I need to clarify that though I have not yet been able to acheive the level of performance that I desire from Sonos, I do feel the Cullen mod is a worthwhile improvement over the stock zone player.
The modded player with a good dac ($1K or under) very well may be comperable to cdp's that aproach $1-2K.
Again, I strongly feel that the benefits of the mod are system dependant. |
Thanks Barrelchief. So your results are a bit of a mixed bag: definite improvement via the cullen mod, but still not enough to match your cdp's, even when using the same dac (the AA internal dac fed digital from sonos). Perhaps the limitation in rate via the sonos limits best possible results? I wonder if there are any other reasons we are not accounting for? You did seem to suggest that the differences were pretty definitive, so there is obviously something holding this back. The only other note I might add is to echo your statement that this is all probably very system dependent. I would assume, given the rest of your system, that you also have very revealing, high quality speakers as well. Obviously the less revealing the speakers, the less the perceived difference (duh!). Hopefully we can all get to the bottom of this and find a way to make sonos what we all want: equal to a quality cdp at roughly the same cost outlay (ie, 5k cdp = 5k investment in sonos, mod, dac combination) |
Has anyone tried the Emperical Mod, it's more money and he really knows what he is doing. Perhaps even more than Cullen, in that the digital domain is his main focus.
|
Does anyone have experience comparing the Cullen modded ZP80 through a quality DAC with the regular Slim Squeezebox 3 or transporter.
I have both the Sonos system and SB3, as well as 3 high quality DACs (Lavry DA10, Naim Supernait and Resolution Audio Opus 21......the latter two of which have built in DACs which can be accessed by digital sources)
Comparing the digital outs of the basic SB3 to the basic ZP80, the SB3 is far superior.....less congested, less compressed, better soundstage and instrument separation.
I do like the convenience of the Sonos system though. If I am to spring $500+ to get the Cullen mods, I would hope I would be getting a significant upgrade from the SB3 quality and close to the Opus 21 CD player quality.
Quite a specific scenario, I know, but does anyone have any insight to answer these questions?
Thanks, Nigel |
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1204503359&openflup&9&4#9
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.php?topic=42526.30
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.php?topic=47245.new#new |
Is a basic difference between the Empirical and Cullen mods is that in the Empirical mod the reclocker is an external unit (pace-car), where in the Cullen mod the reclocker is a board which replaces a board inside the ZP-80? |
"Is a basic difference between the Empirical and Cullen mods is that in the Empirical mod the reclocker is an external unit (pace-car), where in the Cullen mod the reclocker is a board which replaces a board inside the ZP-80?"
No, there is HUGE difference between the Cullen reclocker and my Pace-Car. The Cullen is an asynchronous sample-rate converter (ASRC) with a better oscillator than the stock Sonos. This is just like an upsampling DAC or a Monarchy DIP. It will improve the jitter by resampling the data, but nothing like the Pace-Car, which does not change the data.
The Pace-Car is a true reclocker with a FIFO memory that is clocked by a Superclock4. It offers superior isolation, jitter rejection and superior clock. It does not resample the data stream like the Cullen reclocker. The Pace-Car also has a separate power supply from the Sonos and many voltage regulators. It contains probably 30X the parts count as the Cullen board, even more parts than a typical DAC. This is a very complex circuit and designed to test equipment standards, using GHz coaxial cable and connectors. It can also drive I2S input DAC's directly, as well as standard DAC's using S/PDIF or AES/EBU. The jitter levels from the Pace-Car will be lower than ANY CD transport. The Pace-Car was recently compared in a shootout (I was not present) to 2 new Meridian $8K and $14K CD players and there was no contest. The participants told me that the Pace-Car was clearly better at a fraction of the price. I believe it was driven in this case by an Apple TV and an AirPort Express, but can be driven by virtually any PCM digital source.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
If it is under 1k - I am in........ But I doubt it.
Different, more economically driven choices arisen lately.
As good as Peace Car can be, it comes down to financial decision.
But it seems that selling larger quantities works better then having a thick skin and hoping for the best. I am not an expert by any means but have seen
it work. Also onother benefit of an entery level product offered to the masses is that company is gaining future consumers, which can.... or will come back in the future , base on their earlier ( positive ) experience + products like that can finance future research or/and marketing. You will see few other products like that in the very near future. Both were talked about at the table during CES. Both analog. Both over-build and better then competition in that price range. Both for the same reason and through many conversations and planning. I also saw a similar moves from other brands - Wadia for one.
You have great product Steve but others are catching up.
We have met during CES, and you are a very good guy and I wish you well. |
Thanks much for the information, Steve. It seems like an interesting product. |
I have both a CD player and unmodified Sonos ZP-80 connected to my preamp via digital outputs. I ripped my CD's to my hard drive in FLAC format. I set up my system where I had a CD in the player, and at the same time the same CD ready to play via the Sonos system. I played both at the same time and used the preamps remote to do quick A/B comparisons. All I can say is the results were inconclusive. Sometimes I thought the music through the CD player was a bit better (voices and strings may have sounded slightly more present and less dull); other times I couldn't hear any difference at all.
Has anyone else attempted this test? If so, what conclusions have you found? If you've modified your Sonos with Empirical or Cullen mods, what differences have you found over a stock Sonos or your transport? |
Some feedbacks I have read:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1204503359&openflup&9&4#9
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.php?topic=42526.30
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
Steve,
How would the Pacecar compare in SQ to a Prepro that has built in streaming, like the Denon Prepro. In this case the flac files are streamed from a NAS drive directly to the Prepro. Shouldn't this have the best SQ?
I have a Sonos, and the convienience is much better than the Denon interface, so the Sonos may still be the way for me to go. But, I am curious about the SQ trade-off.
Thanks,
Darrell |
I have Cullen modified ZP-80 feeding an Accustic Arts DAC MKII into a Cary SLP05 (Tube)preamp into a Bryston 14BSST (600 watts). My speakers are Aerial 10T. All cabling is Acoustic Zen. In an A/B test of modified and un-modified, my wife, a friend and I all felt that the difference is immediate and dramatic. Mod has more transparent sound, no grain and tighter bass. Cannot compare to other mods because have only heard Cullen. However, in my system, well worth the money. |
For about a month already i am enjoying Sonos with Pace-Car. My device has Ultraclock inside and WBT Nextgen as SPDIF output connected through Stereovox XV2 to Chord DAC64. I must say what Pace-Car does to my system is magic.
Chord has RAM buffer with 3 settings: off, medium and large. Common rule is to use medium or large buffer, then DAC averages digital sources to some level. Even pretty expensive Chord Blu transport is usually used with medium or large buffer.
But with Pace-Car best setting by far is BUFFER OFF. Music is smooth, focused and alive. I used to think that my system produces very fine soundstage - wide and deep, good separation of instruments. Now everything is much more real, microdynamics is better. |
