thanks!
post #267 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

You're right, but I do not have power at my columns - have power up front in the LCR region.

Is there a remote way or specialized cord to plug these into? I'd have to route all power back to my equipment room as this is where the outlets are.

Thanks

I'd bet Mark could rig the amps remotely. He's a pretty creative guy.
post #268 of 296
How would you guys compare the pro audios to the cat 12s? I'm really interested in hearing the cats but being in UK This is somewhat difficult.

I just feel they wouldn't have the same resolution and clarity of treble as my current B&W diamonds do.
post #269 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by djnickuk View Post

How would you guys compare the pro audios to the cat 12s?

I just feel they wouldn't have the same resolution and clarity of treble as my current B&W diamonds do.

I've heard all of those speakers, but in very different settings so I can't offer any comparisons. It'll be hard to find people who have directly compared them. Those diamonds have a nice sound.
post #270 of 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

What signal would you feed the additional channels? Does the Cinema Reference have any processing, such as DTS Neo:X, that can extract Height or Wide channels?







We are extracting the height and width with the TRINNOV processor.





New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › ADA Cinema Reference Mach IV