timbley Posted January 22, 2005 Share Posted January 22, 2005 I've been running my passively bi-amped SA-XR50s with RF-7s for a while, and thought I pretty much knew what this set up could do. Well, I discovered a few things while attempting to convert some of my old vinyl to CD. Here they are: 1. The Panny's analog inputs are fair to poor. I kind of knew this, and had read other reports as such, but didn't know just how true it was. This must be because the built-in A/D converters are sub-par, even though they operate at 192 kHz. 2. A real 96kHz/24bit digital signal(not upsampled lower bitrates) sounds really, really good on the Panny's. I mean way nicer than 44.1kHz digital input. There may be more reasons for this than just the higher data rate, or maybe not. 3. LPs sound awesome digitized at 96/24, even when using the phono stage of an old Sony Audio/Video control center! 4. 30 ft. long patch cords carrying line level analog suck. 5. 30 ft. long patch cords carrying spdif at 96kHz / 24bit seem to do very nicely. My setup right now has my old Sony receiver and the turntable crammed onto my computer desk. The phono signal is fed through the tape outputs from the Sony into an M-Audio Delta Audiophile soundcard, where it is converted to digital at 96kHz / 24 bit. With this I can record digital files, or I can just send the digital signal straight out to the Pannys via the long patchcords. Sending the 96kHz digital straight out to the Panny's makes a sound that's very smooth, sweet, and detailed. It's almost too soft and gentle, and yet blooming with detail and air. I really love it. Not at all what I've come to beleive of the RF-7 or the Panasonic. The dynamics aren't as good as I've heard running the RF-7s with non-digital solid state amps, but pretty good. I put Robert Farnon's Captain Horatio Hornblower on tonight, a reference recordings label LP. The album cover says it's a "Prof. Johnson Pure Analog Recording." This album sounds beautiful. Here's big, complicated orchestral stuff sounding absolutely fabulous on my system! This is amazing to me, because I was pretty much of the impression that my setup just wasn't good for this kind of music. Out of curiosity, I tried hooking my Denon 2200 DVD/SACD/DVD-Audio player's analog outputs straight into the soundcard. This also produced excellent sound, but different. The dynamics were improved, bass was tighter, and the sound not so soft and sweet. Awesomely detailed, not grainy at all, but a bit on the high energy side. I guess I could say bright, and in your face. Running the Denon through the Sony's CD inputs and tape outputs softens the sound up a bit while still preserving spectacular detail. Yup, I think I like it better that way. So there's what I've found. I'm now intrigued with phono stages, turntables, and cartridges, and of course collecting more records. I'd like to make 96/24 recordings of them. I've experimented with it a little already. The recordings sound nice, but not as good as direct feed out of the sound card. It may have to do with iTunes not being able to pass the full bitrate through, even though it can play the file. I think I read that somewhere. Good night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted January 22, 2005 Share Posted January 22, 2005 Timbley, Thanks for your take on the Panny. I've been reading what I could find on the net about this receiver the last few weeks. It's sound should be impressive indeed with it's Tripath digital amplifier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timbley Posted January 22, 2005 Author Share Posted January 22, 2005 ---------------- On 1/22/2005 8:24:25 AM Daddy Dee wrote: Timbley, Thanks for your take on the Panny. I've been reading what I could find on the net about this receiver the last few weeks. It's sound should be impressive indeed with it's Tripath digital amplifier. ---------------- I think it's a great sounding unit, especially with Hi-Rez digital input. On a technical note, it doesn't actually use a Tripath amp. It has a Texas Instruments "Equibit" chipset. I don't understand all the differences, but I think the main thing is that the tripath is analog controlled, whereas the Texas Instruments is digitally controlled. I haven't heard the Tripath amps yet, but I've read a lot of good things about them. They look like they're fun and fairly easy to mod. OTH, I took the hood off my SA-XR25 to see if I could bypass the power supply and run SLA battery power to the amps. Looks like it ain't gonna happen, at least not by my hand. It's way too complicated for me. The DC voltage to the amps actually varies in the Panasonics with the volume setting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonygeno Posted January 22, 2005 Share Posted January 22, 2005 I'm a little confused about one thing: If the analog inputs are "fair to poor", how can LPs sound "awesome"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timbley Posted January 22, 2005 Author Share Posted January 22, 2005 ---------------- On 1/22/2005 1:11:26 PM tonygeno wrote: I'm a little confused about one thing: If the analog inputs are "fair to poor", how can LPs sound "awesome"? ---------------- That's because I'm not using the analog inputs on the Panny. I'm using an M-audio delta 24/96 audio card to convert the analog from the phono stage to 96kHz 24 bit digital instead of the Panny's own built-in ADCs. The high rez. digital input to the Panny is what's making the great sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonygeno Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 I'm not sure I understand this. The hi-rez inputs of the Panny are digitized at 96/24 in 6 channel mode and 192/24 in 2 channel mode. So aren't you utilizing an additional digital conversion with the Panny's internal DAC's? