How Loud Will ML1's Go

[Willco]

If you wear a bracelet made of duelund capacitors your arthritis will be cured

 

Pardon me Sir--I presume you voice in jest--I also have arthritis -it is not pretty nor curable--you only prolong the inevitable. 

 

Willco

.

[Guest fordgtlover]

Me too... I have a homemade (caveman) switchbox ....   something from the 21st century would be very nice.

 

Similar - i made a basic, but very effective, relay based a/b switcher a while back and found the experience very enlightening.

 

[rawl99]

We've done few times comparison between signals going through ADC => DAC of MiniDSP / DEQX vs. Straight wire and 4 or 5 of us couldn't hear any issues whatsoever.

 

This is using blind instant-switching, with level matching.  Speakers were Unity Horns and Acapella Violons which are some of the most high resolution systems in existence.

 

The link is somewhere  in Paul's (red spade) blog.

Gainphile,

If this was using the switching assembly that you posted photos of quite a while back when you did the comparison (said assembly consisting of Jaycar plated tin RCA sockets, $2 Jaycar slide switches and $2 Jaycar pots for 'level matching) then with the degree to which such a switching assembly would cripple the signal path you would be hard pressed to tell,the difference between a $50k amp and an AV receiver.

Weakest link concept not too hard to grasp?

I can change RCA sockets on my dac or amp from Eichmann to WBT, both of which are very good, and the difference is audible.

Put tin plated Jaycar quality items in their place and my speakers would pack up and leave home!.

And they would be following in the slipstream of my ears.

Cheers

Rawl

[bhobba]

And still curious as to why he doesn't listen to vinyl considering he thinks AD and DA conversions degrade the signal. And details of the DEQX shootout...

 

I find digital MURDERS vinyl to my ears.  Those clicks and pops for one thing annoy the bejesus out of me, its quieter - and it simply has more life and vibrancy to my ears. You can get rid of the clicks etc with care but too much work for me.  Me and computer audio get along great - I use my Pad and select and play everything from my listening position easy peasy..

 

No details on the shootout yet.  Rawl99, who has been trained down at the DEQX factory in setting them up, needs to be available and he is busy busy right now.

 

Thanks

Bill

Edited August 9, 2013 by bhobba

[Cafad]

I find digital MURDERS vinyl to my ears.  Those clicks and pops for one thing annoy the bejesus out of me, its quieter - and it simply has more life and vibrancy to my ears. You can get rid of the clicks etc with care but too much work for me.  Me and computer audio get along great - I use my Pad and select and play everything from my listening position easy peasy..

 

No details on the shootout yet.  Rawl99, who has been trained down at the DEQX factory in setting them up, needs to be available and he is busy busy right now.

 

Thanks

Bill

 

Yeah, +1 IMO.

Vinyl has an interesting dimensionality to it, and I certainly don't mind listening to it, but it isn't really what I'm looking for so this little duck won't be moving in that direction.

 

I am betting most vinyl systems could be improved via the addition of a pair of ML1s though (or S2s, ML1s get all the credit where is the love for the S2s?).

[soundfan]

Yeah, +1 IMO.

Vinyl has an interesting dimensionality to it, and I certainly don't mind listening to it, but it isn't really what I'm looking for so this little duck won't be moving in that direction.

 

I am betting most vinyl systems could be improved via the addition of a pair of ML1s though (or S2s, ML1s get all the credit where is the love for the S2s?).

 

I'm not sure I understand how a vinyl system can be improved by the choice of speakers? And in this case ML 1s.

[sir sanders zingmore]

I'm not sure I understand how a vinyl system can be improved by the choice of speakers? And in this case ML 1s.

Vinyl is better played loud and ML1s are the loudest there is.

[rawl99]

I find digital MURDERS vinyl to my ears.  Those clicks and pops for one thing annoy the bejesus out of me, its quieter - and it simply has more life and vibrancy to my ears. You can get rid of the clicks etc with care but too much work for me.  Me and computer audio get along great - I use my Pad and select and play everything from my listening position easy peasy..

 

No details on the shootout yet.  Rawl99, who has been trained down at the DEQX factory in setting them up, needs to be available and he is busy busy right now.

