Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion Meridian - Systems Worthwhile trading-in 808.2 for 808.3?

I agree but I hope that the two are equivalent, not one better than the other.

Thanks Ronnie.

Quick comparison update: The coax digital output of the Control:10 going into a digital input on the 808i.2 was much better than the Control:10 speakerlink into the DSP8ks. There was no fog and the imaging was better. The sound was full and dynamic. The same CD played on the 808i.2 was still better, but not by much.

I assume you don't have SpeakerLink 8ks, so this is purely down to apodizing in the 808.2. Right?

Joel
Dollar does specifically say "Control:10 Speakerlink Output into the D8k's"

Since converting Speakerlink into SPDIF is difficult at best and the AC12 is not available yet, I do think that Doollar's D8k's are the Version 2's

That being the case, they do indeed have Speakerlink Inputs

More importantly, the D8k.2 have Apodizing as standard.

There have been numerous reports on here from people who report very positively on Apodizing from the HD621 but seem much more lukewarm about Apodizing from the D8k.2, D5200.2's and D7200's.

Would appear to support Meridian's claim of different Apodizing implementations as well as their statement of "Apodize as early as possible"

I would like a bit of clarity of the latter. What does "Apodise as early as possible actually mean". Is it in a physical sense where, source excepted, as early as possible is the same in "source -> DSP" as equally as early as "source to 808.2" or does it mean in (the Meridian sense), stick a 808.2 in there because its a pre amp and that is being apodised 'logically' earlier than apodising in a speaker, even though the speaker also has a preamp.

These are two quite subtle differences which I may not have explained particularly well and must not become confused with the differences in quality that may lie in the different apodising solutions used in different pieces of kit - ie 808.2 would appear to have better apodising then the implementation in the speakers.

Ian
My interpretation of Apodize as early possible" is that Meridian strongly suggest getting the Data Stream into a 24/88 (for Redbook) state as early as possible in the System chain

Meridian have had this stance for many years (well before Apodizing, which is just a more evolved way of Upsampling / RE to 24/88)

IMHO, this recommendation stems from their opinion that high speed data at 88khz and Encrypted into MHR is less susceptible to Jitter at the various Input and Output Interfaces between the Components in a typical system

So in the real world, they suggest that when using a Source that does not have the ability to output a High Speed Stream (Sooloos, Non-Meridian CD Player or SB3 / Sonos) then it is "best practice" to get this into a High Speed and MHR Format as early as possible using either the 808.2i or the HD621. Using an HD621 would obviously require converting to HDMI, which may have its own Jitter implications

None of the above has anything to do with possible differences in Apodizing Implementations between various Meridian components

My guess at what Meridian are saying would boil down to this, when using a "normal" source which can output 16/44 (including a Sooloos)

a) Get the Data Stream into High Speed (24/88) and MHR as soon as possible after that Source

b) Use the 808.2i rather than the HD621 because it has a more evolved or "fine tuned by listening tests" version of Apodizing

As I said at the outset, that is my INTERPRETATION of what they are saying. In no way am I saying that I have verified their opinions

Hi Ronnie. My bad. The apparent discrepancy between apodizing in the 808.2/HD621 and DSP speakers is odd.

To add to your comments, I agree with your interpretation. In a jitter-free world, apodizing can occur anywhere in the chain, but because it occurs in the same operation as upsampling, the best results are obtained by upsampling/apodizing as early as possible.

Not sure I would use the word "odd" as such. What I will say is this

There have been FAR more positive reports on here about the benefits that the HD621 brings to 2-ch 16/44 music replay than reports commending the Free Firmware Updates on the D5200v1's, which allowed Apodizing at the Speaker. (These "raves" come even after the potentially degrading step of SPDIF to HDMI Conversion)

Sure, if one has a G68 / G61r / 861, then Upsampling in that processor needs to be turned off.

But there has been more than a few reports from people who have tried turning Upsampling in the G68 On and Off and usually revert to leaving it in the G68, rather than taking advantage of Apodizing in the Speaker. Obviously, there are many possible reasons for this (Interface Jitter on 24/44 Data Streams at the Processor Outputs and Speaker Inputs being one)

You raise an interesting point Ronnie. I have suspected for some time that the de-jittering in the speakers is not as effective as in the processors, but maybe this only comes into play with 24/44 data streams? i.e. The apodizing in the speakers is outweighed by the increased input jitter?

The Sonos/SB is a good example to demonstrate. Take Sonos and 5200's. Many people are advocating trying to put a HD621 in between which involves kludging the Sonos/HD621 interface. Surely a Sonos/SB direct into 5200 is physically apodising just as early as Sonos into HD621 then into 5200. Intact it could be argued that becUse of the SPDIF/HDMI kludge, it's actually happening later.

As I say, quality of apodising (dejittering) excepted although I believe de jittering in speakerlink speakers may be on a par with HD621/newer processors.

Obviously at end of day it's down to listening tests but addition of �1500 HD621 is hard to quantify when for some people the only benefit is apodising.

If one equates "De-Jittering" with FIFO Memory Buffering, then I have heard from the Meridian Gurus for years that their FIFO Buffering Stages and Implementations are best in their Players (800 and subsequently 808); then their Processors and then their DSP's

Equally, they have also said that the Upsampling in the Player was a better (more fine tuned tested???) version than that in the Processor which in turn was better than the DSP's

As you know from previous posts, I have always found that CD Replay on an 800 to be subtly better than same 16/44 material from even a 508 non-Upsampling player

Likewise, I have also preferred the results of allowing the 800 to Upsample to 24/88 than outputting 24/44 to the 861 and allowing that to Upsample. Again, there are several potential reasons for this, including the reasons that Meridian themselves quote