I had the opportunity of listening to a fellow a'philes system yesterday with the DEQX room correction processor. It was a highly interesting demo. IMO, with the processor switched in there were some immediate improvements noted..in the bass and in the sound staging. BUT, there was also a little lack of purity that crept in.
According to the DEQX ads., the system eliminates phase, timing and freq response errors, it restores coherent impulse response and performs room compensation.
Anyone else have any experience/ thoughts about DEQX? Would you use it in your system?
So, is it as DEQX states...is your system up to par? Think again!!
I use the Deqx HDP-4 in my system and it is excellent. I use it in my tape loop so I can listen direct, deqx calibrated or 3 preset eq positions.
I have some room problems in the bass that can't seem to be resolved in any easy manner. The speaker calibrated under 200hz cleans up the sonic picture nicely but does not resolve all bass issues. I then have 3 other eq choices with different reductions in bass under 200hz only that I use depending on the music .content. Above 200hz has no correction.
I don't notice any lack of purity as that was my No 1 concern prior to using it as previous experience with Lyngdorf rp-1 and Rives Parc had definate impacts on the purity and immediacy of the music that the benefits outweighed any gains. The HDP-4 does not, perhaps compared direct to my cj GAT pre amp on some recordings a little bit of the upper air seems to have not as much, but it is very close. Sometimes when music without a lot of bass is being played the difference between direct and calibrated is too dificult to tell.
When you have bass in the recording, the deqx comes into its own. Amazing what a 3 - 4db attenuation in the under 200hz range does for cleaning up the mud.
I only recently used used the HDP-4 as a pre amp for some fun and it is very good. I do prefer the Pass XP-20 over it as it has a little more life, get up and go and bigger soundstage in direct comparison - but that seems to be what a good pre amp does vs a CD player direct.
Overall, very happy with the Deqx HDP-4 and for this analog turntable boy, quite an eye opener once I removed my audiophile resistence to well designed dsp processing and parametric eq.
XV-1, I too felt that the DEQX was better than the Lyngdorf that I had heard previously. The problem seemed to stem from a overall intrusion of digital artifacts into the sound. Something that I think perhaps I am too sensitive to. This is a trade off that I am NOT so sure I would want to make; although the increase in bass depth and soundstage width was very nice....a real thinker
Dave Clark of PFO (the emag Myles also writes for) loves it and apparently wouldn't ever consider not using it (or perhaps something better if/when it comes along).
XV-1, I too felt that the DEQX was better than the Lyngdorf that I had heard previously. The problem seemed to stem from a overall intrusion of digital artifacts into the sound. Something that I think perhaps I am too sensitive to. This is a trade off that I am NOT so sure I would want to make; although the increase in bass depth and soundstage width was very nice....a real thinker
Not sure of the system, surroundings or what config function Deqx was being used for when you listened so can't comment.
Like anything, you need to live with anything for a while to better appreciate/understand or to confirm your initial thoughts.
There are no digital artifacts introduced into the sound in my system, however please note that I only use the speaker correction and eq for 200 hz and under.
The signal from my two phono stages and 4 turntables do have go through ADC ,DSP and DAC in the deqx when its in the loop. It is transparent, to whatever amp / preamp, whether that be the tube or SS config I am using at the time.
I would not use it for any correction in the upper frequencies as these issues can be resolved with room treatments and placement. Deqx do not recommend full bandwidth eq.
Dave Clark of PFO (the emag Myles also writes for) loves it and apparently wouldn't ever consider not using it (or perhaps something better if/when it comes along).
That is the basic creed of the DEQX people. They are ( and many others too) are stating that without digital room correction ( in this instance DEQX) you cannot hear your system's true potential; regardless of how
well the other gear and room is set up.
It's an interesting theory.
I am listening to Nyal's HDP-4 right now. I am not using the DEQX filters. Instead, I am using DIRAC LIVE. This is a very good DAC. That's coming from a guy that's been living with a totaldac for the last couple of years. The only reason I am demoing the DEQX is the ability to use crossovers and delay to perfectly integrate subwoofers. I have one jl f113 on frontwall about 25% width and another 113 about 75% width on backwall. Nyal and I are going to dial the subs in Monday. I'll try using a 24db or 48db slope somewhere between 40 and 60hz xover, each sub mono. I've tried the sub integration in another setup and I was shocked at how the sub can disappear if I set the delay and crossover correctly. I should be able to eliminate all remaining axial modes/nulls front to back.
My point posting here is that you don't need to use the DEQX PEQ or FIR speaker correction filters. I think the crossover functionality won't have any effect on the rest of the sound since it's simple IIR LF stuff. It's similar to what you'll get using Jriver PEQ. There won't be any loss of resolution the way I want to use it.
DSP has no downside as long as it's done right. Also, Audionet has a DAC that aims to help integrate dual mono subs in the way I've described. It's called the DNP. Problem is I can't find anyone to answer simple questions about the DNP.
Hello. I have a deqx HDP 4 and the hdp4 express . I have a 4 way setup now so i needed the second unit for the added channel
. I ordered from nyles too . And bought the total support too. As of now I have the same setup with a yamaha
Setup . It does sound really good now. Hopefully next week I will put time aside and start the process myself .
