"Old" vs. "new" digital equipment


Some recent posts about how far digital has come have got me thinking. I have a Theta DS Pro Gen III dac fed by a CEC TL5100Z as a transport. (The rest of the system is ARC LS2B Mk II into ARC VT-100 Mk II into Vandy 3a Sigs and 2WQ sub.)

I wonder what improvements I might hear if I were to go to a newer dac or newer cdp. In my current system, I hear grain when I listen to massed strings, some congestion on orchestral peaks, but otherwise most generally like what I hear.

Would newer digital stuff mitigate or eliminate these issues?

If I were to upgrade, where might I head next?

More generally, can anyone characterize the differences between my "old" Theta and newer digital equipment?

TIA.

David
Ag insider logo xs@2xbikecommuter
Everyone is entitled to there opinion but after owning the 3A Signatures for years and comparing them to speaker after speaker, I can say without a doubt, they are one of the better speakers available at any price for reproducing mass strings (realistically.)In fact, this is one of the time and phase designs biggest attribute.
agree completely with bigtree....the more things change, the more they remain the same. the dna in every digital front end is not terribly different.
As we mature in our quest for the newer,better, bigger this, that, and the other,ultimately,I think, you reach a point of diminishing returns. When someone is new to our noble hobby,the quest can and is a lot of fun,but, when one comes to terms with what makes one "happy" with what they now have(own)then, the whole idea of pursuing our audio lust seems to narrow to a point of being content with what you have, and not how much you think you "need". I think after years of pursuit I'm content with audio being what it is,a hobby,not my life...ymmv... ;^)...
Bigtee.
I believe you will find a 'dramatic' reduction in 'stridency' with some additional significant AC power isolation for your digital. A simple experiment may be to just try an MIT Shotgun AC2 power cord for digital. If you like it try comparing results by changing it to your preamp.
I hope it's informative & enjoyable. pete
I agree with Rotarius that reproduction of massed strings is a weak area for the 3A's, at least with a digital source. That was my experience. In fairness, it's a weak area for lots, if not most gear. (Especially if your reference is Carnegie Hall, or Symphony Hall in Boston.) The Harbeth M30's proved to be, for me, significantly easier and more pleasant to listen to for massed strings. That having been said, I don't necessarily disagree with Bigtree that the 3A's are better than a lot of speakers in that area. I suspect that most manufacturers don't voice their speakers with hard core classical listeners in mind...and, because the recording of massed strings seems to be a tough and imperfect art, an issue of concern is balancing between forgiving speakers and detailed speakers. The 3A's were what I would call very revealing speakers. For me, in fact (in the long run), TOO revealing. (One dealer, when I told him I'd gotten the Harbeths, said "But they aren't high end!?" I don't agree with him, but that sure got me thinking, maybe I don't really WANT "high end." At least not what a lot of people refer to as "high end."