Is this Possible and if so could it match seperates???

[Jason36]

I am thinking more in theory here as a potential revamp of my main home system.....and with the right components could it sound as good as an equivalent seperates systems??

Active Speakers such as AVI ADM 9.1 / Dynaudio Focus 110A or similar

NAS Drive (HiRes FLAC / ALAC etc) into Squeezebox Touch or Sonos

Controlled via iPad touch

Additions could include a DAC to sit between the SB and Actice Speakers (such as REGA DAC or the MF M1 DAC)

This would obviously be a compact and virtually boxless solution. Looking at the equipment listed we are probably talking about a total cost of say £2,500.

Would you need to include a pre-amp to control the volume or could this be done via the iPad?

And what would peoples opinion be on the sound quality? would it match say the sound of all in one solutions such as the UnitQute / Clic etc etc??

So options are:

1) Keep the Caspian Pre / Power and add a SB Touch

2) Sell the Caspian Pre / Power and replace as above

3) Sell the Caspian Pre / Power and replace with UnitiQute / MF CLIC or similar

Whatever the final outcome the Turntable would be staying.

Opinions gratefully received as are alternative solutions

 

[big1986ben]

The AVI ADM 9.1 already include a dac and pre amp all you would have to do it attach the SB via optical.

I would then get a cheap PC off ebuyer or ebay and install vortexbox.

My friend has this system very clean and sounds great. The pc can be put in a different room etc.

 

[Overdose]

Various options exist for the active route and you have a few directions to come at this from.

Do you want to go right up to the £2500 budget for example? Do you want the smallest box count possible, or just a smaller setup?

For a minimalist, typical 'hi-fi' system, you could do worse than the ADM 9.1s and a Mac mini. This could be remote controlled via an ipod/iphone/ipad.

Most other actives will need some sort of pre amp, either h-fi or proaudio interface.

For the best functionality, go with a Preamp/DAC combo with remote control, with the source being a computer of some description or a streaming device.

I have a HTPC myself, but if my budget allowed, I'd be tempted by the Mac mini, as it will work seamlessly with other Apple products and will simply 'work' straight out of the box without any faffing.

Several other people on this forum have active systems of varying types and will hopefuly add their opinions.

I have just noticed that you have headphones too. A preamp/DAC combo, usually has a headphone amplifer built in too, so you could do away with the X Can

 

[Jason36]

Various options exist for the active route and you have a few directions to come at this from.

Do you want to go right up to the £2500 budget for example? Do you want the smallest box count possible, or just a smaller setup?

For a minimalist, typical 'hi-fi' system, you could do worse than the ADM 9.1s and a Mac mini. This could be remote controlled via an ipod/iphone/ipad.

Most other actives will need some sort of pre amp, either h-fi or proaudio interface.

For the best functionality, go with a Preamp/DAC combo with remote control, with the source being a computer of some description or a streaming device.

I have a HTPC myself, but if my budget allowed, I'd be tempted by the Mac mini, as it will work seamlessly with other Apple products and will simply 'work' straight out of the box without any faffing.

Several other people on this forum have active systems of varying types and will hopefuly add their opinions.

I have just noticed that you have headphones too. A preamp/DAC combo, usually has a headphone amplifer built in too, so you could do away with the X Can

Hi overdose and thanks for your reply?

I suppose the theory behind this is that 3 months ago I sold my Caspian M1 CD player due to lack of use. All of my music is saved on my laptop / iPod / iPad in ALAC format and also predominantly use Spotify Premium. I have also now got a few HiRes downloads in FLAC format (both 44.1KHz-16 Bit and 96KHz-24 Bit). The other format I predominantly use is the Planar 3 turntable and this will remain as a main source.

I am looking to achieve all of the points you mentioned, but predominantly looking to reduce box size and if possible count whilst still achieving high quality audiophile sound.

What I know is that I do not want a PC which has to be left on all the time to access media players and music files. If I can sell my Pre / power amps (full size separates) and get a smaller system offering a similar high quality sound then that would be a bonus.

