Official Classe SSP-800 thread. - Page 152

Riwi,

Did you ever consider if you'd shipped it back to Classe for repair it would have been fixed right the first time? Not cheap I understand but they would back their repair and I would think replace and repair as needed. The price for driving 500km and twice repairing it would drive me crazy! It may have needed to go to someone who knows exactly what is occurring, and not just swapping parts internally. Good luck with your new unit.

Hi sharp,
The first 3 month repair was done by the official Classe import / repair
The dutch dealer only charged me the shipping cost to the importer. The fix was done under warrantee eventhough the ssp was originally bought in a different country (Germany). I asked what was done, but they could not say more then that the problem was fixed. The dealer said the mainboard was replaced but through the vents I saw that the serial number on the mainboard was not changed.

The second quicker attempt was done by the local repair of the german Classe dealer. They had a lot of expertise in repairing Classe equipment I was told. The dealer in Germany/Karlsruhe (where the unit had originally been sold) was excellent in their efforts and support. They also supplied me with the new 1.4 v3 unit quite quickly.

All in all it took 6* 500km of driving. I drove to speed things up and have personal contact with the dealer. In the end it worked out fine. I bought german beer on every trip there so I did get something out of it

Cullen does a mod to the output of the Sonos zone player to reduce jitter and the reviews are pretty positive if you do a search, so I would say it is probably possible to improve the digital output. At what cost I don't know???

In my system I use a Genesis Digital Lens to clean the digital output of an Apple TV (v1) and it makes a huge difference whether connecting to my Perfectwave DAC or Anthem D2.

Ayer Acoustics does an extensive mod to the BDP-83. One of the areas they address is HDMI jitter. Read more here. Whether/if/how audible it may be when driving the SSP-800 has not been reported.

Roger, your post has reminded me of something that has puzzled me for a while.

I have previously read Charles Hansen's explanations of Ayre's HDMI audio jitter reduction efforts and Kal's follow up review of the DX-5 in Stereophile. But something escapes me. How can a very low jitter HDMI audio master clock at the source make any relevant difference in jitter at the sink?

I believe that my understanding of HDMI audio transmission is sound. HDMI audio data (assume LPCM) gets inserted in between frames of the actual or null HDMI video data. As a result, the audio data is no longer isochronous. It becomes asynchronous -- essentially a packet of audio data transmitted every 1/59.94 of a second. For that reason, the audio must be buffered and re-clocked at the sink.

Thus, why should the very low jitter audio clock at the source matter? Rather, the precision of the audio clock that controls the output of the buffer at the sink is seemingly what should ultimately matter.

The analogous situation that comes to mind is that I am packing up my bookshelf to move my books to a new office. On one hand, I can pack my books in each box in a very orderly fashion. Or, on the other hand, I can pack my books into boxes with little regard to order. No matter how meticulously (or not) I pack and transfer my books to the new office, though, I still ultimately control how neatly I rearrange my books on the new bookshelf.

What am I missing?

AJ

I'm no expert in HDMI or jitter, but my understanding is that the recovery clocking is still under the influence of the source clock, just as it is with S/PDIF, in contrast to the newer asynchronous USB method where the sink's local clock solely defines the data draw rate.

Source-clocked signals, whether the data is packetized or not, must be tracked by the sink's local clock, which is achieved using a PLL. The PLL partially decouples from the source clock by acting like a low-pass filter to the jitter spectrum, thus reducing it. But there are limits to any filter's attenuation. And the worse the jitter to start, the more that survives the filtering. Hence it makes good sense to reduce the jitter in the source when possible as Charles states.

Meridian also took the same approach when they built their many world-class CD players. Like most manufacturers, they bought their drive kits from Philips then made the rest of the player. But unlike the others, they obtained a separate license to allow a redesign to the laser mechanism to change the tracking servo. Turns out Philips had optimized it for hostile physical environments (cars) where shock/vibration could induce mistracking of the disc. This required a servo that tracked fast. But in a home player that is no longer necessary, and it is safe to apply a stronger low-pass filter in the tracking servo, thus reducing jitter in the recovered data stream. As Bob Stuart relates it, his approach is to reduce/minimize jitter at every step along the chain, even though its deleterious effects do not occur until the final conversion to analog.

