Hello all. 1st of thanks, this is a great forum and u guys are great w/the help u offer. I want to improve my sound in 2 channel music mode. I have Paradigm Monitor 9's for my fronts. I'm using a Harmon Kardon AVR-230 as my Pre/Pro for the fronts connected to 2 M-Blocks. I have about $1k to spend. My question is: do u think I should get the Outlaw 950 or upgrade my speakers. Would the 950 make much of a difference over what I'm hearing w/the HK. I'm not unhappy with my current sound, I just "feel" like there's something missing and I can do better w/my current budget. I just don't know which way to go 1st.
Thx in advance,

dk

Changing your speakers is the biggest difference you can make in your system. With the budget you stated, there are plenty of options out there. Grab your favorite CD and head on down to some of your local hi-fi shops and listen to whatever you can.

My personal favorite experience with a speaker in that price range would be the Sonus Faber Concertino. It really made my jaw drop with the size and depth of the soundstage it produced. You might, if you have the space for it, look into Magnepan speakers. They've developed a pretty loyal following so they must be doing something right. Their entry level speaker, the MMG, is available in floor-standing form for $550 shipped directly from them with a in-home trial period.

Good luck and have fun!

Just my opinion but...

You will always gain the most from updating a transducer over a piece of solid state electronics. So my initial reaction is "speakers" will make the most difference.

You've got plenty of power and there's not much, if any, difference in sound between one solid state pre-amp section and another. So I still think "speakers."

But then comes the kicker: $1000 to spend.

Sure you can get a darn good pair of speakers for $1000. But you are already in possession of a pretty darn good pair of speakers in the Paradigms. While you could buy something that sounds "different" for $1000, I doubt that anything else will sound an awful lot "beter" - but that's always a matter of taste.

It does not hurt to go out and shop around and listen. But it looks to me like you are already pretty well off for listening to stereo music - and spending $1000 is not going to get you much more - sorry to say.

On this one I am sure that others might disagree.

Jeff Mackwood

You know, Jeff makes a really good point. At your price point, you are going to find many different speakers from many different brands. While all these speakers sound good in their own right, and while they will also sound different than your current Paradigms, they aren't going to be the end all to your "uprgradeitis." Don't get me wrong, I still think the biggest change you can make is a speaker swap, but Jeff's point is completely on the mark.

That said, here are some other options that you can do for under your price limit.

1) Look into the Benchmark DAC1. It's a pro-quality DAC that may help you hear what you are "missing" in your current system. It's also very easy to fit into your current system as you can use your current player as a transport.

www. benchmarkmedia.com
look under "digital products"

2) Pick up a pair of really sweet headphones and a seperate headphone amp. I picked up a pair of Grado SR-80 headphones last year and they provide a great 2-channel option to my main system. Look into the higher-end Grado and Sennheiser headphones. You'll be amazed at what kind of sound and image they can produce.

With your price range, you can also add a headphone amp that will truly let your "cans" open up.

www.headphone.com

Here’s a bit of a “reverse engineering” suggestion: listen to another set of Paradigm Monitor 9's in a different setting. If you find that you can hear in this alternate setting what you thought was missing at home, try to determine if the difference is in the processing, the spacing/arrangement of the speakers, the acoustics of the room, supplemental subwoofers, or ???

Thanks for your comments. All good stuff. Headphones aren't a good option for me for personal/lifestyle reasons. But thanks for the suggestion. I like the idea of adding a DAC. The reverse engineering idea is good also. I think I'll go with the DAC for now and save my $ until I can afford to go to another level with my speakers. Maybe in the $2k range. You've given me some things to think about, and I really appreciate it.
thx,
dk

when you are looking to improve the quality of your sound, typically you need to consider the whole picture. it will only ever be as good as its weakest link. the great thing about speakers is that at all costs they produce sound, it just depends on what kind of sound you like. i think people go out and get a new component and expect it to be so so much better, and sometimes it is, but sometimes it is just different and they are disappointed.

I agree with virtually all of what has been posted. For an additional thousand bucks you probably can't improve your speaker situation all that much, though speakers clearly have the greatest impact on the listening experience.