 

Thanks

Bill

Bill,

Your words are something of an understatement re life being a little full.

Also of interest is that I found the speaker measurement methodology that I personally trialled (and errorred ) to give superior results.

Measuring the speakers with a deqx, whilst in theory a very simple thing to do, is a non-trivial exercise.

By this I mean that to do the measurement is easy; to figure out the methodology to give really good and useful correction filters is a non-trivial exercise.

Speaker position, mic position, angles, mic height in respect of drivers, reflections around etc etc all have a noticeable impact on the quality of the result.

Just so I can get my head around the plan re DEQX comparo, what are the intentions re amplification plus other aspects listed below?

My HDP3 has unbalanced out and balanced via the built-in Jensen transformer coupled output..

Are we intending on feeding, say,

spdif into the deqx from offramp,

Deqx to 2pair of amplifiers ( which ones?)

Amplifiers direct to speakers (which ones?)

Vs

Offramp-----spdif or i2s to what dac (PDX?) ( really need spdif to level the playing field a bit...I2S is quite a bit better--- which is one of the limitations of the deqx. New new unit has USB, but you know my opinion on that format, and I don't have one of them anyway)

PDX(?) to 1 pair of same amplifiers,

To passive implementation of same speakers

.?????

Need also to give some thought to cabling to be used.

Are we aiming to emulate the passive speakers measured FR, phase etc as Ken talked about earlier, or aiming to 'optimise' the performance of the system?

And if 'optimise' is the answer, then optimize according to what parameters and whose ears/opinion of 'optimum'.

And who is going to pass judgement as to which setup is 'better', and based on what metrics????

Timing wise I have another minor project for you which is WAY higher priority than any little 'shoot out' such as this one.

IMO it is a given that no matter which way the outcome goes the vast majority of folks will dismiss the findings because of:

-it wasn't done blind,

-it was done blind,

-it was done subjectively and not by measurements (which ones should we use please)

-it was done by measurements and not by listening,

-of course the guys doing the listening don't have good ears,

-of course the guys listening had a subjective bias since they were trying to prove that "..............."

-Of course they didn't test using the type of music I listen to,

-it used valve amps,

-it used solid state amps,

-it used class D amps,

-it used a tube dac,

- it didn't use a tube dac,

-it used computer transport,

-it used a cd spinner,

-it used Audionirvana not Jplay and 'everyone knows that Jplay (insert whatever software name YOU like) is waaaay better,

-they used a MAC and 'everybody' knows that a properly set up windows pc works better,

-they used a windows oc and everybody knows that a MAC set up properly works better,

-they weren't using an ssd drive,

-they were using an ssd drive,

-of course the pc power supplies weren't properly upgraded so you wouldn't get REAL resolution out of the system,

-the cables weren't good enough,

- the dac wasn't good enough,

-the power cables weren't good enough,

- and I am getting bored now!

So in essence a 'shoot out' such is this no more than a personal interest exercise.

I personally have much higher priority things to 'waste' my time on at the moment.

And as you well know my opinion is firmly stamped so I gain to learn nothing from the whole exercise.

I KNOW which way works for me.

The one possibility that I feel may have significant potential is as alluded to earlier:

Transport--DSP-- dac --amp-- speaker

Wherein the dsp acts as a room correction device if feeding a passive speaker.

The issue, from my experience, will be to appropriately clock the data feeding the dac to create a high grade source from the DSP.

Easy in theory but not so easy in practice. Reasonably easy to good measuring results. Not so easy to get good sounding results.

This is how I read the new deqx to operate, offering digital out. Albeit still only as aes/ebu or spdif, both of which I find limiting.

Option B is fully active:

Transport---dsp--dac---amp--tweeter driver

---dac--amp--bass driver

Transport/DSP quite possibly the same box.

Or 3 way if you prefer.

For a really good setup that is gonna be a lot of $$ in dacs and amplification ie by 2 or 3 sets depending on your preferred configuration.

I don't have an extra quite a few grand to throw at another dac and amp, plus whatever DSP device and reclocking equipment will be needed to match what I currently have.

I KNOW from extensive experience that room correction offers significant benefits but I have not as yet heard a configuration/implementation that does not rob the music from the sound.