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timbley Posted January 26, 2005 Author Share Posted January 26, 2005 ---------------- On 1/23/2005 10:23:29 AM tonygeno wrote: I'm not sure I understand this. The hi-rez inputs of the Panny are digitized at 96/24 in 6 channel mode and 192/24 in 2 channel mode. So aren't you utilizing an additional digital conversion with the Panny's internal DAC's? ---------------- I'm not using the hi-rez/analog inputs of the panny. I'm using an external ADC to convert my phono preamp to digital, which is then sent to the Pannys via the optical or coaxial digital input, at 96/24. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timbley Posted January 26, 2005 Author Share Posted January 26, 2005 ---------------- On 1/22/2005 4:14:44 AM timbley wrote: 2. A real 96kHz/24bit digital signal(not upsampled lower bitrates) sounds really, really good on the Panny's. I mean way nicer than 44.1kHz digital input. There may be more reasons for this than just the higher data rate, or maybe not. 3. LPs sound awesome digitized at 96/24, even when using the phono stage of an old Sony Audio/Video control center! ---------------- I'm responding to my own post to update my findings on the two above points. I've found that some of the changes I'm hearing in sound quality have to do with a change in tone response caused by the different settings on the sound card. It may not be that the higher bitrate is actually necessary to acheive the improved sound I'm perceiving. The soundcard sounds mellower on the 96/24 input. It also sounds mellower on "consumer" setting compared to "pro" setting. I reconfigured my amplifiers to run my speakers full range in parallel. This softened the sound of the RF-7s considerably. After doing this, CDs sounded a whole lot better in a number of ways. The record player through the sound card at 96/24 now sounded way off balance, with a definite lack of treble. Changing the setting to 44.1kHz actually improved the sound So there's more at play here than just improvements due to increased sample rate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timbley Posted January 26, 2005 Author Share Posted January 26, 2005 Wow! Things just keep getting better. I'm now using 3 Panasonic receivers on my RF-7s. Two SA-XR50s are running in parallel to power the 10" mid woofers, while my old SA-XR25 (which I had planned on selling) is running the horn tweeters. This is really awesome, an unbeleivable improvement over having one SA-XR50 run the woofers and a second run the horn tweeters. The two 50s in parallel seem to give the RF-7's 10" woofers the juice they really want. Wow! I can't believe it! It's that good! Drum hits on the NEU! CD now have incredible impact. They make me flinch and blink they hit so hard. I jumped when I first heard it. It's nuts! All the clarity and detail I've always loved about these Panasonic amps is still there. The mids and highs seem sweeter and airer than ever. Vocals seem prominent and full as they should. Hooking everything up is kind of a pain. I haven't yet figured out how to get the sound from the Xbox and theVCR to all three amps. I may have to buy splitters. Right now I'm listening to "The New Dreamers" on KLCC FM, and it is cosmic. I tried running just the two SA-XR50s in parallel, with the RF-7s speaker wire bindings bridged. This also exhibited the improved dynamics and bass, but vocals were weak, and the treble seemed a bit too rolled off. Throwing the SA-XR25 into the mix to power the horns makes a huge difference for the better. Man, I've had all this equipment for months now without realizing it's full potential. I've made vast improvements over the last couple weeks without buying a thing. Amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonygeno Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 ---------------- On 1/26/2005 2:09:12 AM timbley wrote: ---------------- On 1/23/2005 10:23:29 AM tonygeno wrote: I'm not sure I understand this. The hi-rez inputs of the Panny are digitized at 96/24 in 6 channel mode and 192/24 in 2 channel mode. So aren't you utilizing an additional digital conversion with the Panny's internal DAC's? ---------------- I'm not using the hi-rez/analog inputs of the panny. I'm using an external ADC to convert my phono preamp to digital, which is then sent to the Pannys via the optical or coaxial digital input, at 96/24. ---------------- I get it. When I saw "hi-rez" I immediately assumed it was the analog input. Thanks for setting it straight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 ---------------- On 1/26/2005 3:59:42 AM timbley wrote: Wow! Things just keep getting better. I'm now using 3 Panasonic receivers on my RF-7s. Two SA-XR50s are running in parallel to power the 10" mid woofers, while my old SA-XR25 (which I had planned on selling) is running the horn tweeters. This is really awesome, an unbeleivable improvement over having one SA-XR50 run the woofers and a second run the horn tweeters. The two 50s in parallel seem to give the RF-7's 10" woofers the juice they really want. Wow! I can't believe it! It's that good! Drum hits on the NEU! CD now have incredible impact. They make me flinch and blink they hit so hard. I jumped when I first heard it. It's nuts! All the clarity and detail I've always loved about these Panasonic amps is still there. The mids and highs seem sweeter and airer than ever. Vocals seem prominent and