I haven't commented on this thread in a while so I will cover a few things starting with the post above.Erik wrote:I think "Source in the speaker" is totally B/S. Everyone who has compared ethernet cables and also heard what a difference a NAS can do must be skeptical to the marketing statement.Per A wrote:
Philosophically speaking
If the source is now the crossover and if this has advanced to the uppermost position of the hierarchy, does not that mean that the Kiko is better than the Klimax DS since it also has a digital crossover?
And why is still the LP12 superior, even through a Exakt system?
/Erik
Having recently been to the Linn US dealer introduction of the Exakt Akubarik and AEDSM I am a bit more conversant with Linn's theories on this technology now. Linn repeatedly stressed the "lossless" nature of the signal in the Exakt system from the Studio Master download all the way until the DAC conversion just before the feed to the power amps. Along with this they stated flat out: "There are NO losses in the digital side of the DS systems. Different cables, NAS units, ripping software, etc. cause NO musical difference whatsoever". Those who claimed such differences were audible and important were referred to as "snake oil salesmen". So at least at this meeting Linn have come down on the side of "it's all 1s and 0s" and none of this makes any difference. Indeed it was claimed it is provable that none of this makes any difference and that no musical differences could be heard in a blind A/B test! Somehow that last phrase was something I never expected to hear from someone representing Linn. Throughout the meeting the term "lossless" was used in essence as a synonym for perfect, although I'm sure they would never use that term after the comments Ivor made about the "Perfect Sound Forever" advertising campaign by Philips at the introduction of the CD. Nonetheless, it appears to be pretty much what Linn is saying about this new technology.
On the pricing I have not seen separate pricing on the units themselves yet. However, I believe Flatcoat could be easily correct in the AEDSM being less than the ADSM. Linn stated early on that if they sold the units separately the EDSM units would be less expensive than the DSM units. And well they should be as they contain much less circuitry with all the DACs and conversion work being done in the speaker. The Exact units only receive the network audio or direct digital inputs and upsample as necessary to 24/192. They also have one or two ADCs to convert analog inputs to 24/192. This 24/192 signal is then sent to the speaker and all other conversions are handled there. So these Exakt units have no analog output stages, no volume control, and don't need the powerful FPGA (one of the more costly chips, in my understanding) that Linn uses for up sampling, digital filtering, etc. as this is all in the speakers.
Finally, on the side issues of active ATCs. Like others on here I have at times wondered about the musical quality of the internal amps. I would certainly love to hear what ATC100s would sound like with a six pack of Tundra Monos! The problem is the electronic crossover. How do you find a truly musical electronic crossover that can be set for the proper frequencies and phase delays for ATC speakers? ATC no longer makes a separate electronic crossover and those they did make seem as rare as hen's teeth. And would they be musical enough if you could find one. Maybe somebody could modify a Keltik crossover to work but it is certainly beyond me. If Fredrik wants to make an appropriate crossover I'd be glad to be a beta tester. ;-) However, I have long since given up worrying about the quality of the internal ATC amps. Why? Simply because I haven't yet been able to make a superior musical sound in my house with other speakers and Solos or Monos. I have tried with last version 242s and 212s and the ATCs were still superior. So, accepting the higher importance of the amps vs. the speakers, I have to assume that the ATC amps must be doing a very fine job indeed in the context of the internally active speakers. And since those amps are designed specifically for the drivers being driven they are certainly different than a general purpose amp that has to be able to drive passive crossovers and whatever is on the other side of them. So I don't feel you can necessarily extrapolate the sound of the stand alone amps to the sound of the internal ones.
In addition, I know a couple of other people in the US who have active ATC 50s and 100s and they are supremely happy with them. One recently told me he heard a local demonstration of the Exakt 350 system and heard nothing he felt was competitive with his 100s. An interesting note is that both these people previously owned Aktiv Keltiks with Klouts and I owned Aktiv Isobariks with both 4 LK280/SPARKS and 3 2250s. None of us has ever looked back after purchasing our ATCs.
Still, I'd love to hear that ATC100/Mono six pack system. I recently had a pair of the last version original Isobariks in on trade and a customer wondered how they would sound with Tundra Monos. My Monos were on loan to another customer at the time so I hooked up a system with LP12SE, ADS/1, KK/1 and Tundra Stereo just until the Monos came back. I couldn't believe how good the Tundra 1.2/Isobarik combination sounded. A few people who came into the store sat down and commented on how good it sounded - one even saying he had never heard original Isobariks sound that good. This despite my original reticence to hook it up as I wasn't sure the Tundra 1.2 would drive them. But drive them it did to quite high levels in a really large room. Indeed it would play louder than I wanted to listen (and for me that is saying something). Then the Monos came back and were hooked up and took the Isobariks to an even higher level. I have to say the musical quality was so good it has me tempted to haul a pair of Isobariks out of the basement and connect them up with the Monos to see how they do in the living room. These amps are killer! I can't wait for the Sagatun to match them.
