[Richter Di]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nuclearpoweredpenguin /img/forum/go_quote.gif I went ahead and sold my Aria, and my Opera and ordered a Symphony that shipped on Friday. I'm looking forward to it.

Congratulations. Please give the Symphony at least 50 hours of burn-in before assessing it (if possible with something like the "IsoTek - Full System Enhancer & Rejuvenation Disc" - highgly recommende, if not, some complex classical music)

Quote:

Originally Posted by nuclearpoweredpenguin /img/forum/go_quote.gif A question for Jazz and Richter.

Maybe I give it a first start.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nuclearpoweredpenguin /img/forum/go_quote.gif What type of music have you been listening to, ...

My music taste is very broad ...
from classical music esp. Bach (esp. Goldberg Variations), Mozart (esp. Magic Flute)
to Jazz e.g. Brad Mehldau Trio, EST, Jan Johansson, Tord Gustavsen Trio
to Pop e.g. Anja Garbarek, Emiliana Torrini, Susanne Abbuehl, Postal Service, Youngblood Brass Band
to Electronic stuff e.g. Agoria, Apparat, Gorilaz, Kreidler, Sketch Show.
to what I call Avantgarde or Minimalism e.g. Books, Kammerflimmer Kollektiv, Claude Chalhoub

Quote:

Originally Posted by nuclearpoweredpenguin /img/forum/go_quote.gif The impression I get from your comments is that the sound is almost clinical (which is what I'm looking for) without being sterile or boring, is that an accurate interpretation?

"Clinical" is a word which provokes in me the feeling of a hospital and therefore it has a certain smell, so unfortunately I can not relate to this word. The sound is surely not boring or sterile. As long as your source transports the information in a musical way the Symphony will deliver exactly the quality of the record.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nuclearpoweredpenguin /img/forum/go_quote.gif ... and could you say if there are any situations where the transparency of the Symphony made a recording difficult to listen to, or a recording where you felt the Symphony truly shined.

So when the Symphony is delivering exactly the input, there is no recording which shines more because all well produced shine!

Still, this said, if you take e.g. the new record of Maria Mena "Cause And Effect", this is a highly compressed record and as the mastering engineers where trying to make it as loud as possible they overdid it and now you have heavy distortions (e.g. first Song 1:12; 2:37 - 2:38; 2:59; 3:12-3:14). While with an ordinary headphone system (e.g. iPod 160 GB with audio-technica ATH-ESW10) you might think there is a kind of crackling, you clearly hear ALL distortions with the Symphony.

 

[scootermafia]

I'm trying to encourage my friend who is looking for a headamp/dac to get the Symphony once he can afford it. What I am sold on is its utility - besides its many, many features...it really is a nice analog preamp as well as a nice standalone DAC. The switch on the front switches it between being a preamp and being a headphone amp. And the DAC can pass its sound through...5 inputs, 2 analog inputs and opti/coax/usb...he likes the fact that he can use this with his power amp and speakers as well as his headphones.

He does not like the idea of buying a product that he will never have any use for outside of headphone listening.

 

[Headphony]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Audio-Omega /img/forum/go_quote.gif Has anyone compared it to Rudistor RPX-33 ?

x2, I'd like to know too.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nuclearpoweredpenguin /img/forum/go_quote.gif A question for Jazz and Richter. You both seem to share very similar views on the sound of the Symphony. The impression I get from your comments is that the sound is almost clinical (which is what I'm looking for) without being sterile or boring, is that an accurate interpretation?

Well, «clinical» would actually be the same as sterile, so I don't find it an adequate characterization, the more so as the Symphony doesn't sound cold or analytical. But it just as little sounds particularly warm. To my ears it just sounds «neutral», which on the other hand doesn't equate with boring at all -- quite the opposite, in view of the detail richness and the pronounced expressivity.


Quote:

What type of music have you been listening to, and could you say if there are any situations where the transparency of the Symphony made a recording difficult to listen to, or a recording where you felt the Symphony truly shined.

