Is DEQX a game changer?

To Al & Roscoe - when you get your DEQXs' I am happy to help with any aspect of explanation or setup if you need it...

The DEQX does indeed result in a 'dream system'. I have had more than 2 years of pure pleasure since I installed mine and the realism and clarity never ceases to amaze. It makes a good system great and a great system simply unbelievable!

- I hope that Bifwynnes' dealer is up to the task and can achieve all that it can do (ideally measure the speakers first outdoors, it makes a big difference to doing it in the listening room. I have tried both)

Actually Psag I actually like very clear but smooth treble and both my TTs use cartridges that achieve this: AT150ANV and Ortofon 2M Black. Neither can be called rolled off

Digital sources now have a very close signature. The harshness I described in the DEQX DAC was very minor but I am extremely picky! (I also have a Chord 64 DAC and that IS rolled off)

My 'real' love in this hobby is live amplified music and I spend way too much on that. DEQX in my system using all my sources gets me remarkably close

I am a DEQX user (HDP3 since mid 2012) and for me it has certainly been a game changer. It is not an easy product to set up and takes a great deal of research and learning to perfect. I now consider myself quite experienced. This was once I properly understood all the nuances of crossover slopes, phase, time alignment and room effects. What follows below is a simplified description of the procedure for using DEQX. The manual itself is lengthy and in many cases not easily comprehended (ie not difficult to get it wrong in several important aspects)

Originally I calibrated and used a pair of existing Shahinian Obelisks and the improvement compared to the sound I was familiar with was very dramatic. This was with the standard passive crossovers in place and blended to a pair of subs. By time-aligning these and with subtle room equalisation below 250hz, it was the first time that the crossover to the subs truly became seamless and all room effects disappeared (no exaggeration). I remember swearing out loud when I first got this, it has to be heard to believe it!

After a few months and fully appreciating what the DEQX could do, I decided to build a pair of Open Baffle speakers. Mid-sub crossovers are at 100hz (72db slopes), mid-treble at 3145hz (60db slopes). Extreme slopes allow individual amps and driver sets to operate within a narrow band and this creates very clean and dynamic transients

The beauty of DEQX is that you can calibrate these outdoors (raised ideally above grass, not a hard surface and no walls around so there are only very faint and unimportant reflections to corrupt the microphone reading) - the software creates a flat frequency response, which can be verified. Then when a mic is placed at the listening chair indoors, it compares with the original 'anecholic' result and time aligns all the drivers including phase at each frequency etc. All you then need to do is further manually time align the separately calibrated subs, if you use them. Very clever and effective - sitting in the sweet spot is holographic & 3D sounding. Performers 'hang' in space before you, realism way beyond anything I have heard in a hi-fi dealer demo, exhibition or, frankly anywhere else including some very expensive and otherwise impressive systems. My own speakers also manage to beat the Shahinians in every respect but I suspect this is more to do with 3 separate frequency bands being opimised for each driver set and very steep crossovers. The way this was described to me is like the latest military aircraft or Airbus. These are intrinsically unstable but sophisticated software allows them to fly. In the case of a fighter jet, often way beyond the realms of normal aerodynamics. I think that is what the DEQX algorithms do

Oh, and by the way...everything you do can be listened to using 4 presets to compare and changes made in real time whilst music is playing (including time alignment which I can only describe like turning the dial on a lens until suddenly everything falls into crystal clear focus, very useful)

DEQX is also an excellent preamp, completely neutral and very analogue sounding to my ears (I play a lot of vinyl) and also contains very good DACs (only bettered by a new Graham Slee product called the Majestic. I had previously used a Chord 64 and the DEQX DAC was much more musical, the Slee even more so)

I only caution someone borrowing and trying to set this up themselves in a short time. You may get 50-60% of what is possible but not appreciate what it can really do. When you do eventually dial everything in correctly, there really is no going back. I probably sound like I am preaching so sorry about that - I am 57 years old, have been fanatical about music all my adult life, am extremely fussy about realism and my loft is full of expensive but ultimately unrewarding hi-fi kit. If anything, after 2 years, I am more enthusiastic about DEQX that I was before

