Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion Meridian - Systems 596 with 518?

I switched transports from a 500 MkII to a 596. I have a 518, but haven't connected the 596 through it (to 568.2) as the 596 sounded so good alone. I plan to give it a try, but wondered if anyone alse has tried the 596>518>568.2 combo vs. 596>568.2, and can you give me your impressions.

John

I have tried the 596 with and without a 518 into 568.2 for movies (not music, as I prefer the 500), so we're talking about dejittering the DD stream only. Via the 518, the sound had a bit more weight and authority, but I decided to try going direct to improve intelligibility of dialogue in the centre channel. The dialogue didn't really improve, but the sound was noticeably thinner. It's only personal inertia regarding the innaccessibility of my wiring that has prevented me from switching back.

Sorry I can't offer more info on the music side of things. Oh, and you'll need to remember to switch MHR off on the 596 set up menu or the 518 won't recognise the signal. Do let us know what you find yourself...I'd be very interested in your experience.

Cheers

George

Hi, could either or both of you describe the sonic differences between the 500 Mk2 and 596 when playing red book CD? I actually have two 596, but have never compared them to any other Meridian transports. \

Thanks

John,

I tried the 596 direct to my 568.1 and the 518 in the path was so much better. Smoother more analog, laid back and more depth and better bass. I never tried the same with my 568.2...I still have the 518 in the path and I'm using a 598 now. Plan to use my 596 in a second room when my additon is finished. Smartlink is still a little dryer sounding than through the 518 and I like flat dither output. The noise shaping could be what I'm hearing that makes the difference. Flat dither out the 518 is really nice when listening to CD's. It smooths out the soundstage and makes notes more palpable than the noise shaped smartlink.

Ron

You should be able to use the main 596 o/p direct to the 568 and the aux o/p via the 518 - at least that is what I have done with my 598/561. Makes an A/B comparison easier.

All,

Thanks for the input. I will try the 518 in the loop and report back. Unfortunately, Mortod, the 596 does not have a second digital output, so I will have to rewire and reconfigure to try the 518. Would love the opportunity to a/b immediately, but...

Thomas,

I switched from the 500 Mk2 to the 596 because it had a "cleaner" sound - without losing the smoothness and musicality of the sound. The difference was so pronounced that my wife could successfully make blind A/B selections 100% of the time - even from the other room!

As this is such a pronounced difference, I recommend that you listen to both - your ears will tell you quickly which you prefer.

For me, the 596 sound allows all instruments and voices to exhibit their own "air" and sense of space. As I said above - the sound seems much "cleaner" and open. Your mileage may vary.

Thanks John. I have always suspected that the DVD-ROM based players (596, 598) were cleaner sounding than the older generation players (508, 500), but as I have never compared them in the same set up I was never sure. Many thanks for sharing your experience.

I said I'd report how the 596 worked with the 518, so here goes:

Bear in mind, I use the 518 only for jitter control, so I'm not using its sound-shaping capabilities.

Unlike the 500 MkII, I didn't see any improvement in sound for the 596 with the 518. With my 500 MkII, the 518 difference was significant and very positive. With the 596, I heard no difference at all.

This seems to imply that the 596 jitter is already low enough to make the 518 redundant.

A theory that is supported by the fact that the 518 makes other sources (AirPort, Cable) much more listenable.

For me, the 596 sound is a significant improvement vs. the 500 MkII alone or with the 518. Much purer sound.

My 2 cents. I'm ready for the flames...

John

Hi John,

There was still a difference with my 568.1 with the 518 in between the 596 and 568. Never tried it with the 568.2. I have a 598 now. I actually like the flat dither setting since it smooths out the sound and its not as dry sounding. Some might think its more pure with noise shaping but not me. CD's already have noise shaping and the 568 has noise shaping. Add some flat dither and you may be surprised. Try the 518 again. Set the input to 16 bit and output to 24 bit porfessional. Set your 568 to 24 bit input. Then set the 518 to flat dither. The result is more relaxed, darker top end and more dynamics as well. I have very good AC line conditioning so that alone my be flushing out or smoothing out the soundstage for me to hear the differences. I still think with the 518 and flat dither sounds a tade better than my smartlink path with CD's.

Cheers,

Ron

I deleted the 518 out of my system , it did some stuff well BUT it also robs the music of pace and impact even if left in bypass mode (I believe bypass still subjects the signal to DSP)
I had used it with many sources and it always had that effect. On some music what the 518 did was very desireable , there was more air and ambience to the music and a more all enveloping sound. I found that any change of setting actually changed the sonics subtley , merely changing the amount of bits it put out , or one of the dither algorithms did have some impact. It was often difficult to find a setting that treated the music best. The apparent bass seemd to be deeper with the 518 ,but in essence I found it actually reduced the VLF and almost created a hump slighly higher up to give this effect , but as I say , it ALWAYS robbed the music of its toe tapping qualities. There are other folk who have also found this , but as they say in the classics , your mileage may vary. I havent used it in movie mode and the transports used with it were the 500 , A theta data II universal , a theta Jade and a Mark Levinson 31.5.

Remember Rodney, You just can't add bits without setting up the 568 or any of the M processors for the correct input bit depth. Otherwise you could be truncating bits and thats not going to sound good.

I found the professional 24 bit output brought back the pace and more I think. That's what I hear. In bypass, the 518 still dejitters it just doesn't change bit depth or noise shaping. Noise shaping should be used when reducing bit depth and not for increasing it. Flat is the best for increasing it plus it helps the DSP's in the 568 to do a better job with the flat noise. Athough you can experiment with each recording. Older CD's from the mid 80's sound better with some noise shaping.

Like I said in the post on source components, its all what or how you like it to sound. Most of what you say I do hear except the VLF reduction and loss of pace. I hear better pace. Thats why I'm thinking you may have been tructating bits. Maybe not! I'll have to run a test and see if there is a bass drop...I never noticed one and i can compare between smartlink and the path through the 518 on the fly and never noticed any change in bass response. It just sounds more natural through the 518. Probably because the flat dither seems to bring back the lush full sound. Too much noise shaping just sounds to dry to me...not musical...more mechanical. Flat dither helps reduce that affect. IMHO

Cheers,

Ron