Re: Cambridge Audio - an open letter [long]

Stewart Pinkerton wrote: 
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 22:25:50 +0100, Dave Giles <spam@xxxxxxxx> wrote:


Stewart Pinkerton wrote:


Given that you can buy 24/96 sound cards for your PC which demonstrate
more than 100dB dynamic range,  that wouldn't seem to be much of an
issue for 16/44 CD.


Maybe those sound cards are pretty well shielded - I don't know. I know that
the Linn Tunboks uses a conventional PCI sound card (albeit a Linn
soundcard, as conventional as that makes it), so I appreciate that a PC
which doesn't interfere with it's analogue output isn't impossible.
However, my point is that there have been no assurances from Cambridge
Audio that this is the case.



Can't recall 'assurances' from any manufacturer that their DAC is
shielded - it's just basic engineering.


Look up the Yamaha 1300 HD recorder - that's an example. Also you'll find meridian (amongst others) use external DACs for ultimate shielding.


4) change the CD transport 

What possible difference would that make?


No difference to the actual product as regards electrical noise, or
whatever (though if there is, that wasn't what I was getting at). My only
problem with the transport is that CA appear to be pushing the 640H as a
640C with a hard disk ('...incorporates the high-quality CD player from
the Azur 640C...' - read that as you will), when it seems that the only
similarity between the two players is (essentially) the DAC. A number of
postings on the CA forums indicated that some people did think that this
was, basically, a replacement for the 640C.


But why do you think that the 640C actually does have a different
transport mechanism from the 640H?

Bear in mind that the ten grand Meridian 800 series uses a standard 20
quid CD-ROM drive...........


The drives are cosmetically different - the drive drawer on the 640H is
deeper than that of the 640C. Given that the Azur range has a distinctive
style, to deviate from this style implies that there is some other
restriction in place, ie, it's a different drive.



That's just the loader, not the actual transport. In many cases,
they're separately available.


The Cambridge has a CD writer - differences in performance and engineering are well documented. Whether they're audible differences or not I couldn't say for certain.


Besides, the 640H has a
VIA mobo installed - the drive connecting to this will be a regular
IDE-interfaced jobbie (assuming CA haven't re-written the spec for a CD-ROM
interface and got VIA to implement it), which the transport in the 640C
isn't.

I suspect that the CD-ROM drive used by Meridian may have been a bit more
than a stock £20 special.



Your suspicion is wrong. Bear in mind that a stock CD-ROM drive can
read data perfectly at 40x, it should be obvious that nothing more is
needed for 1x CD replay.


The Cambridge has a CD writer - differences in performance and engineering are well documented. Whether they're audible differences ... I couldn't say for certain.


However, Meridian did also re-write the CD-ROM
controller software (although the interface remains the same) to get better
control of the spin speeds of the drive. Maybe (just maybe) this is what
Cambridge Audio have done - but there's certainly no evidence of it (and
they're not saying). So what we've got is a CD-RW drive which spins right
up to 52x - or whatever - making it useless as a regular CD player as it'd
be too noisy, and certainly not comparable with the 640C as a straight CD
player.



You have absolutely *zero* reason for such a claim, since you haven't
actually seen the thing in operation - and nor has anyone else, of
course.


These devices are, in general, noticeably noisy when copying anything other than in real time.

5) build wireless in 

What, you want *more* internal noise?


Ok - I meant build wireless into the basic spec of the product; I
envisaged the aerial on the outside. Although would a transmitter in close
proximity transmitting at 2.4GHz have an effect on an audio signal?


It's a powerful RF source - who knows what intermodulations might
occur? And what's the point, in a domestic installation?

Is there a reason for not using wireless in a domestic installation? 


Yes - wiring is easy. Why add complication?


Wireless is easy - why add the wiring?


Granted, these are criticisms of a product which is yet to be released; the
point of this post was to raise issues (both actual and potential) with the
640H (and to make a point about their removal of their forums).



You have yet to show that there *are* any real issues.


Concenrs are based on plain commonsense. I accept that you have no experience of machines of this kind. However, I'm sure you could raise certain concerns related to say your gramaphone, needle or wireless just by looking at it and knowing the marketing specification. The point of this product is that people who know about such machines have raised points of *possible* concern - they just haven't been answered.

.

Quantcast