Bryston SP3 Preamp-Processor

[nicoff]

Originally Posted by gbaby

If you buy the BDP-2 or 3, all your problems with USB will be resolved and you will have the extra option of storing all your digital music and get playback quality better than the best CD player. I play all my 2 channel music on it but convert it to either 7.1 Dolby Pro-Logic IIx or Stereo7 7.1. The very best use of the SP3 is music in surround; discreet if possible, but lesser surround is always better to me than 2 channel. Plus, I'm using the SP3's balanced digital input. It makes a difference.

My problem is not only with the USB in the SP3. The DAC chips inside the SP3 are older generation than those in the BDA3. For example, the SP3 cant do DSD (let alone DSD-256) natively, it can't do PCM playback capable of 384kHz/32 bit resolution.
Right now, I am using an old and trusty Logitech Transporter as a streamer/player. It is Roon-ready; it does hi resolution but only up to 24/96; it does not do DSD natively. I connect it via AES (balanced digital) to the SP3. If I replace the Transporter with a BDP-3, I still have to deal with the limitations of the older chips inside the SP3. And since I also want multichannel, it looks like, for now, I have to wait or find another solution.

[nicoff]

Ah, and while at it, add MQA to it! [emoji3]

[gbaby]

Originally Posted by nicoff

My problem is not only with the USB in the SP3. The DAC chips inside the SP3 are older generation than those in the BDA3. For example, the SP3 cant do DSD (let alone DSD-256) natively, it can't do PCM playback capable of 384kHz/32 bit resolution.
Right now, I am using an old and trusty Logitech Transporter as a streamer/player. It is Roon-ready; it does hi resolution but only up to 24/96; it does not do DSD natively. I connect it via AES (balanced digital) to the SP3. If I replace the Transporter with a BDP-3, I still have to deal with the limitations of the older chips inside the SP3. And since I also want multichannel, it looks like, for now, I have to wait or find another solution.

Since you like DSD, unless you love classical music, this is not an issue. I truly believe the SP3 is still the first great processor as Kal Rubinson noted in his initial review of it. No manufacturer can give you multi-channel DSD without converting it to PCM due to crossover issues with DSD. Also, ask yourself, what music do I like that originates in DSD? Probably none unless you like classical. As far as 384/32, this is overkill. Don't fall into the numbers game. Except for multi-channel SACD or DVD-A, I think you already are at the state of the art when it comes to digital sound reproduction. All you need now is time to listen.

[gbaby]

Originally Posted by nicoff

Ah, and while at it, add MQA to it! [emoji3]

Wanting MQA and higher sampling rates is a contradiction. MQA is suppose to negate the need of a higher sampling rate, correct?

[nicoff]

Originally Posted by gbaby

Since you like DSD, unless you love classical music, this is not an issue. I truly believe the SP3 is still the first great processor as Kal Rubinson noted in his initial review of it. No manufacturer can give you multi-channel DSD without converting it to PCM due to crossover issues with DSD. Also, ask yourself, what music do I like that originates in DSD? Probably none unless you like classical. As far as 384/32, this is overkill. Don't fall into the numbers game. Except for multi-channel SACD or DVD-A, I think you already are at the state of the art when it comes to digital sound reproduction. All you need now is time to listen.

Short answer: I love classical multichannel SACD (DSD) recordings.

(And by the way, I have no intention of purchasing 32/384 recordings. I mentioned it because Bryston says that the DAC in their BDA3 can handle those. I was just highlighting the difference with the DAC inside the SP3).

[nicoff]

Originally Posted by gbaby

Wanting MQA and higher sampling rates is a contradiction. MQA is suppose to negate the need of a higher sampling rate, correct?

No contradiction at all. I own many hi rez files (24/96, 24/192, DSD). They are stored in my NAS and I listen to them often. I recently subscribed to Tidal that now offers MQA files. My intention is to stream those Tidal MQA files to the DAC. One does not negate the other.

[Still-One]

Originally Posted by nicoff

No contradiction at all. I own many hi rez files (24/96, 24/192, DSD). They are stored in my NAS and I listen to them often. I recently subscribed to Tidal that now offers MQA files. My intention is to stream those Tidal MQA files to the DAC. One does not negate the other.

+1

[gbaby]

Originally Posted by nicoff

Short answer: I love classical multichannel SACD (DSD) recordings.

(And by the way, I have no intention of purchasing 32/384 recordings. I mentioned it because Bryston says that the DAC in their BDA3 can handle those. I was just highlighting the difference with the DAC inside the SP3).

I own the BDA3 and never use it preferring multi-channel PCM from the SP3. To be honest I have never been satisfied with my system until I purchased the SP3. I'm through with the upgrade game; I just want to enjoy my music. Owning thousands of CDs (purchasing them was an addiction) I can now import them as aiff files to my BDP-2 and listen to them at last in multi-channel at that. I envy you in that you like classical and have plenty of DSD software in which to listen. I like more contemporary sounds from smooth jazz, R&B and soul, classic rock and even a little blue grass. Also, I am completely satisfied with the SP3 down grading SACD in DSD to PCM 176/24.

[gbaby]

Originally Posted by nicoff

No contradiction at all. I own many hi rez files (24/96, 24/192, DSD). They are stored in my NAS and I listen to them often. I recently subscribed to Tidal that now offers MQA files. My intention is to stream those Tidal MQA files to the DAC. One does not negate the other.

I was under the impression that MQA was suppose to make 44.1/16, 48/24 or 96/24 sound the same as 192/24 or DSD. I thought it as suppose to save on storage while offering the same sonic benefits as hi res.

[nicoff]

The full technical explanation of what MQA does can be found in other sites like CA or blogs.

This much I have learned: 1) the MQA files are smaller than your typical high resolution files, and 2) the MQA files can be decoded or converted into higher resolution files via software (like Tidal, and soon Roon) to a resolution of 24/96, 3) MQA files can be decoded to even higher resolutions using a MQA capable hardware (DAC).