Dynaudio Owner's Thread - Page 494

Thanks to those who replied.

I actually auditioned the S1.4 a few months ago when my dealer held an event and a representative for Dynaudio was there.

Called the dealer today and ordered the S1.4! I got it in high-gloss cherry. Also got the Stand 4. I will report back after a few weeks with my impressions.

Glad to know I won't have to upgrade the M3i. I won't have enough money for a major amp upgrade after getting the speakers. (By the way, I'm a grad student.)

I don't think my cables are the weak link. Just a few months ago I upgraded to Straightwire Serenade II interconnects and speaker cables They sound amazing.

Congrats! I loved the S1.4; IMO, it is the point where Dyn crosses from very very good (I had Focus 140s before them)...to great. BTW...I was totally joking about the cables thing...lol.

CD

The Yamaha RX-V667 is here. Man, it is only supposed to be about 2,5kg heavier than the Onkyo TX-SR309 it replaces, but it feels like twice the weight! Which is of course merely a good thing I wonder what this thing's "real" power specs are for stereo, since the listed power is much higher than the Puccini's. Though as always, wattage itself doesn't mean that much.

Since I have the Puccini wired in to the Yamaha now anyway, I guess I can do away with using the very budget-oriented PCM2705-based 48/16 USB DAC and just use the Yamaha's 192/24 Burr-Brown (no idea of a more specific model) DAC with my computer via HDMI, since I reckon it's likely to do a better job of it (more on that in a sec). I guess if listening via my netbook, I would still have to use the USB DAC though. Only downside of using the Yamaha as a pre-amp/DAC compared to the USB DAC is, I guess, the power consumption. Bummer

So yeah, about the doing a better job of it part... not sure if it's just the DAC or something else, but my first impression of starting playback with the Yamaha connected was that the sound felt... lively? I guess I should compare with the USB DAC properly to make sure I'm not imagining things, since my sonic memory is absolutely terrible.

All in all, if nothing else for the vast majority of usage I can now use the Yamaha as a remote control for the Puccini. But with that said, the Yamaha's remote control gadget is pretty crappy usability-wise compared to the Onkyo's. Especially the directional control thingie + the enter button in the middle of it are tiny and hard to use Regardless, I guess there's no rush with the Naim since the lack of HTBP doesn't seem to be a huge drawback in practise as long as I don't change the volume on the Puccini itself, for which there should be no need usually.

Now, to decide whether or not to try connecting rear speakers... Main issue there being the fricking cables I'd need to run around the entire living room.

After a bit of use I noticed the front channels were emitting some noise even when there was no music being played. Kind of electric interference, or something of the sort. Not sure what is causing it - if I unplugged the Puccini from the Yamaha, it went away. So maybe the pre-outs themselves are noisy, which seems unlikely, or perhaps it's caused by the Puccini not having an actual HTBP and thus the signal going basically through two pre-amps?

Well, regardless, to see if the Yamaha itself was emitting such noise, I plugged the C1s directly to it. No noise. And actually pretty damn great sound, once I started playing some music. Even though I probably shouldn't stir this pot here anymore, because of the great sound I'm contemplating just skipping the Puccini in the setup, even though I bought this darn Yamaha because of the pre-outs to begin with... haha Especially if I can't find the reason for the noise thing. I need to try with the tripath connected to the pre-outs tomorrow and see if it happens with it too. Unfortunately I don't have a power amplifier with no built-in pre-amplifier to try with.

You may have a ground loop issue.

Try attaching a bit of speaker wire as an earth strap between the chassis of the amp and pre-amp and see if that helps.

Alright, I'll try that later today.

Oh by the way. That "liveliness" I mentioned, it ended up being rather fatiguing, and the treble felt a bit off, perhaps a little distorted, and the sound in general... "restless". All that is gone when using just the Yamaha itself, and the sound is now very enjoyable iindeed. I assume the ground loop or whatever is causing the electrical noise is probably to blame for the problems in the sound using the Puccini as power amp?

I got a bit of hum/hiss with poweramps running from my Yamaha AVR. The speaker wire as an earth strap between the AVR and poweramps trick fixed 95% of it.

Just like the ground wire of a turntable to the pre-amp for ground loop problems.

For me it's not just a hum or hiss... hard to describe it, but it is similar to what I get if I use the analog outputs of my desktop computer motherboard's integrated sound card, because the graphics card interferes with it on an electrical level. It's a very distracting type of noise. It's not even - it's chaotic distortion sort of thing. With the sound card it's far louder though, but didn't seem to produce other issues with the sound like what seems to be the case with the AVR.

