Bryston amplification.

[PerfectWagnerite]

     I think toroidal transformers are used because they create less magnetic interference with the signal path. I don't know why the cover is off for the picture. It's probably to show off the dual mono design.

     What's unprofessional about the circuit boards? I ask this in all innocence. Do you mean un-"audiophile"? 

The toroidal transformers as shown aren't shielded so they are still going to created interference. Maybe "unprofessional" isn't a good word but it definitely doesn't look "high-tech" or "state of the art". You'd think they would go with a stripline design for the amount of money you are paying. And that little PCB (the brownish looking one) you almost never see soldermask color like that in the past 10-15 years or so.

[Valentino]

Brystons don't fail. And they are sound engineering, as opposed to a lot of high end crap out there.

Isn't it possible to be an audiophile and be pro blind testing at the same time?

[Harry]

Brystons don't fail. And they are sound engineering, as opposed to a tot of high end crap out there.

Isn't it possible to be an audiophile and be pro blind testing at the same time?

Sure it is!

[M forever]

Isn't it possible to be an audiophile and be pro blind testing at the same time?

Yes, but not for Harry. He has consequently avoided proving his professed high listening skills in the many blind tests which have been offered here.

[drogulus]

Brystons don't fail. And they are sound engineering, as opposed to a lot of high end crap out there.

Isn't it possible to be an audiophile and be pro blind testing at the same time?

    Yes, as long as you can adjust your assumptions about what really affects sound quality. The problem is most audiophiles don't want to do that, and they will listen to Atkinson instead. A bad argument that allows you to keep your subjectivity intact will beat a good argument that requires a painful reassessment. So the switch used in ABX testing colors the sound. Does it really? I doubt it, and it would be easy to show that it did by testing the switch, right? But it doesn't matter for the audiophile. It's just an escape hatch to avoid facing an unpleasant reality. If a better switch is used the argument is the associated equipment isn't high end enough. So magical thinking is defended by an appeal to more magical thinking. The idea is you can avoid ever deciding anything objectively, so therefore the subjectivist must be right. 

[DavidRoss]

    Yes, as long as you can adjust your assumptions about what really affects sound quality. The problem is most audiophiles don't want to do that, and they will listen to Atkinson instead. A bad argument that allows you to keep your subjectivity intact will beat a good argument that requires a painful reassessment. So the switch used in ABX testing colors the sound. Does it really? I doubt it, and it would be easy to show that it did by testing the switch, right? But it doesn't matter for the audiophile. It's just an escape hatch to avoid facing an unpleasant reality. If a better switch is used the argument is the associated equipment isn't high end enough. So magical thinking is defended by an appeal to more magical thinking. The idea is you can avoid ever deciding anything objectively, so therefore the subjectivist must be right. 

Atkinson?  Do you mean John Atkinson, musician, recording engineer, and editor of Stereophile, who subjects virtually every piece of equipment reviewed by his magazine to an exhaustive battery of "objective" tests, measuring such things as frequency response, power output, distortion, comparisons of reproduced waveforms with sine wave inputs, vertical and horizontal dispersion, and so on?  The problem is most idiots don't want to make fair and impartial assessments of all the facts, and they kowtow to their own moronic prejudices instead.  A bad argument based on false premises that buttresses their pathetic delusions of  superiority beats an honest and open-minded assessment of all the relevant facts, in their anything-but-humble opinions--especially if it enables them to look down their noses and sneer judgmentally at others who don't share their narrow-minded view of the world and bigoted attitudes toward their fellows.

I'm reminded of the clown who in several posts insisted that all CD players sound alike and only an idiot would buy an expensive one, but then in a subsequent post (and on the same thread!) recommended buying a CD player "in the $300 to $500 range," apparently too stupid to recognize the logical inconsistency of these statements.  Good grief! 