Once that can be achieved ( not stealing the music away), then the world will be the oyster for dsp.

Cheers Bill,

Rawl

[Audiobugged]

Timing wise I have another minor project for you which is WAY higher priority than any little 'shoot out' such as this one.

IMO it is a given that no matter which way the outcome goes the vast majority of folks will dismiss the findings because of:

-it wasn't done blind,

-it was done blind,

-it was done subjectively and not by measurements (which ones should we use please)

-it was done by measurements and not by listening,

-of course the guys doing the listening don't have good ears,

-of course the guys listening had a subjective bias since they were trying to prove that "..............."

-Of course they didn't test using the type of music I listen to,

-it used valve amps,

-it used solid state amps,

-it used class D amps,

-it used a tube dac,

- it didn't use a tube dac,

-it used computer transport,

-it used a cd spinner,

-it used Audionirvana not Jplay and 'everyone knows that Jplay (insert whatever software name YOU like) is waaaay better,

-they used a MAC and 'everybody' knows that a properly set up windows pc works better,

-they used a windows oc and everybody knows that a MAC set up properly works better,

-they weren't using an ssd drive,

-they were using an ssd drive,

-of course the pc power supplies weren't properly upgraded so you wouldn't get REAL resolution out of the system,

-the cables weren't good enough,

- the dac wasn't good enough,

-the power cables weren't good enough,

- and I am getting bored now!

So in essence a 'shoot out' such is this no more than a personal interest exercise.

I personally have much higher priority things to 'waste' my time on at the moment.

And as you well know my opinion is firmly stamped so I gain to learn nothing from the whole exercise.

I KNOW which way works for me.

 

+100. However, shootouts are worthwhile for the entertainment value. And, with an obliging writer, the enjoyment of good prose. Just read the Hit by David Baldacci and that was a rockin good read too.

The only way to do comparisons is by price. And that's RRP. Purely objective, no subjectivity, unaffected by DBT's, good/bad ears, room issues, blah blah.

[Audiobugged]

I KNOW from extensive experience that room correction offers significant benefits but I have not as yet heard a configuration/implementation that does not rob the music from the sound.

Once that can be achieved ( not stealing the music away), then the world will be the oyster for dsp.

 

 

My active speakers have analog parametric equalisation built in.

It does not rob music from the sound.

Surely you have heard these or similar from your extensive experience?

[davewantsmoore]

I KNOW from extensive experience that room correction offers significant benefits but I have not as yet heard a configuration/implementation that does not rob the music from the sound.

Once that can be achieved ( not stealing the music away), then the world will be the oyster for dsp.

 

I'm confused by this?    Do you say it offer benefits, or drawbacks?

 

 

IME "room correction" for the most part is completely undesirable.

 

However....    Replacing passive XOs with "Active" XO  (DSP) ... ie.  individual amplifiers feeding each driver directly  (with passive components in between driver and amp too if required for electrical correction).

 

... IME offers big benefits.   In both quality  (to test this accurately you would need "emulate the passive XO with the DSP") .... and in flexibility  (the system can be optimised further than a passive XO).

 

 

 

My active speakers have analog parametric equalisation built in.

It does not rob music from the sound.

Surely you have heard these or similar from your extensive experience?

 

 

"parametric equalisation "   is not "room correction"

[rawl99]

My active speakers have analog parametric equalisation built in.

It does not rob music from the sound.

Surely you have heard these or similar from your extensive experience?

Yes I have heard many active Speakers, both with and without parametric eq and my statement still stands unchanged.

Front ends have varied from modest to exotic.

Rawl

[bhobba]

I'm not sure I understand how a vinyl system can be improved by the choice of speakers? And in this case ML 1s.

 

Having been with Cafad and a couple of others while they listen to gear its got to do with how they finds ML1's and Mike's other speakers lined with copper or steel - it too dynamic and alive for their taste - it compensates for the relative lack of such myself and others find in Vinyl

 

Its simply a personal preference sort of thing - the ML1's etc are transparent enough to reveal the qualities of whatever medium you prefer.

 

Thanks

Bill.

[davewantsmoore]

Yes I have heard many active Speakers,

 

It's extremely difficult to compare apples to apples  (make passive XO exactly equal to DSP).

