|
|
Post by bencat on Nov 10, 2022 23:49:01 GMT
On a couple of threads as a side issue I have been asking about active speakers . Main reason for this is that I have two a two way active which is a pair of Linn Sara 9's which are being fed from a MiniDSP DDRC 24 which is a very small unit that acts as a two way active crossover and also has inbuilt DIRAC Live DSP . The digital crossover part is really easy to set and provided you have the used crossover point for the design it is very simple to set . DIRAC Live uses a MiniDSP UMIK calibrated microphone and then a session which consists of placing the microphone at a given shown number of points and taking a measurement of generated noise from each point . The software then combines all of the different point measurements and creates a correction curve that it advises you to use. This filter sorts out issues like time alignment , bass nulls , reflections and much room errors and trys to give you as flat a response as it can . While you can and many do use this offered curve it is fact possible to change the different settings on the curve on the fly while listening to music and gauging what is best for you and your ears.
I also have a three way active system which requires a MiniDSP 10 x10 HD Digital Crossover which covers the single digital input and converts the signal to six analogue outputs which go directly to each drivers amplifier . I also have a MiniDSP DDRC 22D stand alone DIRAC unit further up the chain which does the DIRAC work in this system . I have gained lots of practise using these and in truth would never have been able to achieve the levels of musical quality I now have without using them . At the Wam Show I had a room with my three way active system which was heard by many visitors and most seem to think the level of quality was very good .
Now the reason for bringing this up is to find out firstly is anyone else here has tried using DSP or perhaps is thinking about it ? Oli and I think a number of others are of the feeling that you should not have anything in the way and adding to the original music and I would say if you mainly use Vinyl and prefer that then you are probably right . I find Vinyl unlistenable now due to a sensitvity cause by Tinitus that Vinyl replay seems to make worse and sets me on edge . So I only use digital signals and I know that these have often been greatly manipulated before they ever get to your ears and provided as i do all changes and parts of the chain are kept in digital form right up to the last possible moment means that there is only one D/A conversion being made before the music is fed to the amps . Having heard it in other systems I would agree that multiple switches from A/D and D/A which can be the chain is not great but if all things are dealt iwth in the digital domain and on a full digital signal then the benefits of DSP can be heard .
This is of course only my view and I know many disagree and feel any sort of DSP is bad and ruins the original music and for them they may well be right . I have been listening to DSP manipualted music for over five years now and it it just gets better and better . Well worth a try .
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Nov 11, 2022 3:47:37 GMT
I'm entirely digital sourced and have been for quite a few years. I guess I used to be of the mindset that deliberate manipulation of the music signal is Bad. But not any more. I'm now an advocate of 'if it sounds good to me, it is good'. I don't go in for complex digital measurement, calculation and processing, a full DSP approach. For one, I can't be bothered with all the faff. Either really understanding it sufficiently, or putting it into practice. For two, I've heard systems that have taken that approach and it's genuinely nice to get back home and turn my own system on! In other words, my own approach works for me. So what do I do? (This is equivalent to Coming Out, folks). I control Internet streaming from my phone, and I just use a digital graphic equaliser app. Yes. On my phone. Shock, Horror. I've tried loads of Android apps, and settled on one that suits me. iirc, it can go up to 22 bands, but I find 10 bands hits a nice compromise between ease of setup and effectiveness. The app I use can store 7 preset eq curves. So it's easy to flick around and apply each one. And it has a left/right balance control, which is occasionally useful depending on the recording and/or the state of my hearing at the time. If one of the presets doesn't suit, I can dial in the right tonal balance for the recording, the equipment or just my mood in a matter of seconds. This probably seems rather strange, and maybe disconcerting, for some folks reading this, but it works for me at this time. I've not had or heard a system I'd rather listen to. Tbh, this is not a full Coming Out. There might be more to come.  |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Nov 11, 2022 7:13:33 GMT
It's the tool of the devil!