Removed

Sorry I am losing it

lol.. I figured you forgot you posted this already. you should just be able to delete the post. No?

"The logical solution is to perform the conversion of DSD to analog in a high quality SACD player, such as the type likely to be owned by a potential CTSSP/ SSP-800 owner. These players can then be connected to the SSP via its multichannel analog bypass."

I disagree with this conclusion and believe that using the HDMI/PCM output will result in superior performance from the SSP-800 as it eliminates the D/A conversion in the player (regardless of how good that is) as well as the concomitant A/D conversion in the SSP-800 (regardless of how good that is).

Interesting well I tried both and to be honest having the Oppo BDP-95 decoding the DSD, using RCA connections and setting the SSP-800 just as volume control using 7.1 bypass ensure no additional D/A conversion.

I liked what I heard and thought it surpassed the Classé SSP-800 doing decoding. DACs used in the Oppo BDP-95 are IMHO sound better than those in the SSP-800 for SCADs

Intrigued by this wse as I have a 95 and a pre pro that has a true blue analog passthrough ; does this also apply after a subsequent a/d d/a conversion for those who need PEQ or audyssey etc ? Not the 1st time Ive read favourable comments by those who have tried the analog stage route though few and far between

Did you use the room EQ?

Yes the room was professionally calibrated using the EQ and to be honest it's too flat for my taste

I don't know I am just relating my experience, maybe Audysey MultiEQ 32 would make it better but Unfortunately Classe only has manual EQ.

I even paid $500 to have it professionally calibrated and to be honest I found it flat

Umm, there's no A/D for multichannel analog, making avoiding it pretty easy. But I fully agree that PCM via HDMI is the way to go for SACD in the SSP-800.

So you disagree with Classé, have you tried the analogue using the Oppo BDP-95 you might be surprised.

What you suggest you have twice the D/A conversion once in the Oppo and once in the Classé.

I would rather have it only once

Huh? HDMI to the Classe DAC is still one DAC between the disc and the amps.

BTW, I have no disagreement with Classe's recommendation to use the DSD DAC in an external high end SACD player, then feeding that analog audio thru the analog bypass of the SSP. But that can only make sense if the system does not benefit from bass management or EQ. I suppose that's possible for some fortunate users but certainly not in my case.

I'm sorry your pro EQ did not yield the benefits you expected. Was it tuned only to make a meter happy ("flat" response) or was it also judged subjectively (by him and you)? Did he accidentally remove the "BBC dip? Did he explain that there were issues that could not be addressed with PEQ? Have you reported your dissatisfaction?

Then it wasn't done properly. (I do not want to entertain the prospect that it was but you just don't like it.)

Umm, yes. I was a bit quick on the trigger but I see my point was clear.

I'm a new owner of a Oppo BDP-95. I also have a BDP-93 and a BDP-83 (not SE). Although my 95 is not fully broken-in yet (if such thing exists for sources), its performance is already better than the 93 IMHO under the same conditions. I cannot explain why since I was expecting both my 95 and 93 to sound identical when connected using HDMI or coax to my SSP-800 but bizarrely, although very similar in term of presentation the background is darker with the 95. Might be due to the improved power supply in the 95 but how can we be sure?

When using the XLR analog outputs of the 95 and comparing the result to the 93 using coax, again the 95 wins. Not by a big margin but control, depth (3D presentation) and bass (tighter) are better. Moreover, the test still involves some BM in the SSP as my stereo settings are 2.1 (cannot go without my JL audio sub

That means, to my ears, this config: (Oppo 95) D/A -> XLR out -> (SSP-800) A/D -> BM -> D/A sounds better than

(Oppo 93) HDMI or coax -> (SSP-800) BM -> D/A

I cannot explain why the sound is better through the longest data path but just to confirm what are intrinsically subjective impressions I did the same test alternating between analog and digital outputs on the 95 only and I still prefer analog even with the extra A/D conversion.