Possibly the Linn DS would be an ideal solution but very expensive.....something like the Naim UnitiQute connected to Active Speakers would achieve the smaller system / box count. I would however have to add a NAS to this to get the music to the Qute.

Alternatively a Mac Mini with NAS into Actives would also suit and be considerably smaller than either the Caspian Pre or Power Amp.

Sounds like there needs to be a bit of research and demo of the AVI ADM's initially attached to my laptop (using the NuForce DAC2 I have for listening to my Laptop at work)

 

[Overdose]

Whilst having a Pc on all, or a lot of the time might seem excessive, the small form factor HTPCs are very energy efficient and several types are available. Mine uses very little power and is about 3" high by 7" wide, not much bigger than a Wii console.

Always try before you buy if possible, it's the best way, but you could do a lot worse than the ADMs. They do seem to represent GVFM.

Let us know how you get on with this.

 

[nads]

yes very do able.

just a note on DACs. I bought a Dac Magic (exdemo) that was used to improve a Sonos set up. I does not improve the SB touch. (did improve the SB3).

Oh and I think i will be ending up with something similar.

 

[dannycanham]

Design wise putting everything into the same box is a compromise. However when money comes into play you get more bang for your buck. At the price range you are talking about you should have no problem finding devices you are vey happy with doing the usual going and listening.

At a £2500 budget I would look into an hi-fi'd squeezebox which includes a remote with display:

http://www.fidelityaudio.co.uk/reviews/SB_Duet_diy_review.pdf

A compatible networked storage, some are listed on squeezeboxes wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squeezebox_Server

And a pair of active with DAC inside speakers as you have mentioned.

You don't have to worry about the problem of polution from a computer near to hi fi.

The squeezebox nas should use even less power than low power computers.

It is very few boxes.

 

[Overdose]

Design wise putting everything into the same box is a compromise. However when money comes into play you get more bang for your buck. At the price range you are talking about you should have no problem finding devices you are vey happy with doing the usual going and listening.

In what way would you consider this type of design a compromise? The way I see it, you actually pay for better quality components and design because the manufacturing costs of several boxes have been reduced down to one box.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squeezebox_Server

And a pair of active with DAC inside speakers as you have mentioned.

There are not many options for speakers with incoporated DACs and initially, if going down the squeezebox route, I'd be inclined not to bother with an additional DAC at all. Better to wait and see how the set up sounds before adding something potentially unneccessary.

You don't have to worry about the problem of polution from a computer near to hi fi.

The squeezebox nas should use even less power than low power computers.

It is very few boxes.

A small form factor Pc works as storage and media player in addition to normal Pc duties, it is therefore far better value being more flexible. The power consumption of my ASRock is around 24W, granted, more than my NAS at 11W, but add the Squeezebox and the difference is negligible. There is also the benefit of not having to stream the files between devices and having the ripping and metadata software in the same location as your media.

If the computer in question is a Mac, then the remote could be a number of mobile Apple devices, also being multi functional and not simply a remote.

It is even fewer boxes.

Pollution? Have you honestly listened to a similar system of the type we are discussing? It does seem that your suggestions are based on anecdotal evidence.

 

[John Duncan]

Overdose has it about right if you want to reduce box count. The ADMs have a built in DAC so you wouldn't need to add one (or a pre amp), whereas most other actives/powered passives around would need both. Note, however, that while they're very versatile they're not the only game in town when it comes to sound; i personally prefer PMC DB1-SAIIs (albeit with no dAC or remote preamp, so less versatile, and twice the price).

Not sure what a UnitiQute would bring to the party since it has built in amps so actives wouldn't be necessary (or conbersely, you're paying for amps you don't need). You'd be better getting one of the streamer only solutions from Squeezebox, Cambridge, Marantz, Denon etc.

One thing i would consider however is how you incorporate your turntable; you'll need an external phono stage if you fon't have one already and will need to get the signal to the actives, whoch could mean long phono leads; this may or may not be practical for you.