No not really only reason I don't use it is because I think I don't need it. I could be wrong. At some point I will get around to trying it at home.
|
|
optical
Moderator
BIG STAR
Be Excellent To Eachother
Posts: 1,623 
Member is Online
|
Post by optical on Nov 11, 2022 8:16:12 GMT
I have very mixed feelings on the subject to be honest. - Firstly, I can only comment as to using a rudimentary form of room correction, via Behringer 2496 Ultracurve, it's actually a very powerful tool when used in dual mono (L&R channels independently) and getting a basic room curve PEQ (parametric EQ) to use as a baseline for your room/speakers settings. Achieved by setting up a mike in the listening position and playing white noise/test bleeps. As bencat says this 'blueprint' curve can then be adjusted (although not on the fly from a phone which would be handy). It can indeed cure nasty peaks/nulls/imbalances etc (and again I totally realise my setup will be miles behind a dedicated DIRAC one) however switching back to 'normal' setup (ie no correction) does restore some 'soul' to the listening experience, even with all the caveats of room interaction. Now I totally recognise my setup is sub optimum and I suspect a full DIRAC or similar setup would yield far superior results, but it would cost me a fair chunk of change just to find out . . . . I also believe (and have carte blanch to do so) that using acoustic treatment is the way to go to cure these room issues in a more 'natural' and I guess effectively more analogue way. Coupled with the fact I still listen to a lot of vinyl, for which an A/D conversion then D/A conversion is absolute (audible) murder to the reason I listen to it, means I've still only scratched the surface with it really. Interested to hear others thoughts and experiences too though. |
|
|
|
Post by Pigmy Pony on Nov 11, 2022 8:51:22 GMT
I'm entirely digital sourced and have been for quite a few years. I guess I used to be of the mindset that deliberate manipulation of the music signal is Bad. But not any more. I'm now an advocate of 'if it sounds good to me, it is good'. I don't go in for complex digital measurement, calculation and processing, a full DSP approach. For one, I can't be bothered with all the faff. Either really understanding it sufficiently, or putting it into practice. For two, I've heard systems that have taken that approach and it's genuinely nice to get back home and turn my own system on! In other words, my own approach works for me. So what do I do? (This is equivalent to Coming Out, folks). I control Internet streaming from my phone, and I just use a digital graphic equaliser app. Yes. On my phone. Shock, Horror. I've tried loads of Android apps, and settled on one that suits me. iirc, it can go up to 22 bands, but I find 10 bands hits a nice compromise between ease of setup and effectiveness. The app I use can store 7 preset eq curves. So it's easy to flick around and apply each one. And it has a left/right balance control, which is occasionally useful depending on the recording and/or the state of my hearing at the time. If one of the presets doesn't suit, I can dial in the right tonal balance for the recording, the equipment or just my mood in a matter of seconds. This probably seems rather strange, and maybe disconcerting, for some folks reading this, but it works for me at this time. I've not had or heard a system I'd rather listen to. Tbh, this is not a full Coming Out. There might be more to come. I don't think we need to know what you wear while listening to Ride of the Valkyries  But agree 100%, it's what sounds good to us that matters. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on Nov 11, 2022 9:21:40 GMT
DSP is a funny subject. On one hand i understand why it looks like a solution to many room related issues that would otherwise be intrusive or expensive to do with room treatment etc, on the other ...i don't think it has zero detriment to the sound quality.
I suppose that if the gains you get are greater than any influence of the device, then it's worth it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pigmy Pony on Nov 11, 2022 12:14:54 GMT
All I know is that systems I've heard using DSP (Kii3, Dutch+Dutch, Linkwitz) were all an enjoyable listen that I could happily live with. But most of my listening is vinyl, so...