 

 

Have you ever blind tested A>D>A  in your system?

[bhobba]

Just so I can get my head around the plan re DEQX comparo, what are the intentions re amplification plus other aspects listed below?

 

Hi Rawl

 

I haven't really given it a huge amount of thought.

 

We have the amp GTG coming up, and the DAC one once my Killer is finished (my mate Kev in Canberra may even be up for that to sort out the DAC he wants) and it was penciled in to be after that so its not something I have really put a lot of thought into.

 

The amp GTG has been delayed because my HS 500 has been delayed so I guess all the other stuff has been put back a bit.

 

Regarding answering some of the questions I will need to give it a bit of thought.

 

When I have done that I think its best to start av thread about it.

 

Oh - and one thing I need to mention.  My Off-Ramp is on the blink and it needs to go back to Steve to be fixed and/or upgraded.  That may take a while as well.

 

Thanks

Bill

Edited August 10, 2013 by bhobba

[soundfan]

Having been with Cafad and a couple of others while they listen to gear its got to do with how they finds ML1's and Mike's other speakers lined with copper or steel - it too dynamic and alive for their taste - it compensates for the relative lack of such myself and others find in Vinyl

 

Its simply a personal preference sort of thing - the ML1's etc are transparent enough to reveal the qualities of whatever medium you prefer.

 

Thanks

Bill.

 

Well........................ I owned a pair of ML Plus speakers for 2 years and vinyl is my main game. They (  ML 1's) were no more revealing of my vinyl set up than any other speaker I've tried.

[rawl99]

I'm confused by this?    Do you say it offer benefits, or drawbacks?

 

IME "room correction" for the most part is completely undesirable.

Ok. To be a little more pedantic my view is that the only way to EFFECTIVELY room correct is to use mechanical means.

Sound waves are a mechanical phenomenon which can only be treated mechanically.

Electrical 'room correction' can be quite effectively applied BUT!!! It can only really be effective at a singular point.

Otherwise it is just an averaging, and giving a compromised performance at more locations, or over a broader listening area.

So from a fundamental pov, as usual, you and I agree.

 

I

However....    Replacing passive XOs with "Active" XO  (DSP) ... ie.  individual amplifiers feeding each driver directly  (with passive components in between driver and amp too if required for electrical correction).

 

... IME offers big benefits.   In both quality  (to test this accurately you would need "emulate the passive XO with the DSP") .... and in flexibility  (the system can be optimised further than a passive XO).

In theory i agree absolutely with what you are saying.

And this is what I was saying in the latter part of my post.

But for me to do this effectively would require another dac and another amp, plus, as I said, a dsp device to give me an equivalent level of performance to the transport I currently use.

That's 30 grand plus the dsp/reclocker plus a lot of time to tweak and tune.

Dats a lot of coin to drop on an experiment given that all of the dsp based systems that I have heard have been underwhelming.... Sorry IMHO of course.

So the challenge becomes the implementation of the dsp-based correction and crossover plus digital source in such a way as to not harm the fundamentals of musical reproduction.

I am sure you know me well enough to know that live unamplified classical/chamber/jazz/blues is my aural reference and if a system cannot convey the organic 'life' that such music has then I have no interest.

The end result of the 'corrected' system may measure better and have objectively 'better' performance but if the life and engagement are not there, then I have no desire to listen.

A great example is the deqx unit I have. I have bloody awesome custom-built 3 -way speakers to use with the deqx. I can get amazing slam, dynamics, imaging, "accuracy" etc from this configuration but for me it does not create the emotional connection and "melt-into-the-music" response that I get from my NOS/valve/passive xover system.

In terms of "accuracy" ( wrt in-room FR) the deqx based system wins hands down. But that on its own, unfortunately, is not what floats my boat. I would rather deal with a few lumps and bumps in the bass ( which I do my best to minmise with traps etc) and keep the organic engagement. The world of audio is very give and take. What one device giveth, another very quickly may take away.

Having said that, I am playing with a setup to try and achieve something close to the above:

Dsp Phase and FR correction then reclocking into existing dac. All in my "extensive" spare time.