full as they should. Hooking everything up is kind of a pain. I haven't yet figured out how to get the sound from the Xbox and theVCR to all three amps. I may have to buy splitters. Right now I'm listening to "The New Dreamers" on KLCC FM, and it is cosmic. I tried running just the two SA-XR50s in parallel, with the RF-7s speaker wire bindings bridged. This also exhibited the improved dynamics and bass, but vocals were weak, and the treble seemed a bit too rolled off. Throwing the SA-XR25 into the mix to power the horns makes a huge difference for the better. Man, I've had all this equipment for months now without realizing it's full potential. I've made vast improvements over the last couple weeks without buying a thing. Amazing. ---------------- so you have about $1000 (or more) invested in amplification for your RF-7's? and the result of giving your RF-7's more digital power has improved the sound? i agree with your result, but a better way to get that much digital power to your speakers in a more elegant manner is to use a carver professional ZR amplifier. I use a carver professional ZR1000 digital amp that is rated at 225 watts per channel @ 8 ohms to power my KLF-30's. I purchased mine through a former workplace and got a great price on it, but they sell online now for about $800 brand new!!! For about $950 you can even step up to the ZR1600 that would give you 300 watts per channel @ 8 ohms. http://www.carverpro.com/zramps.html Powerful, Musical and Accurate "Not only are ZR series amplifiers extremely energy efficient, they are Powerful, Musical and Accurate. Just listen! Experience the intricate detail of soft acoustic passages, explosive soul of gospel vocals, shimmering dynamics of a cymbal crash as it slowly decays and earth shaking clarity of the low B on a 5 string bass. You wont believe what youve been missing! Imagine getting better performance out of your speakers, the ZR amplifier can make mediocre speakers sound expensive. With this kind of performance, its no wonder audiophiles, critics and reviewers around the world embrace this new technology and applaud the ZR series amplifiers. The proof is in the listening, you be the judge! This American Made Carver Professional product is available throughout a network of US Manufacturer's Representatives and International Distributors working within prescribed territories and sold through an established group of select Retailers and Contractors that are capable of understanding the technology as well as servicing their customers." I realize that you are using one of the panasonic units as your preamp, but ultimately IMHO you will be introducing noise to the system through all the necessary splitters. IMHO - a moderately priced receiver with the auto eq / room correction feature (Pioneer, Pioneer Elite, Yamaha) combined with a carver pro ZR amplifier will give you more flexibility and a better sound for only a few dollars more than you have invested in your panasonic multiple units Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timbley Posted February 6, 2005 Author Share Posted February 6, 2005 ---------------- On 1/26/2005 8:04:17 AM minn_male42 wrote: ---------------- IMHO - a moderately priced receiver with the auto eq / room correction feature (Pioneer, Pioneer Elite, Yamaha) combined with a carver pro ZR amplifier will give you more flexibility and a better sound for only a few dollars more than you have invested in your panasonic multiple units ---------------- Thanks. I agree, one Carver amp would be a much more elegant solution. And I agree that EQ functions to correct room anomolies could be very beneficial. I think overall I've just been confused. I'm a fool, a very enthusiastic one at that. I didn't realize what was happening. One of the amps had somehow been set to +4 bass in the tone controls. Hence the "amazing" bass impact and full sound. It's hard for me to admit to this foolishness. Once I got all the settings matched on my two SA-XR50s, it became obvious that there was no difference in sound between running just one amp or two! Nothing! The RF-7s are getting plenty of juice from a single SA-XR50. Man, the stuff I put myself through. Everytime I think I've found something wonderful, it almost invariabley turns out to be something changing the EQ response of my system. Passively bi-amping the RF-7s really doesn't add anything either. It changes the sound, but doesn't neccessarily improve it. I don't think the speakers were meant to be run this way. After trying it and listening for a number of months, I'd have to say I don't recommend passively bi-amping the RF-7s. It's not worth the trouble and expense. The double binding posts are made for bi-wiring I believe. I'm not sure if biwiring is worth anything either, but it surely doesn't hurt. And, I've got plenty of speaker cable lying around. Active crossovers, now that may be worth trying. But I'd want to make sure I did it right, and I think it might be best to start from scratch with a speaker design optimized for that configuration. NHT's new system with the DEQX circuitry looks like the right idea. I'll let people who know what they're doing put something like that together for me. So now I'm back to just running one single SA-XR50 for my entire system. It sounds great. I can play with the tone controls and get different responses if I want. I can run everything through my sound card on my computer if I want a softer, smoother sound. I've got a Panasonic SA-XR50 and an SA-XR25 available. All you need is one for great sound! Anybody interested? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.