advertisement


MDAC First Listen (part 00111001)

Status
Not open for further replies.
The reason I say 'sinister' is because once it calculates the filter it shows a really nice correction curve that always impresses me. But I harbour a doubt that if I could measure it, it wouldn't look any way near as good as it says it is.
 
Keith, you always recommend just fixing the bottom end. This is where you say the major room issues are. I do understand this, but why not fix everything, there may be crossover point or a slight driver mismatch further up, why not fix that too?

Surely if you just correct the bottom, the software just multiplies the rest (above the bottom) with zeros so all the frequencies are manipulated anyway.

Lately I'm convinced DSP flattens the sound, I.e., takes some of the life out of it.

Your comments would be appreciated.
The major issues are always lower bass related, ‘usually’ the mids and treble take care of themselves , the ideal would be a ‘perfect’ room, low bass is really difficult to treat passively, a little EQ can bring huge gains.
A decent pair of loudspeakers and some attention to the room and that is it.
Keith
 
The reason I say 'sinister' is because once it calculates the filter it shows a really nice correction curve that always impresses me. But I harbour a doubt that if I could measure it, it wouldn't look any way near as good as it says it is.

Thats a target correction curve, not the result. Its certainly misleading though.
 
Well I cannot be definitive here as we only have two boxes, but both seem to use ASRC and process at a fixed 96KHz irrespective of input sampling rate. Even at 96KHz input I suspect the ASRC is being used (I could be wrong).

Everything going into the MiniDSP units is re-sampled at 48/96KHz depending on product/software plug-in regardless of input sampling rate. I'm amazed you don't realise this. Then again, maybe not! BTW, I can't honestly hear the difference between the 48KHz or 96KHz plug-ins so I guess they're both REALLY bad!

I'm curious if the sonic degradation you speak of is the opinion of the 'Royal We' or the findings of your team of audio engineers and the measurements they've taken before and after the ASRC? If it sounds "REALLY bad" surely it must be reflected in the measurements?

Lots/most DAC's use SRC these days and ALL DSP's use SRC for obvious reasons, so what you appear to be saying is AD Shark SRC in-particular is flawed so you wont use it yet you took the money for FDAC before coming to this conclusion. I suppose you could always try to develop your own SRC and add it to your list of non deliverables.
 
I run a trinnov st2 , a minidsp DDRC 22D (dirac) and direct feed to my Devialet amps and can switch between any of them by merely changing sources , the minidsp in bypass and the trinnov in bypass sound exactly the same as the direct digital feed. , albeit it must be said I really only used the digital i/o and never do any AD conversion

I have used other minidsp products .. 4x10hd , nanodigi and the openDRC 22 as well as their ministreamer and have never found them compromised
Been following this thread with interest as I had a M dac many years ago .. seems a helluva lot of bumps in the road to get to a finished product .
 
I had a M dac many years ago .. seems a helluva lot of bumps in the road to get to a finished product .

Bumps is an understatement, more like driving a golf cart across a super-cross track in the Himalayas during an earthquake! ;)

DSP or no DSP im sure well get there in the end looking forward to a new board to stick in the MDAC! Anything else at this moment is just a distraction, sure it would have been nice to have some DSP or an active crossover setting, but John sounds like he's got his hands full with other stuff at the moment. It's revealing for me as i now understand that the more complicated a system is the more people have to be involved in it's manufacture, The last DSP system i used the Lyngdorf/Tact there was a big team of people involved in it's implementation.
 
I run a trinnov st2 , a minidsp DDRC 22D (dirac) and direct feed to my Devialet amps and can switch between any of them by merely changing sources , the minidsp in bypass and the trinnov in bypass sound exactly the same as the direct digital feed. , albeit it must be said I really only used the digital i/o and never do any AD conversion

The only thing I can think of is that JW hadn't changed the default headroom setting to 0db in the config utility. The DDRC's have defaulted to -10db for the last few years to protect newbies from damaging their speakers when generating a default Dirac target filter. If he was comparing a 0db source with a -10db source that might explain the "REALLY bad" comment.
 
