2. misc-audio
  3. 164675-109487

I saved alot of money.

Many of you will probably disagree but I have to share. I recently started streaming from my cell phone to my system with Amazon HD and You Tube Music. 
Components are a new Hegel H390, Bryston A2 speakers, NAD C 546BEE CD player, and wait for it, a cheap Auris bluetooth thing.
Sounds great but I thought about getting an expensive streamer and/or a separate DAC.
After weeks of research I thought of doing a test. The CD player is hooked up via coaxial to the Hegel. The Auris is connected via optical. So both are using the Hegel's DAC.
I put a favorite CD into the NAD and hit pause, then pulled up the same on Amazon. Without moving from my listening position I switched between the two.
Very little difference if any between them.
I tried this with different CDs 3 different times over a week and had the same results.
My system may be cheap compared to what many of you have but my love for music is as strong or better than anyone out there.
At 66, retired, and on limited funds I'm sure glad I did this test. The results must be due to the Hegel's DAC.
Thoughts?


golden210
mahler123
3,318 posts
 
Oops....I mistook the post by @reubent  to be coming from the OP, @golden210...
russ69's avatar
russ69
3,501 posts
 
Satisfy yourself, that is what it’s about. You have a good system but the CD player is the weak link. So don’t take your test as the final answer. This is a hobby where we keep learning what works.
golden210 OP
32 posts
 
mahler123, to add to reubent's comment, when you connect the Auris Bluetooth via the digital output you are bypassing the Auris's internal DAC. So my Hegel's internal DAC is doing the work.
Thank you russ69 for you saying my NAD CD player is the weak link. I've had it for a couple of years. It was a huge improvement over my Technics carousel player that was under $200.00 20 years ago. I have never listened to a high end player. Since I'm only using the NAD as a transport would a much more expensive CD player give better results?
Thanks to all for your comments.
asvjerry's avatar
asvjerry
4,608 posts
 
@goldern210.....No need to have to make excuses for using your cell for a 'head unit' to this immoral mortal....*G*  Been using a cell to drive the audio in 3 vehicles (Focus, Landcruiser, Dodge dually) and the 'shop' audio system with Spotify Premium.  The same service frequently drives my office system and the 'main' system.  (The latter too big to be mobile, anyway....office and main running Ryzen 5 processors...*L*)

Updated the cell to a Pixel 4A recently; haven't nosed around for any 'enhancements' as yet (usually an eq that has more bands 'cause of the varied 'environments') but will get around to it soon enough.

Understand a limited budget; although 'retired' in concept only, I've not free rein as to what I can spend on 'audio only' pursuits.  But there's no reasonable rationale to apologize for what one enjoys or the means of attaining such.  The 'digital realm' of audio is expanding daily, especially in terms of the device that's in your hand.

BTW...I do like analog, but since it gets 'run through' a primarily digital process en route to my speakers.....one begins to wonder and doubt....;)


mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,570 posts
 
That is the beauty of digital. It is just numbers. Does not matter where the numbers come from. Only the final clocking is important. 
I just did a similar comparison of a high res file to the same file being played over my Sonos network. Could not tell the difference.

Golden210, I think it is because you and I have crappy hearing:-)
More to discover