Hi,
Firstly, apologies if something similar to this has been asked before but i've had a bit of a trawl of the forums and not quite found what I'm looking for. Also, apologies if this is all a bit basic or not quite in the right forum but I'm a bit of a newbie at the whole music-tech & kit-partnering thing.
I bought my first hifi seperates about 10 yrs ago and always intended to upgrade gradually but never quite got round to it. I currently have a basic setup of Cambridge Audio A5, Eltax Monitors, Denon TU1800DAB and a pretty pants Philips twin CD recorder/player combo.
I recently heard a mate's Arcam Solo Mini and have had itchy feet ever since to buy something that sounds similarly warm and rich compared to my rather "flat, boneless and clinical system.
I'm seriously thinking of ditching my CDs and housing my collection on either a NAS + squeezebox (or similar) combo or a large ipod classic at 320kbs.
I'm thinking of two options and need a bit of advice:
1 Go with an arcam solo mini and use with an ipod or squeezebox.
2 Or buy an amp and speakers plus squeezebox/nas combo or ipod classic and continue to use my denon DAB which I'm more than happy with (unlike the rest of my kit).
If I went with option 2 rather than 1, are there amp/speaker combos that are better suited than others for digital music?
Would a DAC be reccomended if I'm intending to use sources at 320kbs rather than lossless?
Would a similarly priced seperates combo sound considerably better than the much-lauded arcam?
Is the seperates idea stupid and I'll regret packing up all my CDs in boxes?
My budget for above is £1000 - preferably new rather than second-hand - all-in +/- 10%
I'd say my room is about 25ft by 18 and I'd sit about 16 ft away from the speakers which have to be fairly close to the wall.
I listen to indie/90s/rock, a fair bit of orchestral and choral, a bit of folk but no heavy metal or dance.
Which type of setup makes most sense (1 or 2) and, if 2, which bits of kit?
Any advice/comments gratefully appreciated ;o)
Thanks for listening,
Eileen
Firstly, apologies if something similar to this has been asked before but i've had a bit of a trawl of the forums and not quite found what I'm looking for. Also, apologies if this is all a bit basic or not quite in the right forum but I'm a bit of a newbie at the whole music-tech & kit-partnering thing.
I bought my first hifi seperates about 10 yrs ago and always intended to upgrade gradually but never quite got round to it. I currently have a basic setup of Cambridge Audio A5, Eltax Monitors, Denon TU1800DAB and a pretty pants Philips twin CD recorder/player combo.
I recently heard a mate's Arcam Solo Mini and have had itchy feet ever since to buy something that sounds similarly warm and rich compared to my rather "flat, boneless and clinical system.
I'm seriously thinking of ditching my CDs and housing my collection on either a NAS + squeezebox (or similar) combo or a large ipod classic at 320kbs.
I'm thinking of two options and need a bit of advice:
1 Go with an arcam solo mini and use with an ipod or squeezebox.
2 Or buy an amp and speakers plus squeezebox/nas combo or ipod classic and continue to use my denon DAB which I'm more than happy with (unlike the rest of my kit).
If I went with option 2 rather than 1, are there amp/speaker combos that are better suited than others for digital music?
Would a DAC be reccomended if I'm intending to use sources at 320kbs rather than lossless?
Would a similarly priced seperates combo sound considerably better than the much-lauded arcam?
Is the seperates idea stupid and I'll regret packing up all my CDs in boxes?
My budget for above is £1000 - preferably new rather than second-hand - all-in +/- 10%
I'd say my room is about 25ft by 18 and I'd sit about 16 ft away from the speakers which have to be fairly close to the wall.
I listen to indie/90s/rock, a fair bit of orchestral and choral, a bit of folk but no heavy metal or dance.
Which type of setup makes most sense (1 or 2) and, if 2, which bits of kit?
Any advice/comments gratefully appreciated ;o)
Thanks for listening,
Eileen