Wayne,

If you like Shostakovich Symphony # 5, check out his Symphony # 11. It is a huge work, scored for a very large orchestra. I have a digital remaster of a recording made by Leopold Stokowski with the Houston Symphony Orchestra. You might especially enjoy an SACD version if one is available.

On the "system arrangement" front, I have just discovered that Cambridge Audio has a 7.2 AV Receiver which has a number of unusual (possibly unique) features geared toward music reproduction. I am studying the manual in depth and I will be contacting Cambridge directly with several questions related to specifically how I would use the unit in my unusual audio setup.

The unit is Cambridge CXR120. I have read several reviews from competent review sources and they all agree that the sound is exceptional for music reproduction.

As part of my evaluation, I have reconfigured my present setup to experiment with the speaker allocations and playback options that I would use if I were to acquire the Cambridge unit.

I will report upon results and the decision I make.

Also, more later upon Sheryl's situation as it develops. Right now, we have a consultation with the oncologist schedules for Friday February 16. We are hopeful that her PT Scan will be scheduled and completed before this consultation.

Happy listening,

Art

Hey Bro Art,
I think, but I don't know, have no real experience of the Cambridge brand to go on, only what I have read and how much you like them, but I think that CXR120 looks like a winner!!!! I think it would blow your Onkyo and Denon outta the water. For someone who has as good and experienced ear as you.

I do have Shostakovich's 11 the Year 1905, but maybe not the best one. I have the LSO conducted by his friend, Rostropovich, the reason I thought it would be good. And it is but the dynamic range of my recording is so wide that the music starts off VERY low volume, I really have to turn it up a LOT and then later I have to be careful not to blow things to bits in my home theater, have to turn it down a LOT. Kinda scares me to play it. Have you heard this version?
I have not found a good SACD of it. But the #5 is on that Grammy winning SACD and sounds terrific.

OK, still praying and hoping for great news.
Have fun with system configuration.
God Bless,
Wayne

Hi Wayne,

I have not heard the Rostropovich/LSO version. From the cover picture you attached, it appears to be a live performance recording. I tend to shy away from live performance recordings.

Yes, the dynamic range of the 11th is very wide. Bur, it is an exciting piece of music. I can't recommend a solution to your dynamics problem, other than dynamic compression which I don't like at all.

I sent a lengthy email to Cambridge Audio with a description of my peculiar audio setup and describing how I would use the CXR120. I also asked them several questions to help me decide about the CXR120.

I expect to hear from them in a couple of days.

Best,

Art

Hi, Art

Like Wayne, I'm betting that the Cambridge CXR120 would be a BIG step up SQ wise for the other channels. Another, maybe equally big benefit: instead of different DAC/amp set-ups for different channels, you'd have the best, and SAME, DAC/amp feeding all the channels, giving an even more consistant sound field, and easier volume control among the channels. Sounds like a winner to me.

Will be interested in what Cambridge has to say....

Something else to consider. I know you prefer 2 channel music in multi channel format, and listen to tv output on lesser stuff. . But, a good surround receiver like the Cambridge, and all those amazing speakers you have, and may yet add to.... well, HT options come to mind. I know when given a choice between watching/listening to anything with music content on a tv with native speakers, and putting that same content on my HT and letting the GEts turn it into something glorious, well, you know what I choose.

Happy listening! I continue to admire how you all are keepin' on keepin' on!

Rick

Hi Rick,

Interesting that you should mention the idea of one DAC feeding all music sources. Actually, there are two possibilities along those lines - each with its merits. I can send my USB audio signal to my Cambridge DAC, then feed the balanced audio to the Cambridge 2-channel amp and the unbalanced audio to the CXR120 (or in my current setup, to my Denon). The advantage of this approach, as you mentioned, is one common HQ DAC feeding both sound processors.

However, the disadvantage of this approach is that the AV Receiver must perform an A/D conversion, then a D/A conversion after processing the signal for multi-channel playback. So, there is still another DAC involved. In the case of the Denon, that DAC is unlikely to approach the Cambridge DAC in quality -- not to mention the dual processing which requires an initial D/A conversion.

In addition to the USB Audio input, the Cambridge DAC Magic Plus has both optical and coaxial digital inputs and outputs. The incoming digital signal, whether USB Audio or a digital signal from a DVD player, TV audio, etc., is passed through the DAC without alteration from the input to the output.