EDIT: I think I'm just gonna roll with the Yamaha solo at least until I can get the Puccini properly fixed, it's certainly good enough solo and the vanishing left channel on the other hand is a pain in the butt.

So, i have been lurking around here for some time and ended up getting the X32s...i am now in need of a "budget" amp (integrated) with pre-out as i plan to run it in combo with a Sub250 as 2.1.

I realize everyone recommends the Naim XS or 5i..5i lacks pre-out, so it leaves the XS which is a $2,700 option. Long story short, i don't plan to spend as much on electronics as on the speakers. At least not for now.

In the sub 1k range, what would be the best option to look at? How would a NAD 326 stack up (and does it matter it only have a "single" RCA sub output and no pre-outs for running the Sub250?)

Thank you for all input!

EnCar, from what I've understood you have to go quite pricey if you want a stereo amplifier that has bass management - in other words selectable crossover so you can cut the lowest frequencies from the main speakers. Technically you could run the signal from the source to the SUB 250 with 2x RCA and then run it from the SUB to the amplifier again with 2x RCA, in this case the SUB would take care of the crossover stuff.

Do you already have the Sub250? If not, I would reconsider and look at the REL subs. Then you won't have to worry about bass management in the pre/amp. The REL accepts high level output from the amp speaker connections, and you set the crossover (as well as phase and level) at the REL, which also means you can set it much lower if necessary, which is often a better way of to get a sub integrated for two-channel bass extension (rather than for multi-channel LFE).

I have a Sub500 and I could never get it to work satisfactorily with my two-channel system. It works brilliantly for LFE in my HT system, but is mostly unusable in my two-channel system. I have a REL T-7 (MSRP $899) and it is fantastic with my Dyn Contour S1.4s.

A Nait 5i, X32s, and a REL T-5 or T-7 would make for an awesome setup.

Whats the disadvantage of using the Sub250 Xover and set it to <80 or so? I realize i may get a bit of overlap on the lower frequencies but figured appropriate volume setting on the sub would take care of that?

The biggest mistake made integrating subs with two-channel audio is setting the crossover to high and the volume too low. With the REL you can crossover lower and set volume higher. That's how I have it. You can't even tell there is a sub in my system, until you turn it off. Then the soundstage collapses and the music sound thinner. That's how it should be. You just won't get that if you xover too high.

Go to the REL site and read the setup manual. It says the same thing about settings.

Look, I love Dynaudio and am a huge fan. I think my Sub500 is awesome, but it just doesn't work well for two channel, and I have tried over and over. OTOH, it will shake my house apart on action movies. Maybe the Sub250 is different, but I just love how the REL works. It's easy to setup, crossovers as low as you need it and is very fast, which makes it ideal for music.

Sounds like i am stuck with the wrong sub ? If i return it and go with the REL instead, do i simply connect the REL to the B speaker terminals?

As an alternative, if i used the NAD 326 pre-outs to the Sub250 and then fed the signal back into the amps main-ins, using the sub's x-over, would this be a worse option?

Here is an example - I have C1's rated at 45hz. I have a Rel B3. I cross my B3 over at 36hz. They blend beautifully and I don't hear any 'hump' in the bass just the lower extension of the C1's. It sounds like the lowest octaves are coming from the C1's. When I cross over at 45 hz I hear a slight 'hump' in the bass with a loss at the lowest octave because the 'hump' drowns it out. The worst is I can now hear where the sub is located. That to me makes the bass sound like it is not from the C1's. The other thing to look for in a sub is how low it goes. What I mean if your speakers are rated at 38hz on the low end and the sub goes to 30hz you are really gaining much. Oh and using the volume to compensate will either tame the 'hump' again drowning out the lowest octave or just exaggerate the hump.

That being said there is not very much below 40 hz in music. Video is a different story.

No connect them to the speaker terminals that your speakers are connected to. The impedance of speakers is normally 4 - 16 ohms where the Rel is 10,000 ohms. So it is just sensing the voltage and taking virtually no current (the Rel has it's own amp built in).

If you do get a Rel the stock cable is garbage. I upgraded to the Nordost baseline (made to Rel spec) and the attack and decay I heard was something I never knew was there. And it is just a single cable.

Yes, the REL has three types of input: LFE, low level, and high level. For video you would use the low level or LFE. For two-channel use low level or high level. The latter works the best and connects to the speaker terminal on your amp along with your main speaker connections. The REL's high level connection does not interfere whatsoever with the main speakers, even though they are bound to the same amp speaker posts.

