Has anyone else ever reached an audio impasse?

Would it be too radical to suggest that you try a passive preamp? But if you do, try to make it a good one--a ladder stepped attenuator would be (and in fact has been) my choice. Better still, if you can estimate the attenuation needed for a certain high quality CD, you could try a fixed attenuation network: one series resistor, one parallel (to ground), like each step in a ladder attenuator but without the switch contact. If you try a good passive, you might just conceivably not want to go back to active when the test is done. I've never regretted not going back, after having an active preamp--the CAT SL1 III--that some "experts" used to rave about.

Just because your friend purchased a CDP that’s worth 15k doesn’t necessarily mean that it will sound superior to a less costly CDP (or DVD for that matter). …That said, one would think that a 15K CDP should sound dramatically better than a $100 DVD player. I’d suggest that your friend’s system resolution is either limited by his component synergy or possibly a lesser issue such as digital cable. If not properly terminated impedance mis-matches can cause significant jitter and this would certainly lessen sound quality/differences between source components. I’d stick to something that is truly impedance matched such as: Apogee Digital, Silver Audio, or Stealth’s ‘Varidig’ digital cables.

While my system is worth less than half of your friend’s I’d suggest that if he does not already have dedicated AC and outlets that he do so (separate circuits for digital/analog too). If he’s already done this he should test a few new cables and isolation products (speaker cables, IC's as well as AC/conditioning and isolation/mass loading). And a really cheap tweak is Ring Mat’s CD ‘Statmat’.

Each time I thought that I'd heard my system sound its best I managed to find a step up via the cable/IC/AC/AC conditioning or isolation routes. …No major component changes necessary. Careful auditioning of said accessories (really components in their own rights) have nonetheless brought remarkable results similar to upgrading a major component. I feel that I’ve now maxed-out a few of these routes and will eventually need to upgrade my speakers and possibly associated equipment (I wouldn’t assume that new speakers would necessarily match my current system).

Personally I've found Silversmith Audio to be THE speaker cable of choice – brutally honest and revealing, no euphoria whatsoever. FYI they now come cryogenically treated. I tried Valhalla’s too, but found my preference with the Silversmith's. If your friend hasn't tried or doesn’t already use either of these fine products he should try them (both speaker and IC). I will be auditioning Silversmith IC’s over the holidays, and expect these to offer greater resolution yet.

Regarding isolation I’d say check both rack and shelves. Using racks like Mana Acoustics with Neuance shelves, or an Arcici 'Suspense' rack with an S.A.P. RELAXA 1 (under the source) would provide much improved detail & resolution. Note that these two approaches I am suggesting are largely different in execution, but attempt to arrive at the same end. I have also found that taking measures to isolate speaker and AC cables are also important and can improve many aspects of the reproduction (or conversely – if ignored can significantly pollute, color and smear sonic images).

As a last suggestion I’d recommend Shunyata Research's Hydra and or AC cords. Those that use the ‘FeSi-1000’ compound. The Hydra and CKv2’s are especially good on digital source components. These improved an already quiet noise floor and added a greater sense of ease and air to my system. My attempt to paraphrase Shunyata Research would be to say that the basic function of SR components is to allow unfettered current flow while stopping ‘electronic pollution’ from being transferred between the various components within the system chain.

If these suggestions don’t bring about major improvements in resolution that allow you to hear greater distinctions between source components I’d be mightily surprised. That said, if I have gone over territory you’ve already covered then please excuse my ramblings.

Cheers,
Mike

Is your comparison done as a rapid A/B switching back and forth between the two components? My experience is that a rapid A/B methodology obscures the differences between components. Listen for a while, then switch to the other component and listen to the same music.

Tom - good idea. I might try that!

Mike - I kind of agree with you about my friends CD player - its cost and how it "doesn't necessarily" sound better than a less expensive CD or DVD player. But I have to tell you, he wouldn't have purchased it if it didn't sound better.

I feel our choices in interconnects have been well thought out and most systems of this caliber do not use low end components anywhere. One thing this auditioning has enlightened us to is how much the Hydra colors the sound of the system. While we like it on source components, it is too much for the whole system. A haze develops - similar to the sugar coated sweetness common to Acoustic Zen Silver Reference ICs.

Drubin, We were doing A/B switching but NOT back and forth immediately - rapidly. We listened extensively to each source.

What kills me here is with a LOW QUALITY preamp, we are able to hear the difference between the CD players. With a very high-end or even a decent preamp, the difference between the players diminishes. Seems like the better the preamp the less the character of the source matters.

We are using (and rotating) a combination of Valhalla Interconnects, NBS Statement, and Stealth PGS. Speaker cables are AudioNote AN-SPz Kondo. PC's have been Shunyata KC v1 and NBS Statement on source. Electraglide FatMan 2000 K's on Pre and Amps.

Mike aka Awdeeofyle brings up some interesting points along with all of the others. To further extend Mike's comments, i will say that there is a LOT more to building a "killer" system than just having "killer components" regardless of price. I ( and many others ) have noticed that some combo's sound "good" while others perform "magic". A lot of this comes about through trial and error or systematic cable swaps. Whether you want to believe it or not, even Frank Van Alstine ( a renowned "cable curmudgeon" ) had to admit that SOME cable changes CAN alter the performance / sonics of a system to the benefit of the end user.

With that in mind, you might want to try finding what you think is the best digital source for your demands and then tweak it into further compliance with the rest of the system with various cables. This might mean a simple substitution of a digital cable from transport to dac, an analogue cable from dac to pre, substituting both cables, etc.. This SHOULD be done one at a time and then in various combo's. Sometimes you'll find that "fatty" compliments "skinny" and you end up with two well rounded performers with different strengths and weaknesses. The bottom line though is that they compliment each other.

NEVER take for granted that one cable is superior to the others based on brand or price. It just isn't true. We are more worried about system SYNERGY than anything else here. Especially what something costs or how "prestigious" the names are.

When you find the "right" ( actually "most suitable" ) combination of cables with your specific components, you will know it right away. There will be a certain "liquidity", "air", "depth", "detail", "impact", etc... without loosing any bit of "musicality" that many people strive for, but few achieve. Hence the accumulation of TONS of money in a system that just doesn't sound "right". Sean
>