So, I can connect the digital output from the DAC to a digital input on the AV Receiver (Denon or Cambridge). This path avoids the initial A/D conversion and allows the AV Receiver to perform its multi-channel processing and then use its internal DAC to convert the signals to audio before distribution to the speakers.

It is this second approach which potentially offers the best opportunity for improved sound because the Cambridge's DAC should be superior to the Denon's DAC.

The superior audio processing of the Cambridge over the Denon will enhanace the sound, regardless of the A/D or D/A approach.

To test part of this new setup approach, I have reconfigured my speakers again. The shelf-mounted front SuperSat 3s are now connected to the Denon Fronts; the KLH Towers remain connected to the Denon Surrounds and the Triton Sevens are connected to the Denon Surround Backs. The Ones and the Paradigm remain connected to the Cambridge 851 stereo amp.

I am driving the Denon with a digital signal from the Cambridge DAC. I am playing with various 7.0 sound field options in the Denon. The idea is to enhance the Front sound field while adding the "presence" hopefully supplied by the surround channels. Of course, I cannot simulate what improvements would be offered by the Cambridge. I am hopeful that Cambridge will supply some useful information along those lines. Ultimately, if I like this arrangement, it will be up to me to decide whether or not replacing the Denon with the Cambridge is worth the expense.

More later...........

Art

Addendum to several previous posts and a new arrangement!!

1. Cambridge has responded, but has not offered much help. They "took the 5th" on the subject of musical quality - deferring to the listener's perceptions. Understandable. I asked a couple of additional technical questions and I expect their response in a couple of days.

2. Regarding driving the Denon with a 192/24 up-scaled audio signal from the external DAC versus sending the PCM Digital signal through the DAC directly to the Denon, avoiding A/D conversion in the Denon: I cannot hear any difference in the surround sound portion of the sound in my room between the two approaches. So, for the moment, I've settled on using the up-scaled analog signal from the DAC.

Now about that "new arrangement": For many years now and regardless of other changes and rearrangements, my Surrounds have always been located on the floor to either side of my PLP and about 5 feet away. Yesterday, I took a fresh look at my room, wondering if there was a way to move these speakers to a rear-side position. Two obstacles, both on the right side, had to be overcome. One was the position of several shelves holding CDs and the other, more important one, was having a speaker wire available to connect the right side speaker. I decided to check the spacing available by considering a shelf rearrangement, so I moved a shelf out from the wall. This shelf had not been moved for a number of years.

Lo and behold -- there, behind the shelf was a speaker wire which had been installed many years ago when we remodeled the room. So, I quickly completed the shelf rearrangement and moved one of my Triton Sevens to that new rear-side position. Moving the leftTriton Seven to a left-wall matching position was easily accomplished and presented no wiring problem. I then placed the two KLH Floor speakers in the rear of the room to act as the Rear Surrounds.

After making appropriate connections and re-configuring the Denon to reflect the new speaker arrangement, I sat down to listen to several favorite recordings which I typically use to test new arrangements.

What a difference!! This new placement significantly improved the surround-sound effects portion of my hybrid stereo approach. I have always been unhappy with the two surround speakers sitting at my sides and so close to my PLP. I also recognized that virtually all 5.1 or 7.1 setups showed the surrounds as being on the side, but behind the PLP. Apparently, this seeming small difference in location makes a substantial difference in sound.

Now, I will be listening to a wide variety of music to further evaluate this change. But, now the benefits of my hybrid 2-channel/multi-channel approach are definitely enhanced. The role played by the Denon with the surrounds and surround backs has become much more important to my overall enjoyment -- so much so that I am now strongly considering replacing the Denon with the Cambridge CXR120 7.2 AV Receiver. If I do acquire the CXR120, I will probably move the connections to my "Front High" SuperSat3s from the "B" Speaker terminals on the Cambridge 851A to the Cambridge CXR120 Fronts. This change would retain the "Cambridge Sound" benefit while allowing me to customize the sound level for these two speakers. I would also have the option of using them as true "Front Height" speakers in a 9.0 configuration, plus moving the Paradigm Sub connection to the CXR120 preamp output terminals for perhaps even more improvement in a 9.1 support system.

Of course, my Triton Ones will remain connected to my Cambridge 851A, unaffected by all of this rearrangement.

Then, the only change remaining for me would be the addition of the References. But, that decision must await the outcome of Sheryl's medical evaluations. She now has a PT Scan scheduled for February 20 and an oncology consultation for February 16 (which may be delayed to await the PT Scan results). We are hopeful of knowing where she stands by the end of February.

Regards to all,

Art