 

[Anonymous]

[EDITED BY MODS and user banned for breach of house rules]

 

[John Duncan]

Not a bad idea, but it has no analog inputs so doesn't solve the turntable problem (presuming the chosen speaker solution only has one set of inputs). Do they do anything else that might?

 

[dannycanham]

Design wise putting everything into the same box is a compromise. However when money comes into play you get more bang for your buck. At the price range you are talking about you should have no problem finding devices you are vey happy with doing the usual going and listening.

In what way would you consider this type of design a compromise? The way I see it, you actually pay for better quality components and design because the manufacturing costs of several boxes have been reduced down to one box.

Basic audio engineering. Anyone who has built audio equipment will tell you that (unless they are selling a combination system of course). If you use the same quality components and build completely seperate pre/power etc etc you come across alot less design problems with components. People including myself who have listened to said systems are pretty much unanimous in the belief that a seperates design will more often than not sound better. I haven't the time to explain it all to you when I clearly have to start from such a low level.

Here is one of many places on the internet with interesting views on the subject:

http://www.dnm.co.uk/materials.html



I already mentioned bang for your buck as the other side of the coin and that for £2500 the op would find something they were happy with. I don't own true seperates. My budget doesn't stretch to the kit I would ideally like. I am aware that the designs of my kit is a compromise. It is audible. For my budget I have found kit I am happy with.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squeezebox_Server

And a pair of active with DAC inside speakers as you have mentioned.

There are not many options for speakers with incoporated DACs and initially, if going down the squeezebox route, I'd be inclined not to bother with an additional DAC at all. Better to wait and see how the set up sounds before adding something potentially unneccessary.

So when spending £2500 on a system you would recommend no DAC past the internal squeezebox DAC? I have heard the internal squeezebox DAC. It is OK. When spending £2500 on a system it isn't hard to do better. I have never heard anyone else who has heard said kit disagree with my view on this.

There are not many options for DAC speakers but as the OP wanted reduced boxes and already mentioned them. I happen to agree he should look down this route.

You don't have to worry about the problem of polution from a computer near to hi fi.

The squeezebox nas should use even less power than low power computers.

It is very few boxes.

A small form factor Pc works as storage and media player in addition to normal Pc duties, it is therefore far better value being more flexible. The power consumption of my ASRock is around 24W, granted, more than my NAS at 11W, but add the Squeezebox and the difference is negligible. There is also the benefit of not having to stream the files between devices and having the ripping and metadata software in the same location as your media.

If the computer in question is a Mac, then the remote could be a number of mobile Apple devices, also being multi functional and not simply a remote.

It is even fewer boxes.

I own two mac mini's and a netbook. I have a phone that can be used as a remote. They are awkward without a tv/screen and keyboard trackpad. As a pure audio device more dedicated kit is much more convenient.

After setup it would be

Speakers, Squeezebox, NAS, remote.

Speakers, computer, keyboard, trackpad, remote, screen.

Pollution? Have you honestly listened to a similar system of the type we are discussing? It does seem that your suggestions are based on anecdotal evidence.

Yes. I have. My suggestions are based on a combination of a degree in electroacoustics, building audio equipment, being a member of an acoustics society for many years, listening to thousands of pieces of kit often with like minded enthusiasts AND anecdotal evidence.

When building hi fi it would be easy to use a computer processor rather than a dedicated audio processor. Dedicated processors are used for a reason. Dedicated processors are fit for purpose using the lowest power and creating the lowest pollution for other components. Obviously a squeezebox is neither but it is a step in the right direction from a multi puprose computer.



Half of your arguments are akin to arguing with reality and the whole industry itself. Are you just trolling or clueless when it comes to hi-fi?

 

[Overdose]

My suggestions are based on a combination of a degree in electroacoustics, building audio equipment, being a member of an acoustics society for many years, listening to thousands of pieces of kit often with like minded enthusiasts AND anecdotal evidence.

An enthusiast eh! Nuff said.

Oh, and the quoting on your last post needs amending, it reads very poorly.