Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion Meridian - Streaming MC200 Owners Thread

I thought that the Media Core 200 deserved an owners thread so I am starting one. After four weekends of listening I am finally ready to post my impressions of the Media Core 200 into the ID40 card of my 808.3. I wanted to listen for long enough to a wide enough range of music to make sure of my impressions. I also have been busy loading music enough into it. I use Trifield in a 7.1 analog setup from my 861v6 for all my music listening. The 808.3 is linked to the 861v6 with a one meter Meridian SpeakerLink cable.

First off I went with the Media Core 200 because it fit my particular needs the best. The MC200 is handsome and quite small so it almost disappears in my listening room, something I wanted to achieve. I use an iPad to control the MC200. I love the size of the iPad and that it is not a uni-tasker, being quite handy to have around for all kinds of things (only $350 for first gen refurb basic Wi-Fi version!). I find the interface of the Sooloos app pleasant to play everything. It is not a Control 15 interface, but the big panel just would not work in my room. I review all Meta data for all recordings as I am importing them using Control:PC. I find the interface within Control:PC straight forward and easy to manipulate.The surprise of going to the Media Core 200 / ID40 / 808.3 is the sonics. In a nutshell, the best I have ever had in my system! To explain this best, I need to review some history of my Meridian sources first.

800: I had one for what seems like forever, ending with 800v3. Played so many CDs (and DVDs using an SDI output card) on it I lost count. I would occasionally try other CD players as transports during the time I owned it but the 800 would vanquish them. Fond memories.

808.2: A true revelation. The apodizing filter was a big advancement. A reduction in digital artifacts that resulted in the realization that CD had much more to offer than you had known before hearing it. I found a musicality I had not heard before from CD. Most exciting was how many fewer �bad� CDs you now owned. The 808.2 changed my impression of digital sound forever.

808.3 (playing CDs): A further refinement of the 808.2. Yet another reduction in digital artifacts that brought you even closer to the music. Particularly noticed was the added spatiality of the soundstage and the added detail to everything within the soundstage. A very worthwhile sonic improvement, but not the revelation I had when I first heard the 808.2.

808.3 (MC200 into ID40): A paradigm shift in digital sound. To my ears, digital music with digital artifacts reduced to the level that what is left is the music. What I now hear is so quiet in noise, so utterly clean, so transparent, and so tonally correct, with little to no glare left that everything I play is new. I call it a paradigm shift because when you have what digital does well left without what digital doesn�t do well reduced to this level you realize what a tremendous source it really is. Yes, 16 bit 44k sourced from CD music can sound stunningly musical. You still hear the effects of a bad recording or of something wrong with the recording. What is amazing is how unimportant that becomes and how much music is still left. The number of �bad� CD recordings has dropped to the floor.

88/24 or 96/24 to MC200: A difference in magnitude like what I mentioned above from the 808.2 to the 808.3 playing CDs. I definitely hear the difference and I will be buying a lot of new music in this format in the future. I must say though that while 96/24 or 88/24 is worthwhile, the MC200/ID40 combo leaves 16/44 from CD in many cases just as musical, simply less resolving. The resolution from 16/44 is high enough on most recordings that I find it fully satisfying. That means I will still be buying CDs I want and putting them into the MC200 for a very long time. It also means I will be focusing on buying new music only on 96/24 and 88/24, not replacing recordings I currently love or duplicating them.

MC200 speakerlink out to 808.3 speakerlink in: Very good. To my ears, I prefer playing CDs into the 808.3 to this but it is close. What is clear from doing this test is how much a difference the ID40 card makes. The MC200/ID40 sounds like a paradigm shift to me as described above. Connected via speakerlink, the same recording just has the very good sound you get from an 808.3. A readily audible difference.