Will let you know the outcome in 12 months..hopefully.

 

I

"parametric equalisation "   is not "room correction"

Sure it is,

Get with the party.

[rawl99]

It's extremely difficult to compare apples to apples  (make passive XO exactly equal to DSP).

 

 

Have you ever blind tested A>D>A  in your system?

Yup

[rawl99]

Having been with Cafad and a couple of others while they listen to gear its got to do with how they finds ML1's and Mike's other speakers lined with copper or steel - it too dynamic and alive for their taste - it compensates for the relative lack of such myself and others find in Vinyl

 

Its simply a personal preference sort of thing - the ML1's etc are transparent enough to reveal the qualities of whatever medium you prefer.

 

Thanks

Bill.

Cracker jack Josephine. Gotta disagree with you on that one.

What vinyl does NOT have is the hard edge that I consistently hear with computer audio ( yeah, I know that that statement will light a few fires but Bill knows my views on this matter)

The most 'real' sound I have ever heard was from vinyl. 100+ grand worth of TT but still who's quibbling.

Well set up vinyl sounds (here we go again - IMHO) extraordinary.

Vinyl folks, I am so on your side!

Gotta love top shelf reel to reel as well. No digital artifacts in that.

[rawl99]

Hi Rawl

 

I haven't really given it a huge amount of thought.

 

We have the amp GTG coming up, and the DAC one once my Killer is finished (my mate Kev in Canberra may even be up for that to sort out the DAC he wants) and it was penciled in to be after that so its not something I have really put a lot of thought into.

 

The amp GTG has been delayed because my HS 500 has been delayed so I guess all the other stuff has been put back a bit.

 

Regarding answering some of the questions I will need to give it a bit of thought.

 

When I have done that I think its best to start av thread about it.

 

Oh - and one thing I need to mention.  My Off-Ramp is on the blink and it needs to go back to Steve to be fixed and/or upgraded.  That may take a while as well.

 

Thanks

Bill

Cheers Bill.

Yes, there really is quite a lot to think about wrt an endeavor such as this comparison.

And it needs to be well thought thru.

Rawl

I am in no hurry whatsoever.

[davewantsmoore]

Yup

 

The reason I ask (perhaps obvious) is to know if it is the ADA which is causing you to not like it ... or it's the actual config in your "DSP".

 

 

So connecting (for example a DEQX) in "bypass" mode  (so it's not doing anything) is no good ?!

[Lenehan Audio]

Bill,

Your words are something of an understatement re life being a little full.

Also of interest is that I found the speaker measurement methodology that I personally trialled (and errorred ) to give superior results.

Measuring the speakers with a deqx, whilst in theory a very simple thing to do, is a non-trivial exercise.

By this I mean that to do the measurement is easy; to figure out the methodology to give really good and useful correction filters is a non-trivial exercise.

Speaker position, mic position, angles, mic height in respect of drivers, reflections around etc etc all have a noticeable impact on the quality of the result.

Just so I can get my head around the plan re DEQX comparo, what are the intentions re amplification plus other aspects listed below?

My HDP3 has unbalanced out and balanced via the built-in Jensen transformer coupled output..

Are we intending on feeding, say,

spdif into the deqx from offramp,

Deqx to 2pair of amplifiers ( which ones?)

Amplifiers direct to speakers (which ones?)

Vs

Offramp-----spdif or i2s to what dac (PDX?) ( really need spdif to level the playing field a bit...I2S is quite a bit better--- which is one of the limitations of the deqx. New new unit has USB, but you know my opinion on that format, and I don't have one of them anyway)

PDX(?) to 1 pair of same amplifiers,

To passive implementation of same speakers

.?????

Need also to give some thought to cabling to be used.

Are we aiming to emulate the passive speakers measured FR, phase etc as Ken talked about earlier, or aiming to 'optimise' the performance of the system?

And if 'optimise' is the answer, then optimize according to what parameters and whose ears/opinion of 'optimum'.

And who is going to pass judgement as to which setup is 'better', and based on what metrics????

Timing wise I have another minor project for you which is WAY higher priority than any little 'shoot out' such as this one.