|
|
|
|
Post by sq225917 on Nov 12, 2022 11:00:57 GMT
If there's something you can't treat in the room then id give it a go pre-dac. I'd also happily use dsp and class- d amps to go semi active in the bass on my Yams, but I'm not up for many boxes of digital to replace a passive xo that's doing just fine as it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by bencat on Nov 12, 2022 11:41:32 GMT
If there's something you can't treat in the room then id give it a go pre-dac. I'd also happily use dsp and class- d amps to go semi active in the bass on my Yams, but I'm not up for many boxes of digital to replace a passive xo that's doing just fine as it is. Quite agree with this as a viewpoint and my KEF 103's were one of my favourite passive speakers that I have heard . Trouble is once you hear that same speaker active the shock of the similarities and differences is very hard to unhear . I originally made my first pair of KEF 103's a two way active and the thing that always surprises me is that as an active it still sounded very much a KEF 103 but then it had added power clarity and speed of notes . Things just sounded more real and this was just using a digital crossover no addition of any filter . DIRAC is another thing all together and adds a real kick and uplift to the sound in the room and adding better sound stage , instrument timbre and bass . Then a so called friend suggested that if you put one on top of the other you would not need any stands and you could have a very nice three way . Much to my annoyance this played on my mind so after a bit of searching I found a second pair . This gave me the chance to hear the passive and active back to back and sadly it was really no contest the active two way was just so much better in every way . Then converted the lower speakers to bass only for bass and disconnected the treble units . Upper pair now do the mid and treble and because of the unique mounting I am able to turn the bottom speakers with the treble lower than the bass and put the two bass drivers closer together which helps a little with crossing over seamlessly . Bass CR at 290hz Mid from 290 - 3000Hz and treble after that . Three way is much better active than the Two way just making every strand that much easier to hear and follow . I have noticed that i know listen at a much lower level with the three way as i get the impact and slam fom the music at lower levels when as a two way i was turning the volume up to get things more in the room . |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Nov 12, 2022 12:04:14 GMT
passive speaker very much dependant on the ability of the amplifier to drive them. Most amplifiers are a bit rubbish. Active removes that constraint.
My own experience is that differences between active and passive systems disappear if the amplifier in the passive system is capable enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by bencat on Nov 12, 2022 12:25:40 GMT
passive speaker very much dependant on the ability of the amplifier to drive them. Most amplifiers are a bit rubbish. Active removes that constraint. My own experience is that differences between active and passive systems disappear if the amplifier in the passive system is capable enough. Almost certainly very true but will depend on the passive design as well KEF 103 are a very easy load and work very well with most amplifiers . When I did my listening test the Actives were being powered by 2 x Quad 405 amps . For the passives I used Krell KSA 50 Mk 1 and XTZ 100 class A plus even tried the Quad 405 . None of them seemed to have any trouble and the Krell never even broke sweat but despite all of this the active was still much better in all ways . I think if I had a new reworked and checked passive CR to use then at least I would know that all things in the CR were working as well as they should (this is an over forty year old speaker so some drift can be expected) then it might have been a fairer test but as i was about to remove all that I was not going to the expense of building a new CR just to hear what happened . I have tried four different speakers from passive to active and of those only the Linn Sara 9's I would call difficult to drive the others were all pretty simple . In every case the active versions were easily superior but in all cases the original sound of the speaker is still there and easy to hear . It would be great to have the equipment and time to do lots of tests with speakers but it would be too costly and time consuming . As a small cross reference I have heard then my only conclusion is that I must prefer the sound of active speakers over passive ones . It might also show that passive speakers in general need much better amplification than we realise to amke them play correctly but I would hesitate about putting that theory forward. |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Nov 12, 2022 12:50:54 GMT
I would not hesitate at all  It's absolutely been my experience over the years and I can't tell you how many amplifiers I have owned but it's in the many dozens. Relationship between a passive loudspeaker and the amplifier is so complex it's impossible to really model it and predict the listening outcome. I'm a total believer in overkill regardless of how easy the speaker is to drive. Take off and nuke the site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure. I still have an XTZ A100, on paper it should have no problem with my speakers, but the difference between it and a Krell KSA50S is obvious from the first couple of bars of music. Active is certainly a more elegant and sensible solution provided it is implemented correctly, don't get me wrong, I just don't agree with the simple generalisation of 'Active is better.' |
|
|
|
Post by bencat on Nov 12, 2022 13:59:33 GMT
Would never say active is better for anyone else than me it is never the only solution and for many I would suspect it is not even a consideration . Like most on here I try and be honest of what experience and use every day it may well not work for others but it does for me and I hope it just encouraged others to have go themselves . Many say to me that I must have great knowledge on this but this is wrong using lots of this tech
Kit is easy and does all the real work for you .
|
|
But agree 100%, it's what sounds good to us that matters.
It's absolutely been my experience over the years and I can't tell you how many amplifiers I have owned but it's in the many dozens.