What is the Cyrus sound

[newlash09]

I've never heard naim or cyrus. Naim is supposed to have a fast sound ( I love that for my EDM ), but with a deliberate low damping factor, leading to wooly bass ( This is what i heard, and i could be wrong. Please correct me )

Cyrus is supposed to have a similar sound, but with more detail over the Naim.

Just want to know how these two British brands compare in sound quality. And trying to follow either , I get quickly lost in their system topology and heirarchy. Can someone please explain cyrus's and Naim's series normenclature. ( I get confused with all the Hicaps, naps and nacs ). Thanks.

 

[MajorFubar]

My experience with Cyrus stops with their Cyrus II. The sound is most definitely not wooly. Damping factor is 100, and with the PSX attached it can swing 60A peak to peak, pummeling even difficult speakers into submission. Midrange is very detailed and the bass is tight, but not over-emphesized. When I had mine serviced in 2015, its FR was found to be flat within 1dB from 10Hz to 20kHz, therein followed by a gradual -3dB slope to 50kHz. So to all intents and purposes it's flat.

Its sound is not for everyone. It doesn't do harsh sources or bass-shy speakers any favours. It was built to be partnered with a fantastic turntable and large speakers with upwards of 8" drivers, but was launched just when the first generation of brash-sounding CD players appeared and when large sealed speakers were giving way to bookshelf-sized squawkers with a bass driver the size of a bean-tin lid. When people complain about its sound being harsh and forward, that's often the issue.

 

[newlash09]

And really sorry that I missed wishing you sir...I always wanted a fast and Pacey sound. I thought Naim it was, till quest started singing praises of the Cyrus 's merits

 

[newlash09]

And really sorry that I missed wishing you sir...I always wanted a fast and Pacey sound. I thought Naim it was, till quest started singing praises of the Cyrus 's merits

 

[insider9]

Wow that's a lot. I'm too interested in Cyrus however at the minute it's purely academic. Sonically amps. I currently have share quite a number of traits with Cyrus.

I remember listening to EBs with Cyrus at yours Major. I'll be honest I thought it was because of Cyrus that I didn't get them. Now I know it wasn't and it was all down to the inexperienced listener

 

[Gazzip]

Wow that's a lot. I'm too interested in Cyrus however at the minute it's purely academic. Sonically amps. I currently have share quite a number of traits with Cyrus.

I remember listening to EBs with Cyrus at yours Major. I'll be honest I thought it was because of Cyrus that I didn't get them. Now I know it wasn't and it was all down to the inexperienced listener

+1 I ditched my EB2’s because I thought that they just wouldn’t work with my (then) Cyrus X power/8VS2 combo, but it turned out to be me not really understanding what good speakers sounded like.

I had quite a bit of Cyrus kit back in the day, finishing my journey through the brand on their DAC XP+/PSX-R combo and a pair of MonoX300’s. I would describe the sound as tight and fast so careful pairing with speakers is required to avoid a sound on the thin/lean side.

Stepping in to the world of Bryston seemed to fill out the sound to me whilst adding dynamics, which was exactly what I thought was missing from Cyrus. I’ve stuck with Bryston pretty much ever since!

 

[chebby]

How about the Alan Shaw “all competently designed amps operating within their design limits should sound the same” school of thought?

Should amplifiers have a recognisable ‘house sound’?

 

[drummerman]

Cyrus; Fast and on the dot timing. Fluid and coherent. Solid mids and controlled bass.

Naim; Somewhat darker. Slightly more textured mids and fuller bass. Not quite as extended up top. Just as fast.

Neither pull the sound apart as some other brands do ie. Cambridge and Audiolab which sound more correct and HiFi. Naim and Cyrus lead on rhythm and pace, Naim slightly more so.

I have not heard any of the latest shape Naim (with the control dials on top)

Comes down to system matching and preference.

As to hierarchy, Naim's XS or Cyrus 8 series would be my choice for value. Both are upgradeable with external power supplies.

After that it can get very complicated and expensive not to mention there are many other choices.

Cyrus do offer more powerful amps for very inefficient speakers or largest of rooms if that is required.

Both brands have plenty of headroom and sound more dynamic then their ratings suggest.

 

[plastic penguin]

With the correct speakers Cyrus is fast, detailed and good solidity. With the wrong speakers they can veer into a cloying presentation.

The main similarities between Cyrus and Naim is they are more speaker dependent than some other brands.

 

[drummerman]

With the correct speakers Cyrus is fast, detailed and good solidity. With the wrong speakers they can veer into a cloying presentation. 

The main similarities between Cyrus and Naim is they are more speaker dependent than some other brands.

Cloying is probably not a word I would associate with either brand though I agree, speakers (and your room) play a big part as always.

 

[davedotco]

How about the Alan Shaw “all competently designed amps operating within their design limits should sound the same” school of thought?

Should amplifiers have a recognisable ‘house sound’?