Michael please keep me posted. Did you buy the cal mic from him as well.
I've been measuring with DIRAC for some time now. So I already have an Earthworks m23 and the correction file from EW. After I get the subs dialed in, I may try to correct my YG Anat III speakers using the DEQX FIR filters; obvious overkill. But why not? If I don't like it, I won't use it. I just don't want to drag my speakers onto the golf course. I might get a visit from the COPS. . I think my room is big enough to correct down to 500hz. That's really not the reason I got the DEQX though. It's all about perfect bass and cleaning up lower mid bass with a steeper xover and get some kick azz bass dynamix! It should work well.
Hello. I have a deqx HDP 4 and the hdp4 aux . I have a 4 way setup now so i needed the second unit for the added channel
. I ordered from nyles too . And bought the total support too. As of now I have the same setup with a yamaha
Setup . It does sound really good now. Hopefully next week I will put time aside and start the process myself .
Michael please keep me posted. Did you buy the cal mic from him as well.
I am aiming for that too. The bass is powerful but booms at times . I do not want to move the room around either .
It's my office rig and need it to function as is. I do need some more treatments though , but need my furniture to be completely built first . When done I will post pics. Yours look nice but do you really need that much treatments ?
Not picking just asking.
Al
There's no exposed fiberglass in my room. It's all diffusion on the surface of each treatment. Most of the bass traps are pressure traps, not velocity. My room is very lively; rt60 is about .4 across the spectrum.
I am aiming for that too. The bass is powerful but booms at times . I do not want to move the room around either .
It's my office rig and need it to function as is. I do need some more treatments though , but need my furniture to be completely built first . When done I will post pics. Yours look nice but do you really need that much treatments ?
Not picking just asking.
Al
Please I am it picking it apart , in fact it looks like you have put a lot of time in it. And I have read many of your posts so it's obvious you are well schooled too. I even looked up the items you have used and it's not cheap either. My speakers are infinity irs 1B so they fire front and rear . As such I need some front wall diffusion too . But the equipment shelving is there and a plasma . So no real room for it. At least not till I am done with the furniture being built. But it does sound pretty good but the bass is out of control though . So 8k later for a new crossover and let's see what happens. I do not intend to use the preamp in the deqx . And I want to use my msb stack and feed it analog , just as I do now with my yamaha .
Are you doing the setup with nyles as I am ?
I figured from few bucks I can learn a lot as he plays with my CPU from his place and does what needed .
Yes. Nyal is going to help me with the subs. I am told he's a subwoofer sorcerer.
Yes, I've owned some mega-gear. I'm not a reviewer or a dealer, so I call it like I hear it. The better the room, speaker and DSP the less of a difference there is with the digital front-end gear, IME. This experience is counter-intuitive for sure. I didn't intend to end up being one of the nerdy know-it-all DSP fanatics. I know my comments are often subversive and offensive to some folks. I can only say what I hear. Take it or leave it.
Please I am it picking it apart , in fact it looks like you have put a lot of time in it. And I have read many of your posts so it's obvious you are well schooled too. I even looked up the items you have used and it's not cheap either. My speakers are infinity irs 1B so they fire front and rear . As such I need some front wall diffusion too . But the equipment shelving is there and a plasma . So no real room for it. At least not till I am done with the furniture being built. But it does sound pretty good but the bass is out of control though . So 8k later for a new crossover and let's see what happens. I do not intend to use the preamp in the deqx . And I want to use my msb stack and feed it analog , just as I do now with my yamaha .
Are you doing the setup with nyles as I am ?
I figured from few bucks I can learn a lot as he plays with my CPU from his place and does what needed .
Your post ,s are fine and based on what you hear , not what you read. As we all read , it's the heating that changes things .
It s the evidence not the hear say. I have many dacs in my My office to hear. And as the good ones sound good there is always something that makes the one you pick special. And that comes from hearing it. I read you just installed. New dac , correct ?
Your post ,s are fine and based on what you hear , not what you read. As we all read , it's the heating that changes things .
It s the evidence not the hear say. I have many dacs in my My office to hear. And as the good ones sound good there is always something that makes the one you pick special. And that comes from hearing it. I read you just installed. New dac , correct ?
I found the DEQX benefited substantially from mods: cleaner power supplies for both the digital and analog sections, lower jitter clock, and better output transformers. Those mods removed a "digital haze" and "tizziness" (a bit like mp3 compression). I concluded that the math/processing in the DEQX was superb and held back by being a notch short of an audiophile implementation. (That being said, it's not easy to find competent people to mod the unit.)
Bruce, that's an interesting point. I could definitely hear the "digital haze" and "tizziness" on the system that I heard. So much so that the DEQX would be a non-starter for me. Removing the haze and tizz would be a MAJOR plus.
I found the DEQX benefited substantially from mods: cleaner power supplies for both the digital and analog sections, lower jitter clock, and better output transformers. Those mods removed a "digital haze" and "tizziness" (a bit like mp3 compression). I concluded that the math/processing in the DEQX was superb and held back by being a notch short of an audiophile implementation. (That being said, it's not easy to find competent people to mod the unit.)
.