I listen to classical, jazz and pop/rock/electronica. So I need an amp without specific coloration. Despite the high resolution and detail the Symphony is astonishingly forgiving with bad recordings. It doesn't make them good, but it doesn't enhance sonic flaws such as distortion. They are so obvious that you can hear «through» them and don't have to further occupy yourself with them. This makes the Symphony a downright ear-friendly amp in my book.
.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nuclearpoweredpenguin /img/forum/go_quote.gif I went ahead and sold my Aria, and my Opera and ordered a Symphony that shipped on Friday. I'm looking forward to it.

Congrats on your decision! But give it at least 200 hours of burn-in. Mine reached maybe 95% of its full sonic potential not before 210 hours.
.

 

[nuclearpoweredpenguin]

Sorry, I guess clinical was a poor choice, and apparently incorrect use of the word. I thought it's definition of "direct observation" would apply here, I guess I thought it meant something similar to analytical, but looking at the definitions now I see I probably should have made sure I understood all it's possible meanings which I obviously didn't, before using it.

At least I know I've been using the word incorrectly for many years now.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nuclearpoweredpenguin /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sorry, I guess clinical was a poor choice, and apparently incorrect use of the word. I thought it's definition of "direct observation" would apply here, I guess I thought it meant something similar to analytical, but looking at the definitions now I see I probably should have made sure I understood all it's possible meanings which I obviously didn't, before using it. At least I know I've been using the word incorrectly for many years now.

Some audiophile terms are a bit vague and ambiguous anyway. «Analytical» could actually be a positive characteristic synonymous with accurate or precise, but it's predominantly used for a sound that enhances detail in an artificial, inorganic way.
.

 

[nuclearpoweredpenguin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Some audiophile terms are a bit vague and ambiguous anyway. «Analytical» could actually be a positive characteristic synonymous with accurate or precise, but it's predominantly used for a sound that enhances detail in an artificial, inorganic way. .

Thanks Jazz. Analytical in as positive characteristic sounds like what I was trying to say.

About the burn in period, I exchanged a few emails with Dr. Meier on the subject and he reiterated the need for at least 200 hours of break in by using the digital section with headphones plugged in at a medium volume.

All the Meier gear I'd owned in the past had been purchased used, and was already broken in. I figure I can just let it run for 200 hours straight, unlike I had done with tube amps in the past since I don't need to worry about tubes with the Symphony though I don't imagine there is any difference between breaking in an amp all at once as opposed to over a longer period of time, right?

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nuclearpoweredpenguin /img/forum/go_quote.gif I figure I can just let it run for 200 hours straight, unlike I had done with tube amps in the past since I don't need to worry about tubes with the Symphony though I don't imagine there is any difference between breaking in an amp all at once as opposed to over a longer period of time, right?

No, it doesn't matter. You could simply listen to it -- just take care not to form your opinion before at least 200 hours of operation. And don't expect too much from the first few listening sessions!
.

 

[cpasglop]

I am totally satisfied with this amp.

Mine has now reached 100 hours of burn-in. The sound of the DAC is now clear, detailed, soft and natural (usb or spdif inputs, crossfeed on).

It is true that the first listenings were a little bit disappointing, but the sound quality has improved quickly during the first thirty hours. I never thought that burn-in was so important!

I have no problem of "power" (gain) with my K701 and the low impedance output : I use the volume dial from eight to twelve o'clock and never switch to the high-gain setting ...

 

[woof37]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cpasglop /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am totally satisfied with this amp. Mine has now reached 100 hours of burn-in. The sound of the DAC is now clear, detailed, soft and natural (usb or spdif inputs, crossfeed on). It is true that the first listenings were a little bit disappointing, but the sound quality has improved quickly during the first thirty hours. I never thought that burn-in was so important! I have no problem of "power" (gain) with my K701 and the low impedance output : I use the volume dial from eight to twelve o'clock and never switch to the high-gain setting ...