IMO it is a given that no matter which way the outcome goes the vast majority of folks will dismiss the findings because of:

-it wasn't done blind,

-it was done blind,

-it was done subjectively and not by measurements (which ones should we use please)

-it was done by measurements and not by listening,

-of course the guys doing the listening don't have good ears,

-of course the guys listening had a subjective bias since they were trying to prove that "..............."

-Of course they didn't test using the type of music I listen to,

-it used valve amps,

-it used solid state amps,

-it used class D amps,

-it used a tube dac,

- it didn't use a tube dac,

-it used computer transport,

-it used a cd spinner,

-it used Audionirvana not Jplay and 'everyone knows that Jplay (insert whatever software name YOU like) is waaaay better,

-they used a MAC and 'everybody' knows that a properly set up windows pc works better,

-they used a windows oc and everybody knows that a MAC set up properly works better,

-they weren't using an ssd drive,

-they were using an ssd drive,

-of course the pc power supplies weren't properly upgraded so you wouldn't get REAL resolution out of the system,

-the cables weren't good enough,

- the dac wasn't good enough,

-the power cables weren't good enough,

- and I am getting bored now!

So in essence a 'shoot out' such is this no more than a personal interest exercise.

I personally have much higher priority things to 'waste' my time on at the moment.

And as you well know my opinion is firmly stamped so I gain to learn nothing from the whole exercise.

I KNOW which way works for me.

The one possibility that I feel may have significant potential is as alluded to earlier:

Transport--DSP-- dac --amp-- speaker

Wherein the dsp acts as a room correction device if feeding a passive speaker.

The issue, from my experience, will be to appropriately clock the data feeding the dac to create a high grade source from the DSP.

Easy in theory but not so easy in practice. Reasonably easy to good measuring results. Not so easy to get good sounding results.

This is how I read the new deqx to operate, offering digital out. Albeit still only as aes/ebu or spdif, both of which I find limiting.

Option B is fully active:

Transport---dsp--dac---amp--tweeter driver

---dac--amp--bass driver

Transport/DSP quite possibly the same box.

Or 3 way if you prefer.

For a really good setup that is gonna be a lot of $$ in dacs and amplification ie by 2 or 3 sets depending on your preferred configuration.

I don't have an extra quite a few grand to throw at another dac and amp, plus whatever DSP device and reclocking equipment will be needed to match what I currently have.

I KNOW from extensive experience that room correction offers significant benefits but I have not as yet heard a configuration/implementation that does not rob the music from the sound.

Once that can be achieved ( not stealing the music away), then the world will be the oyster for dsp.

Cheers Bill,

Rawl

Hi Rawl

              yes no matter what is found there will be naysayers ! otherwise where's the passion , the loyalty , the doggedly entreanched camp politics ? 

I was actually thinking of just connecting your DEQX up with an  NAD M25  7 channel power amp (a nice amp infact) then running with just two channels into a pair of ML2Limited.

             Not really looking to conclusively prove anything here !  your the MAN  ! did you like that "Your The MAN " ! to do this as your DEQX and IT skill have been honed by the factory.

             Your list of  but  But  BUT BUTT"S is very accurate , this is why I thought you could set up as per a dedicated Audiophile but only using the manual and your experience as a competent DEQX installer.    ?

                                                                                    Regards Mike Lenehan

[Gordon Macfarlane]

Hi guy's ,slightly o.t. but Linn have recently introduced a new speaker in 2 forms : full active with analogue electronic crossovers and passive.

It would be interesting for some of you to go to your local Linn dealers and compare the speaker in both it's formats.

The speakers is called the Akubarik and uses a form of Isobaric bass loading.

[Cafad]

I'm not sure I understand how a vinyl system can be improved by the choice of speakers? And in this case ML 1s.

 

Well that confuses me, isn't the 'fact' that changing speakers makes the biggest difference (compared to other components) in a system one of the few things that is (generally!) agreed upon by the audiophile masses?

[Gordon Macfarlane]

Well that confuses me, isn't the 'fact' that changing speakers makes the biggest difference (compared to other components) in a system one of the few things that is (generally!) agreed upon by the audiophile masses?

Yup! but that is mainly with digital source ,change to analogue and you have another electromechanical device that also has a huge impact on sound quality.