Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion Meridian - Streaming Upgrading C15 sound quality

I have a few miscellaneous questions--perhaps confirmations is a more accurate descriptor--relating to my current Sooloos/Control 15 setup. From everything I've read, here and elsewhere, I get the impression that I can step up the sound quality of my C15 by feeding the sound files directly to an external processing board. And my options are the ID40 via an 861v6 or 808.3 or ID41 via an 818, correct?

First, am I correct in thinking that I'd actually be better off with an older C10 if I added a new core device, given that I'm not using the C15 for music storage anyway and I'd be offloading all of the processing of the music files to another device? It might be an academic argument, since I don't see C10s readily available on the used market, but if I don't need the hard drive and extra electronics of the C15 in my music room, wouldn't this be a 'logical' regressive step?

Second, my impression from the manual and online comments is that the 861v6 does not have analog pass-throughs, which would make it kind of a non-starter for my particular situation. Can someone confirm that?

Finally, sound quality: I know there have been long threads on this topic, which I've read. But is the consensus that one still gets a significant (loaded term, I know) improvement in sound by moving from the C15 as core to an ID40/ID41, even in comparison to running the C15 into one of the newer DACs that promote themselves as managing digital input streams in near-jitter-free manner (thinking of DACs like the PWD, Bricasti, Playback Designs)? Unfortunately, it's not possible for me to get loaners to set up direct listening comparisons in my own system, which of course would be ideal. But perhaps others have had that opportunity? And I value the opinions of the Meridian/Sooloos 'experts' on this forum.

Thanks!
Jerry

Another option is MS600 to up the ante on audio performance.

As for core, everything that I have seen with Sooloos points to store+core in same unit being optimal. Options for this are MC200 (basically your C15 without control), MD600 (TwinStore replacement and probably best option), MC600 (modern multizone 'Ensemble').

As you say, your C15 could easily be replaced with a C10 functionally, but would you get any money out of the downgrade? Probably not enough for it to be worth it especially as the C15 is probably a better C10 than the C10 is.

As for analogue pass through. Most modern Meridian equipment is inherently all digital so any preamp type of device (861/818/808.3 etc.) will to ADC to get signal into the digital domain as soon as possible. Most people, having heard the result are not bothered by this.

Wow, I'm always amazed at the speed of replies on this forum!

I had not really considered the 200/600 series of products as sound upgrades--interesting ideas. But I'm curious about the rationale ("store+core in same unit being optimal"), since I've had Meridian reps tell me several times that "optimal" was to separate the electronics of storage and the "computer noise" of the C15 core from the processing, which seems at odds with your statement. Of course, maybe they were just pushing an ID40/41 option as an upgrade path, but their *argument* was best sound quality.

As an aside, I do like having the TwinStores--just belt and suspenders, since I back up separately, and having the convenience of real-time backups is nice--so am not anxious to move towards replacing them.

On the analog pass-through, I'm sure the extra ADC/DAC cycle is handled extremely well by Meridian. And I appreciate the confirmation that the 861 doesn't allow for analog pass-through.

Thanks for the quick response and thoughts!

Keeping it simple for now...........the MS600 is the simplest and cheapest of the Meridian Sooloos Upgrades for your system

And it will offer a sound on its very, very good Analog Outputs that will far exceed that of the C15

FWIW, the MS600 is not part of the 200/600 series.........it's a 2 year old Meridian Sooloos component..........that offers a Sound Quality only outperformed by the ID40 / 861 / 808..........or 818

Okay, I will take a good look at the MS600, which would clearly be a huge cost differential vs any of the ID40/41 alternatives. I'll do my homework, but my assumption is that the MS600 acts just like one of the ID40/DACs functionally--C15 to TwinStore to MS600 (with router in middle, of course), with the MS600 receiving the music file natively, processing it, and converting it to analogue. Since it deosn't have a hard drive and isn't a computer, it could sit quietly in the music room (and was no doubt intended for that purpose), correct? So I'm not paying for the preamp and/or CD player and other functionality that the 8xx products provide and which I might not use. Is that a fair assessment?

If cost were no object (it always is, of course), and sound quality from the C15 were the only priority, it still appears that an ID40/41 is the way to go.

I still would be curious how people who have ever been able to make this kind of direct comparison feel about the C15 into a really top-notch DAC, designed with digital input and jitter control, as mentioned before, versus the Meridian-based solutions being discussed--MS600 and ID40/41 solutions. I've seen a couple of comments recently--one from John Marks, if I'm not misremembering--praising the C15/Bercasti combination quite highly.

Again, thanks for the feedback.
Jerry

One thing to consider is that you still get a separate zone with the C15 or C10 and, while the SQ is not as good as the other options discussed it is still good. And the earlier C10s did not upsample, whilst the later do but do not have apodising like the C15; so it might make sense to stick with the C15 for a secondary zone. I use mine to drive DSP3200s in a place on my veranda for parties, etc.

Thanks, Jack. I agree that I should keep the C15--the only possible advantage to the C10 (went my thinking) was that it is quieter, I believe, because I don't believe it has a hard drive (?). So I might conceivably locate one closer to my listening seat, whereas I keep the C15 over on an equipment stand (and use the iPad app from my seat). But the economics probably don't make sense and there may well be other advantages to the C15 over the C10, as people have suggested.

Jerry

The rationale behind ID40/41 (and MS600 for that matter) is perfectly valid. My comment about store+core being optimal extends this in that it too separates the computer side from audio side but combines store+control functions into same box thus avoiding network traffic between the store and the core. The effects of this range from negligible to potentially significant depending on the topology of the network. It could however be argued that a box handling core and store is less optimal than distributing these functions across two or more boxes but I personally don't think that it is an issue.

My personal opinion is that MD600 (or MC200/C15 for smaller collections) + MS600/ID40/41 plus control of choice represents the optimal Sooloos system.

Whilst the C10 does not have any music storage, it does still have a hard drive.
There is no advantage to switching from a C15 to a C10. Have a look in the Wiki for more information on C10/C15 variants

Regards,
Carl

Thanks, Ian. I understand better what "store+core" means now, I think, and what you say makes sense to me and does seem consistent with what the Meridian reps were saying.

I'll definitely be looking at the MS600 now, given the huge price differential between that solution and the ID40/41 options.

Carl, thanks for correcting my understanding of the C10. Makes sense that it would still need a HD for the software to manage/"control" the system, I suppose, so it really has no additional interest for me vs. the C15.

I think that store+core (MD600) to ID40 sounds better than store to core (C10) to ID40.