Main draw to FDAC for me has always been John's implementation of DSP for EQ/Room correction, it's why I have no interested in the MDAC2 as its a required feature. Sad to see that this has crept out of scope while stuff like tubes made their way in. Round and round we go.

As for MiniDSP, I agree with John's views. I too have seen a drawback in use and if you can get away without using it then you are better off doing so - its just that I am unable to. I'm no expert so I cant say why, perhaps its to do with resampling but something is lost even with no EQ applied - this is for the MiniDSP nanodigi 2x8. The DSPeaker antimode doesn't seem to suffer from this problem, so I settled with this as my solution for EQ and maybe other/newer MiniDSP model's do a better job.

Totally agree that fixing the bass peaks are the most important thing, but if you can actually get a nice flat response with pink noise then throw a little LF tilt on it can sound truly excellent. Easiest place to see how important it is, is somewhere like car. I won't go without active EQ now, but I'm always nervous about what it does to the original signal and it does take some patience to get right. Persevere.
 
Keith, you always recommend just fixing the bottom end. This is where you say the major room issues are. I do understand this, but why not fix everything, there may be crossover point or a slight driver mismatch further up, why not fix that too?

Surely if you just correct the bottom, the software just multiplies the rest (above the bottom) with zeros so all the frequencies are manipulated anyway.

Lately I'm convinced DSP flattens the sound, I.e., takes some of the life out of it.

Your comments would be appreciated.
I suggest you read Floyd Toole's book. EQ only works effectively on the bottom end and is likely to degrade SQ if applied to higher frequencies.
 
I suggest you read Floyd Toole's book. EQ only works effectively on the bottom end and is likely to degrade SQ if applied to higher frequencies.
I think I've seen a talk by him on YouTube, I shall have another look. But wow! , my findings are similar to the great man....not to mention Keith. Thanks for the recommendation.
 
That's interesting. With Dirac (software on PC) I have filters at 16/44 and 24/?(96 maybe)....I wonder if then you should only play those files on that filter, otherwise it gets up/down sampled??? What a palava, I just like to play tracks and I have a big mixture of sampling rates on both mp3 and flacs....no wonder it sounds better without DSP.
Have you looked at Roon? It has DSP functionality and can up-sample to any frequency, but unfortunately you cannot use Dirac to generate the filters think most use REW which has a steep learning curve IMHO.
 
Have you looked at Roon? It has DSP functionality and can up-sample to any frequency, but unfortunately you cannot use Dirac to generate the filters think most use REW which has a steep learning curve IMHO.

I don't have Roon, but I've read good things about it here on PFM. I don't stream at the moment (unless you include youtube in that), maybe when I get the MDAC2 I'll try out Roon and Tidal and maybe go with one or the other. I do know you can use Roon for local libraries too, I'm using Foobar (DarkOne). I've had a play with REW and you're right the learning curve is steep, some youtubers were useful. Before I got Dirac, I used a free DSP plugin called MathAudio for Foobar and based on that I went for Dirac. Like I said, I been using DSP for a while now, but recently I tried it without (on a whim) and prefer it with no DSP now. I spent so much time and effort on Dirac, Mathaudio, REW, I guess I convinced myself it was better with it, but not anymore. In all these DSPs however, I did correct everything (which maybe my mistake) from about 30Hz-18KHz(maybe 20KHz, but I can't hear past about 15KHz I have a set of files by Alan Parsons for setting up a HIFi which are rather good for checking this IMO). Thanks for the suggestion, I'll bear it in mind if I go streaming in the near future.
 
I think most just rubber neck in the hope that someone, someday,somewhere hears one of the offerings. Whether it be MDAC2, devdac, detox,Fdac, devdac ltd. edition, the changing list goes on. I get out a lot but after a hard day for a bit of light relief it's always worth a check on here to see if the postman has belatedly been with a box full of audio joy for some lucky punter.
 
Is it weird that I read every post on this thread but don’t have an MDAC or any investment in MDAC2/FDAC/detox etc?

Not at all, I read threads on PFM just out of interest and sometimes amusement. Of course the cable/fuse/etc threads are always good fun. But this one is the king of all threads, it's got everything, including one man against the world....keep reading and enjoying...:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top