I have heard that the high-gain setting is the most "pure" amp gain setting, in general. Is that true? I can't really tell a difference on my own.

 

[Richter Di]

Quote:

Originally Posted by woof07 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have heard that the high-gain setting is the most "pure" amp gain setting, in general. Is that true? I can't really tell a difference on my own.

Its very difficult to compare as I never reach exactly the same volume after setting the gain to high. But generally I could not find major difference. It seems that the accoustic noise (maybe from the recording) gets louder.

 

[fkclo]

Sometime in November I wrote about my initial impressions of the Symphony

My 270 hours Journey with Symphony

Time flies. I have now clocked over 430 hours on my Symphony and would like to say it has got better. Not day or night or in any big way, but what you may expected out of a "mature" component and a deeper understanding of its behaviour. With the whole host of features, solid build quality and superb sound the Symphony continues to represent very good value.

I was asked by a number of members how the Symphony compares with the Grace Design M902 (since I owned both). I can understand why as both seems to share a very similar feature set and target at a similar group of needs in the circle.

I was thinking of putting forward a full review of the Grace Design M902 vs. the Symphony but never find the time to complete it. I think I have spent enough hours on both. So, instead of a full comparison let's just look at the obvious

The feature set of M902 and Symphony is very similar. My M902 has single end output only so it this regard the preamp function is almost similar. The M902 does accept balanced input ( and additional single end input) while both inputs on the Symphony are single-end only. For USB input, the Symphony uses Type B connector which is more "standard" than the "mini" connector being used on the M902. If one decides to go for a upscale USB cable (which, to my ears, does change the sound I hear), it is worth noting most come with the standard USB connectors.

The obvious difference between the two are :-

• The M902 is more compact. The Symphony looks big and feels heavy in comparison
• The M902 has a remote which is useful in some occasions. But this is another $115 option which adds to the base price.
• The Symphony DAC is slightly better sounding to me ( SPDIF vs. SPDIF) - being more resolved but not edgy. The M902 DAC sounds "soft" by comparison.
• The Symphony USB DAC is noticeably better, and comes with various filter choices for fine tuning of the sound you want
• The headphone amp of the Symphony sound more neutral and have a lower noise floor (actually both amps are very black background so the differentiation is not that easy). I am sure the power supply of Symphony is better.
• The headphone amp of the Symphony is more resolving and provide a more neutral sound, but the M902 is a bit smoother (or rounded) in general
• The Gain switch and cross-feed selector of the Symphony is more accessible. Whereas on the M902 one will have to dig into the menu to locate the settings ( and it is not sticky - which means once you power-off the M902, it will default back to low gain, and CF off)
• I use the M902 in low gain all the time and can drive most headphones well (with volume set at 65 / 99) I have to use the high gain of the Symphony most of the time except very low impedance headphone (with volume set less than 12 o'clock most of the time)
• M902 offers separate volume control for line out vs headphone out which is useful if one is using the unit as a pre-amp as well.
• The Symphony sounds more airy and imaging is more precise and real
• The Symphony sounds extremely well with classical instruments - violins, piano especially.
• The M902 sounds impressive with jazz vocals - feels intimate

For new purchases, the M902 will cost you around US$1,450 to 1,600, not including the remote and shipment, whereas the Symphony cost around $1,250 shipped. Of course, import tax can make or break the "best buy" evaluation. For those of us that do not need to worry about import tax or duties, the Symphony is obviously a better buy.

F. Lo

 

[Skylab]

Nice analysis, F. Lo!

 

[Drosera]

Thank you for these detailed comments on the Symphony. It's nice to have these extensive impressions, especially from someone who's used to listening to really high-end gear.

It is surprising to me that so few people have reported on the Symphony. Would that be a reflection of somewhat disappointing sales-figures? It certainly seems to have created far less of a stir and following than the Opera did some time ago.