Don't get me wrong, the DACs and analog stage of the SSP-800 are quite good and I really like how it sounds but I've read a few comments about the fact the Oppo was a "reference" player and wanted to verify by myself. The performance of the player is very impressive given its price. I thought that when purchasing my SSP I would be using the digital route entirely going forward and that a good transport would suffice (using one cable for all applications is so convenient). I really like my SSP and could live with all my components using HDMI but this little test has raised some doubts in my mind... it's probably audiophile madness but if a 1K$ player can do that, what would be the improvement when using a dSC or Ayre player? I don't like thinking about that since that means more money to spend normally

I still have to do some comparisons between HMDI and 7.1 analog and I'm sure that would be interesting. I'll keep you posted.

Interestingly he set up all speakers to small at 80Hz cross over even the B&W 800Diamond L&R!


Yes it seems that way! I can


To some extend, but I thought it was too flat, he told me I need listen to higher volume


The what? Never heard of that. I did a google search is that what you are talking about? http://www.harbeth.co.uk/uk/index.ph...ts&page=faq#13


Nope, I know my room is not perfect if there is such a thing


Yes, and unfortunately time was up

I could post picture here how do I do that again?

I am done spending money on gear for the time being This has to last as long as my car, 13 years

Oppo 95 D/A -> XLR out -> SSP-800 pure analogue bypass no additional A/D conversion in SSP-800 for me sounds better as well

Pretty much. While this is not the exact B&W model you use, it illustrates the point. B&W deliberately voice their speakers a certain way, and EQ might take it out, for bettor or worse.



This is from "The Subjective and Objective Evaluation of Room Correction Products".

Interesting! It's too bad Classe never included Audyssey Multi EQ XT32 it would be nice to compare, with what is done manually by independent contractors. I believe that one gets two or three acoustician professionals who does calibration and it will sound different. There is no good training and normalized standards as to what constitute good calibration

I have read rave reviews in Audyssey Multi EQ XT32

Then I would not have been a Classe customer. I wanted manual PEQ. I admit I did not get the best from it until the Dirac Live showed me the way forward. But that's a measurement deficiency on my part.


I agree that it seems there are many different approaches to this. I thought that's what HAA Certification is supposed to address, just to name one.


Yes, it's the first version worth its salt from Audyssey. It did not exist when the SSP was designed. And you'd need the Pro kit to be able to tweak it, that is unless the PEQ could run concurrently. Even then, I am not certain of the transparency of the Audyssey filters. Or even the Dirac. They all seem to be doing a lot more "correction" than actually necessary, based on the fact that I could apply some very low-Q PEQ mimicking the Dirac curves (with 1/2 octave smoothing) and achieve as good a result (EQ speaking). So what is all that extra EQ "grass" really doing for the sound in the end?

Any one you know does good calibrations?

It looks like my b/m point is moot in any case without an a/d conversion - no peq It reminds me of something the standalone audyssey unit distributor out here once said ;to paraphrase ; audyssey is the cherry on top of a well sorted room ie bass traps/diffusers etc ..

You may well have a good room ;or better than most Rogers bbc mention reminded me of how many british speakers over the years conformed to this report; http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1958-31.pdf

Rogers ;Pro ac etc

We discussed this 9 months ago. I've seen many names go by, but I have not heard the fruits of their labor myself, so cannot vouch on a personal basis.

I would think SoCal would be an easy environment for such services.

Might have a look at PMI for a start. Their videos are informative and will give you an insight as to their capabilities. Mr. Grimani and I worked together at Dolby before he went on the THX. The man knows his stuff. He is in NorCal, but travels a lot.

Does anyone know if the Classe SSP-800 has a AES/EBU balanced digital input on XLR jack? I want to connect it to a Berkeley Audio Alpha DAC Series 2 / Alpha USB.
The AES/EBU input is supposed to provide the highest quality signal.

I am considering the SSP-800 along with the Bryston SP-3 and Cary Audio Cinema 12. The Bryston and Cary both provide AES digital XLR inputs, but looking in the SSP-800 manual, it states that it provides 2-channel balanced ANALOG audio inputs. Are these the same as AES/EBU balanced digital input or something different?

If it does not have this input, then I would probably go with the Bryston or Cary pre pros.