[drogulus]

   I guess I shouldn't recommend such extravagantly expensive equipment. Usually I spent less than $500, but not much less. $300 to $500 seems like a good range to get a player that satisfies all your needs, unless you want an art object that's built like a tank. Actually I do want that, but I'm on a budget most times. If I had unlimited funds I might get an all-McIntosh system, partly for the coolness factor. It wouldn't sound different but it would look bitchin'.

   If you want a good player that isn't from a no-name manufacturer it will be hard to find something for much less than $300. The exception that comes to mind is the Oppo. Although I worry a little bit about Oppo's durability, I haven't heard anything bad about them.

[DavidRoss]

I just bought a new 192kHz/24bit machine from Philips (you know them--the folks who invented CDs?) for our exercise room for $35 US. 

[Daverz]

I was thinking of getting an Oppo for SACD playback.  It converts the DSD to PCM, though.  I suppose it would have to be hooked up to some kind of HDMI capable A/V processor.

Until I go multi-channel (rather iffy with a 16x15 living room in a condo), I have an old Perpetual Technologies P3A that can handle 2-channels of 24/96 input.  I still prefer the sound of my Arcam Alpha 9 CD player to the P3A, though.

[drogulus]

    Here's an inexpensive alternative to Bryston:

   

    300 wpc into 8 ohms,450 wpc into 4 ohms, 570 wpc into 2 ohms, some ridiculous number bridged into 8 ohms.

    The price is in the neighborhood of $400. I'm sure the "handles" are removable. Crown also has expensive lines for those who want that.

    Or this from QSC:

   

    This is the RMX 1450. Specs and price are quite close to the Crown. I mention these brands because of their outstanding reputation in the field of pro audio. I briefly had a Crown amp long ago and it was entirely satisfactory.

[M forever]

Both Crown and QSC are indeed well regarded brands, although there were periods when Crown products failed more often in the field (esp. the Macrotech series), but they got beyond that and solved a lot of these problems. I generally still prefer QSC for a number of reason, mostly their very clever design and reliability. I had the opportunity once to visit the factory in Orange County - very impressive.
One nice feature of some of the Crown amps (not this particular series though) is the fairly versatile inbuilt DSP stage which allows nuanced EQ and crossover settings right in the amp. I actually played around with that earlier because we are going to use some XTi amps in an installation in a screening room at Harvard:

[Valentino]

So you do audio, M? But of course...

For my hifi I'm using a Behringer DCX2496 as LP-filter and EQ (incl. room tuning) for my ELF-tuned bass system, and a passive line level HP filter for the main speakers, Fc 120Hz. My amps are all B&O ICEpowerASP-based, but I'll probably change to the new ICEpowerASX2 for my main speakers, since they measure (and sound  ) better.
My main speakers is a passive two way system that use a relatively new Mundorf AMTtweeter and 5" SEAS Excel Al-Mg midbasses in MTM-configuration.
My frontend (and "preamplifier") is a Logitech Transporter. I also use a RME ADI-2 as ADC for my LPs since the Transporter only has digital inputs.
I sit 1,7m from my speakers in a 48sqm room.

[drogulus]

Both Crown and QSC are indeed well regarded brands, although there were periods when Crown products failed more often in the field (esp. the Macrotech series), but they got beyond that and solved a lot of these problems. I generally still prefer QSC for a number of reason, mostly their very clever design and reliability. I had the opportunity once to visit the factory in Orange County - very impressive.
One nice feature of some of the Crown amps (not this particular series though) is the fairly versatile inbuilt DSP stage which allows nuanced EQ and crossover settings right in the amp. I actually played around with that earlier because we are going to use some XTi amps in an installation in a screening room at Harvard:

     Yes, the XTi line is impressive. They're a bit more expensive but not prohibitively so.

     

     The base XTi1000 is comparable to the XLS 402 275w/8 ohms, 500w/4 ohms, 700w/2 ohms, etc.

     The price is~$500. If you look around I think you can get it for less than that.

      For home stereo I think the base XLS line is more than adequate.