Have you thoroughly investigated room placement, listening locations, sound treatments and the like? And can you say to yourself just what it is that you don't like about your current setup? If you can't then shopping for upgrades is going to be more difficult since you will have to perambulate from venue to venue trying to hear whatever it is that you feel is missing at home.

As to better DACs, you can certainly try them but unless you do a blind A-B comparison and can consistently identify the better ones then I'm betting you won't hear any difference at all in your room at home.

To tell the truth, when I start feeling that something is "missing" it often means that I am just hungry for an upgrade of some sort...any sort. That's just a symptom of audiophilitis and you'll probably be afflicted with it all your life.

Enjoy!

------------------
The Nice Guy with the Good Ears.
"The human capacity for self-delusion is nearly boundless."

I was currently in the same boat with an H/K 310 and the outlaw 755 connected to a bunch of polk audio speakers.I also was considering the 950,but instead up -graded my cd/dvd player from a low end sony to a denon 2900, and that changed the sound of my system dramaticaly.

Would you suggest the DAC1 for those who have very high quality speakers, and associated solid state components for two channel? Is there an argument for more than one unit, as they are only a half rack space in width?

If so, would I run a digital PCM two channel signal via coax from a CD/DVD Player such as a Panasonic RP91 to the DAC1?

Now, I use the Outlaw 950 in stereo bypass mode for all two channel recordings, using the DAC's in the RP91. The RP91 also can upsample CD's to 88.2 kHz/24bit before converting to analog output. I believe this feature smoothes out higher frequencies (less strident than the unconverted signal) coming from this player. It may not be an issue with other players or the DAC1 however.

With all the hype on the newest DAC's in players, pre-pros, and receivers, it would actually be comforting to know that a separate pro quality box like the DAC1, would be a significant improvement for two channel purists. it also has balanced outputs, which is always a good option to have.

Best,
Allan

[This message has been edited by AGAssarsson (edited May 28, 2004).]

It stands to reason that if you're using high quality components in your playback chain; an outboard DAC such as the DAC1 could serve you nicely. Your system would be able to bring out the subtle details that a higher quality DAC can reveal.

The DAC1 is made as a stereo device. If your just connecting it to your transport (in this case your RP-91) via a digital connection, than all you need is one. Taking the analog output of the DAC1 and connecting it into the direct inputs of your 950 would be the proper connection method. The DAC1 can also function as a pre-amp if you want to hook it up directly to amps.

Note: Benchmark recently raised the price of the DAC1. It's still a good deal at the new price but it is a little more expensive.

Jason, thank you for your response. The DAC1 promotes special features in it's design that seem to set it apart from other quality DAC's found in receivers, pre-pros, and players.

From the Benchmark brochure... "Many DACs derive their system clock directly from the AES receiver making them very susceptible to jitter. These DACs can rarely achieve their rated performance in real world applications. By contrast, the DAC1 takes full advantage of our jitter free UltraLock™ technology... The DAC1 provides some of the finest analog conversion through 192-kHz and all sample rates playback with a 52-kHz analog bandwidth. The performance of the DAC1 is unrivaled. THD+N is an astonishing low -106 dB (0.0005%) measured at 0 dBFS, at any playback frequency, at any sample rate, with any degree of input jitter..."

Considering this and your experience with other equipment, do you believe that the DAC1 represents a significant improvement over the many products (receivers, pre-pros, and players) that include high quality DAC's as part of their design? And, is the 52-kHz analog bandwidth in playback uncommon for DAC's?

thank you again...
Allan

You want to improve Stereo sound.

You have nice speakers.

Everyone loves to say "buy new speakers!" but in all honesty the sound can be improved to get the most out of your speakers rather easily.

First I'd look at the source. You never mentioned what you source is. You likely could buy a really nice CD player and improve your sound.

You could buy some Audio-Tech Feet of Silence and improve your sound (seriously, of all the changes I've made in the last 5 year, Audio-Techs' Rack Of Silence, Discs of Silence, and Feet of Silence made the LARGEST difference and most notable).

You could jump right to speakers but I think you have nice speakers to begin with. Find out where in the chain is the weakest link and look to improve it.

CD player/DVD player, Pre-Amp, Receiver, AMP, Speaker Cable, Interconnects, the Audio-Tech stuff, any of those could audibly increase the performance of your system.