If you are determined to stick with the Sub250, I'm sure Mick can pipe in with suggestions for the best way to get it integrated for music bass extension. as OctaDyn_Dude mentioned, if you don't get it right, you just end up with humps and/or dips, which will in turn rob you of other benefits like soundstage refinement and resolution of detail.

I also went with custom cable for my REL that was built with Transparent Cable and Cardas connectors. I also use Cardas double banana connectors to connect both the sub cable spades and speaker cable bananas to my amps banana connectors.

Dean Did the replacement cable make a huge or minor difference? To me it was huge.
George

I can't say. I ordered the cable when I ordered my REL and never used the OEM cable but for a couple days at most. I just trusted what everyone else said about getting an improved cable. I think I paid about $150 for mine, although there are good cables for less than $100. Until Audiogon went to s&^t you could get new cables there with a search for REL.

Thanks for all advice. I will return the Dyn Sub and go for the REL. This way i don't need a new amp right away and sounds like I will get a better result. Understanding that the REL can be connected to the same terminals as the speakers make the Naim 5i again interesting. Perhaps this is the way to go as suggested by you all. Hopefully the store won't kill me for changing my mind.

The Naim 5i - Houston we have a problem. Since the Naim 5i has an unique banana connector you will have to get a banana adapter that will accept both a banana and a spade. The stock cable is bare wire. If you decide on an after market cable get spades for the amp end to go into the adapter.
Houston the problem is solved

Excellent post, Dean. I've found exactly the same thing with my REL sub.

The downside is that you can't give the lower frequencies to the sub instead of the speaker, if the speaker is being strained. With the SUB 250 you can, if you run the cables from the source to the sub to the amp. But I guess the main issue with this approach would be volume control, since you'd effectivel have to control the volume from the sub, and the sub has no remote control (as I understand, the 300 and 500 do?). Unless I guess if you have a pre-amplifier with volume control, in which case pre-amp -> subwoofer -> amplifier -> speaker could work and control the whole thing from the pre-amp.

You need to use high-pass filtering for the monitors to get satisfactory results, that's why it works better in a HT setup (where this is done). Using the acoustic filtering of the monitors only works if the sub is filtered really low, but this is not adviced in general. With HP filter for the monitors the distortion will be lower and the response curve will be smoother. In addition phase should be corrected. I believe that the dynaudio subs have output with HP filter for the monitors. This should be used in a 2.1 setup.

Anyone listened to the Xeo speakers yet?

I have auditioned the Xeo 3 and is very impressed with the performance. I believe that this is definitively the way to go in the future. Digital all the way and dsp filtering must be a dream to work with for speaker designers, having control over the entire signal path. The sound can be tailored in any desired way and the amplifiers optimized for the work load. My guess is that this type of filtering and amplification results in very low distortion levels compared to an equivalent passive version. I just hope that the Xeo system will be expanded with e.g. subs and/or surround, just like the Air system. At the very least the option to add sub(s) to the Xeo 3.

Wow, it sounds like we may have found the cure for the the golden eared audiophiles !!
No more switching amps and cables every 2 weeks!

According to who? If you read the REL setup manual, they specifically state the biggest mistake setting up their subs is setting the crossover to high and the volume too low as a result.

When I raise the crossover on my REL it starts to sound boomy, kills the resolution of the system as a whole, and draws attention to itself. When I put it back lower, I get nicely integrated bass extension and it enhances the performance of the system as a whole. you can't even tell it's there (until you power it off and notice what is missing).

As I mentioned before, I could never get my Sub500 to sound right in a two-channel music setup. It just plain didn't work. Even my Dyn dealer said the REL approach is better.

Im close to pulling the trigger on x12''s, x22 and dm 2/6 (for surround) in a 5.1 setup that will be 90% ht use and 10% music (already have svs 20-39pc+ sub.) Im deciding between two avr's, the integra dtr 80.3 or the dtr 70.3. The main differences between the two are the 80.3 has a shielded toroidal transformer and four independent power supplies while the 70.3 has an unshielded toroidal transformer and two independent power supplies. The 80.3 also is 5-10 watts more powerful per channel. The price difference is $600 between the two. The 80.3 would put me a bit over budget. I would like your opinions if you feel the 80.3 would be worth the extra $$. I appreciate all responses but please do not recommend other receivers or separates as one of these two avr's will be the one i choose. Links are below to both units. Thanks, as the members in this thread have been extremely helpful thus far!

http://www.integrahometheater.com/mo...s=Receiver&p=s

http://www.integrahometheater.com/mo...s=Receiver&p=s