But only if his comments are taken in context. When engineers (rather than 'hi-fi people) talk about amplifiers, they are really talking about power amps. With compedent designs and under controlled conditions, I doubt anyone could tell power amps apart.

The real complication comes when we consider integrated amplifiers, it is the difference in the way that the amps sensitivity and gain stages are managed. There was a long thread (prompted by Vladimir) about these effects and, for example, describing how high levels of gain in the input stages of some amplifiers seems to be responsible for their 'fast' slightly aggressive character.

In normal systems I think this is what makes the difference, obvious examples would be the smooth, slightly relaxed feel of a modern Arcam against the pacier more assertive qualities of a Naim, the Arcam having much lower sensitivity and balanced gain structure compared to the sensitive, overdriven Naim.

This is a pretty 'broad brush' explanation, backed only by personal experience, but it does help explain why amps sound different in real world applications with different speakers and in different systems.

 

[insider9]

The real complication comes when we consider integrated amplifiers, it is the difference in the way that the amps sensitivity and gain stages are managed. There was a long thread (prompted by Vladimir) about these effects and, for example, describing how high levels of gain in the input stages of some amplifiers seems to be responsible for their 'fast' slightly aggressive character.

Fascinating and thinking about Naim, Hegel even Densen makes so much sense.

A tiny bit of trivia. It was meant to go into impressions on the Hegel thread. But website crashed my long post.

Built in DAC in Rost is level matched to 2.5V analogue input. 2.5V is what Hegel standalone DACs output. When comparing the inbuilt DAC against a different digital source that output standard 2V it will sound better because of a virtue of sounding louder.

 

[drummerman]

The real complication comes when we consider integrated amplifiers, it is the difference in the way that the amps sensitivity and gain stages are managed. There was a long thread (prompted by Vladimir) about these effects and, for example, describing how high levels of gain in the input stages of some amplifiers seems to be responsible for their 'fast' slightly aggressive character.

Fascinating and thinking about Naim, Hegel even Densen makes so much sense.

A tiny bit of trivia. It was meant to go into impressions on the Hegel thread. But website crashed my long post.

Built in DAC in Rost is level matched to 2.5V analogue input. 2.5V is what Hegel standalone DACs output. When comparing the inbuilt DAC against a different digital source that output standard 2V it will sound better because of a virtue of sounding louder.

Good point insider.

 

[davedotco]

The real complication comes when we consider integrated amplifiers, it is the difference in the way that the amps sensitivity and gain stages are managed. There was a long thread (prompted by Vladimir) about these effects and, for example, describing how high levels of gain in the input stages of some amplifiers seems to be responsible for their 'fast' slightly aggressive character.

Fascinating and thinking about Naim, Hegel even Densen makes so much sense.

A tiny bit of trivia. It was meant to go into impressions on the Hegel thread. But website crashed my long post.

Built in DAC in Rost is level matched to 2.5V analogue input. 2.5V is what Hegel standalone DACs output. When comparing the inbuilt DAC against a different digital source that output standard 2V it will sound better because of a virtue of sounding louder.

I nave come across a number of integrated amps wher the onboard dac is set so that the digital inputs are not as loud as the analogue inputs when the latter are fed with the now standard 2 volts. First noticed this on the D3020, an outboard dac feeding the analogue input was sharper, more focussed etc, etc than the same source into the digital coax input. It took a while to work out but eventually it became clear that the onboard dac was less loud, with the levels more equally set, the differences virtually disappeared.

 

[insider9]

With Rost when level matched it only showed that there is more available from the amp. DAC is OK but can be imporved, particularly when it comes to size of soundstage.

 

[drummerman]

With Rost when level matched it only showed that there is more available from the amp. DAC is OK but can be imporved, particularly when it comes to size of soundstage.

Oddly enough, thats ok with me. Soundstage ranks relatively low on my priority list.

 

[insider9]

With Rost when level matched it only showed that there is more available from the amp. DAC is OK but can be imporved, particularly when it comes to size of soundstage.

 

Oddly enough, thats ok with me. Soundstage ranks relatively low on my priority list.

For me is genre dependent. Built in DAC has more substantial sound. Vocals and instruments projected are bigger and more upfront. But the separation is such that it doesn't feel congested. No issues distinguishing layers and exact placement, just that instruments are closer to one another. It's a punchy presentation that feels natural. It's only if you start comparing you'd notice otherwise I'd be completely fine with inbuilt DAC also. H160 implementation is better when it comes to soundstage.

 

[steve_1979]

How about the Alan Shaw “all competently designed amps operating within their design limits should sound the same” school of thought?

Should amplifiers have a recognisable ‘house sound’?

Yes and no.

All competently designed amplifiers operating within their design limits will sound the same provided the THD is sufficiently low. The key to this sentance is the "operating within their design limits" part.

Generally most typical domestic hifi amplifiers are rated at around 30-80 watts. This is fine for 99.9% of the time because at domestic levels you will probably only require about 5-10 watts of average power. However as discussed in the recent amplifier headroom thread dynamic music will have brief but regular millisecond long peaks that can require a couple of hundred watts even though the average power output is below 10 watts.