Mac Mini / HDMI / 621 / Speakerlink cable to 861v6: Had a chance to hear this for a few weeks before I got my MC200. I did not do a real long comparison because the sonics were so far below the 808.3 playing CDs I just wasn�t interested. Not bad sound by any means but it sounded like just another digital source with none of the magic of the 808.3. Returned the Mac Mini.

Conclusion: You can tell I am mightily impressed with the MC200/ID40/808.3 combination. To me it is like arriving at the top of a mountain after an audio journey of forty plus years. I suggest that if you are into music servers and have an ID40 card but are not using it; you are missing out on something very special sonically. Linn said many years ago when they marketed the LP12 that the source was the most important item in your overall system performance. This combination reaffirms that statement to me. The source truly rules.

Why don't you have an ID40 in your 861v6? That should be the best solution. Maybe you can move it from your 808.3 to the 861v6?

+1 I wonder if you would gain even more by removing the transition from 808 to 861 and just process the ID40 in the 861.

Apart from that, many thanks for your write-up. Is very informative.

I bought the 808.3 a year ago to play CD's. The highest performance available at the time. I was told by Meridian you get better performance from the ID40 in the 808.3 vs the 861v6 due to lower noise in the 808.3. Based on what I am hearing, I am loath to change anything out.

Mwiebelhaus, that was an extremely interesting and informative write up. Many thanks for taking the time to commit it to 'paper'.

Cheers

George

I think I recall that being stated before. Does this mean that 'noise' in the 861 is greater than the benefit of processing ID40 directly in the 861 rather than sending down another cable between boxes.

This surely opens another can o'worms re: whether it's better to go 808.3/ID40 direct to DSP and not via 861 for the ultimate (and gaining +3dB / resolution in the process)

Does the 808 have 2 outputs you could test that with I wonder ? Dare you test it (and risk upsetting the status of the 861v6)?

I would say that is only true when the 808.3 is directly driving the speakers (2 channels).

Routing the ID40 data from the 808.3 to 861v6 involves transforming the audio to an SPDIF/AES signal and then converting it back again once inside the 861v6, which can introduce jitter (albeit very small).
Having the ID40 card in the 861v6 eliminates this SpeakerLink connection and the associated jitter.

For 2 channel play back with an ID40 card I would suggest in order of most optimal:

1) ID40 --> 808.3 --> Speakers
2) ID40 --> 861v6 --> Speakers
3) ID40 --> 808.3 --> 861v6 --> Speakers

Unless of course [specuation mode] the 808.3 has a better implementation of appodizing in it compared to the 861v6, which outways the downside of having to use a SpeakerLink between the two boxes.[/specuation mode]

Regards,
Carl

Hi Carl,
That is my take too, but, the advice from M seems to be ID40 in the 808 is preferred. So, their point must be that the noise in the 861 is greater than the impact of transforming the audio to an SPDIF/AES signal and then converting it back again once inside the 861v6.

Given that the 808 is a 2ch source and ID40 doesn't do 5.1 I'd really have a go with your Option 1) as that will sound very different especially if the +3dB tweak hasn't been applied in the 861.

edit...agree with your speculation. There could be a few things involved here.

+1 on that, thank you.

Regards,
Carl

But assuming that is true, once inside the 861v6 the audio is back in the 861v6 'noise' again.
I can't help but feel that M�s statement was comparing [my] options 1 and 2 and not 3.

This is where a missive from M would be most helpful.

Regards,
Carl

I do believe the implementation of apodizing in the 808.3 is the best that Meridian currently offers. That plus the lower noise in the 808.3 offsets the disadvantage of the jitter reintroduced by the speakerlink out to the 861v6. The 808.3 is the best two channel source Meridian makes.

Thanks for the great writeup on your impressions Mwiebelhaus. I envy those who have 808 861 kit. I am a potential MC200 owner and would use it as a standalone one box solution into analogue preamp, amps (Bryston), and passive speakers (Dynaudio).

Have you had a chance to try the MC200 as a standalone piece via analogue outputs? Impressions?

Thanks, Al