It's how amplifiers cope with these several hundred watt millisecond peaks which can effect their character because during these peaks many hifi amplifiers are actually operating outside of their limits and are clipping the largest peaks even at domestically acceptable volme levels. This is one (of several) reasons why amplifiers can sound different.

https://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/headroom-how-important

 

[steve_1979]

I think a good test with any hifi component is the spoken word. Nothing new but perhaps worth pointing out every so often.

100% agree.

Clapping hands are another good test too. Vey few speakers can reproduce a round of applause realistically and the ones that can do clapping and spoken words naturally usually also sound natural with music. This is usually more down to the performance of the speakers than the amplifier though.

 

[drummerman]

I think a good test with any hifi component is the spoken word. Nothing new but perhaps worth pointing out every so often.

We all know how voices should sound, we hear them every day.

Now, its difficult to find a 'definitive' voice recording but I often listen to youtube vids, watch films and listen to a wide variety of radio. - On the whole, cyrus does these justice and they sound natural, full with no sibiliance or chestiness. - The sort of speach you could listen to for hours without fatigue.

I don't want to make it sound like Cyrus is perfect though. With my old 8vs2 & PSX-R (or any new 8's) it could, for some, be a power issue.

It is rated at 70w/ch into 8ohm. - This will only go so loud with average sensitive speakers. You won't be able to recreate a live band in your room with 87db/m speakers.

However, the power supply is decent for the rated power (320VA torroidal transformer and 20'000uf capacitance) with good dynamic headroom. Add a PSX-R and there is a further 300VA or thereabouts transformer plus an additional 40'000uf supply capacitance). Power does actually not increase, or not by much, but noise floor is lower and the onboard amplifier power supply is now dedicated to just the output stage. Small signal and operating circuits are now fed exclusively by the PSX-R. The difference is easily audible with better & more pronounced dynamics, the difference between quiet and loud and a more refined presentation.

Something like a Roksan K3 will give almost twice the power but, imho with the K2 which I had on trial, sounding more cloying and soft in comparison. The cyrus having a more 'live' feel despite the difference in power, mainly due to its speed with transients and control of low frequencies.

Others may feel different of course.

 

[Leeps]

On the whole, cyrus does these justice and they sound natural, full with no sibiliance or chestiness. - The sort of speach you could listen to for hours without fatigue...

Something like a Roksan K3 will give almost twice the power but, imho with the K2 which I had on trial, sounding more cloying and soft in comparison. The cyrus having a more 'live' feel despite the difference in power, mainly due to its speed with transients and control of low frequencies.

Interesting.

Anybody heard the Cyrus One? Just wondered how their Class D effort compared with the traditional Cyrus 6/8.

 

[drummerman]

Can't help but reviews are good.

100w/ch is into 6 ohm at 0.1/Thd

Around 65 to 70 watts into 8ohm. Class D has little or no dynamic headroom.

A 82 DAC will probably be better though you loose the Phono stage.

https://www.cyrusaudio.com/products/8%E2%82%82-dac/

 

[MajorFubar]

Wow that's a lot. I'm too interested in Cyrus however at the minute it's purely academic. Sonically amps. I currently have share quite a number of traits with Cyrus.

I remember listening to EBs with Cyrus at yours Major. I'll be honest I thought it was because of Cyrus that I didn't get them. Now I know it wasn't and it was all down to the inexperienced listener

To be fair it wasn't exactly a match made in heaven, my Marantz PM65KI was a better tonal match for the EBs, but the midrange wasn't as open and expressive as the Cyrus and the phono stage wasn't as good. Every time I put the PM65KI in place it did sound less fatiguing at higher volumes but I always felt there was just something missing from its presentation.

 

[plastic penguin]

Personally don't think a house sound of any brand matters, or how a system reproduces a hand clap.

I've always gone on how a system makes you feel. When I dem'd a Cyrus 8VS2 - on two occasions - and I could understand why reviews of the brand are inflated. Likewise, I've heard newer Cyrus integrated (8XP) with the external power source and it sounded quite impressive.

Regardless of Cyruses virtues, I just couldn't grow to love the sound.

Think this proves how loyal I am to certain brands, and a sound that ticks all my boxes: Since 1997 I've only owned Arcam and Leema.

As both are very different in terms of presentation, I'm not sure the theory of a house sound exists per se.

 

[newlash09]

Very enlightening indeed.

And a very merry Christmas to you plastic penguin.

@ major. 60 amps is a lot of grunt. Thanks for pointing that out.

I thought most big brands had a house sound. If brands don't voice their amps then there will be no brand loyalty and all Amps will be the same.

I have heard speakers, and can make out the voicing clearly. With amps it is a little more difficult

Considering that Cyrus has such a peculiar sound with a love it or hate it voicing, sure can't buy it blind . Thanks again for sharing your experiences