Hi Lewinskih01
No problem, I will mail you. I am in the UK

Yes a single DEQX processor handles 6 channels/6 amps. You could add a second of course (I may one day add the latest HDP4, these things are very expensive but worth every penny)

My setup is:
Treble, 2 channels +3145hz
Mids, 2 channels 100-3145hz
Bass, 2 channels -100hz (2 separate subs, different placements)

I originally purchased the HDP3 because I could not integrate the sub (single M&K MX200 at that time) to the Obelisks without occasional audible crossover dips or humps which drove me crazy. The DEQX made the crossover seamless and I was happy for the first time. It's going to be a compromise for you: Because with only 6 channels you may need to either take the clarity and image realism using the DEQX for the main speakers and live with imperfect sub integration or maybe combine mid-bass or mid-treble on the main speakers so you achieve the cleanest bass. I would take this route personally. Whatever you do I am happy to assist as much as I can

Hi Lewinskih01
No problem, I will mail you. I am in the UK

Yes a single DEQX processor handles 6 channels/6 amps. You could add a second of course (I may one day add the latest HDP4, these things are very expensive but worth every penny)

My setup is:
Treble, 2 channels +3145hz
Mids, 2 channels 100-3145hz
Bass, 2 channels -100hz (2 separate subs, different placements)

I originally purchased the HDP3 because I could not integrate the sub (single M&K MX200 at that time) to the Obelisks without occasional audible crossover dips or humps which drove me crazy. The DEQX made the crossover seamless and I was happy for the first time. It's going to be a compromise for you: Because with only 6 channels you may need to either take the clarity and image realism using the DEQX for the main speakers and live with imperfect sub integration or maybe combine mid-bass or mid-treble on the main speakers so you achieve the cleanest bass. I would take this route personally. Whatever you do I am happy to assist as much as I can

Answering After_hrs question, the difference in the quality of music after setting DEQX into the system is so astounding that it is impossible to compare the amps

An important aspect here is that when you measure & correct the speakers (ie outdoors) and then calibrate, re measure and correct in the listening position, this is with each amp/channel as you will use in the final setup. Source components (in my case Vinyl/CD/SACD/Streamed FLAC) only play a part during final time alignment tweaks or equalisation on-the-fly whilst listening to music. This is a really good feature so you can arrive at exactly the sound you want

DEQX corrects what the mic hears and therefore the impact (or otherwise) of each amp is taken into account. The end result just sounds lifelike and 'neutral', without colouration. Equally importantly, all the bass humps and dips have audibly disappeared and the room/speaker interface has no bearing on the sound. DEQX will also enable you to take bass to unbelievable levels if you so desire and if the drivers will allow it. At the same time it remains uncoloured - hard to believe it is possible until you hear it

Another example is that I have tried 3 different types of speaker in 2 different rooms with a different power amplifier controlling the midrange and if used correctly, the end result is remarkably similar. I have changed to different brands for mid and treble in my current setup and it has no discernable bearing (and I am someone who knows that system/room intimately). That is very impressive

If there is a downside, apart from the relative complexity in learning the process correctly, it is that I now spend all my spare time in that damned music room and my already vast music collection grows weekly :)

Lewinskih01

I did not require my other preamp because the DEQX does this very well, reducing components in the signal path and it is transparent sounding

It has both digital and analogue inputs, balanced and unbalanced (HDP4 has USB as well but I don't need this)

The DEQX has analogue volume control outputting to the power amps (digital volume option included) and yes, I have used the onboard DAC which is very good, configured as below:

CD transport input to Balanced Digital XLR, onboard DAC, then onboard XO/speaker correction, output to external treble/mid/sub power amps, then to Speakers & subs (likewise for a Digital streamer to coax unbalanced Digital phono input etc)

A Turntable and SACD player use the phono and balanced XLR inputs

From the first evening I started to set up DEQX, I appreciated the dramatic change made to my system. No need to ever remove it - its effects are immediate and noticeable

At first, all I wanted was a means of integrating two subwoofers properly and the HDP3 took care of that very quickly

What floored me was the unexpected clarity that I had no idea my system was capable of. I was trying to listen to the bass but it was as if everything coming from my speakers was now in a different league

Although it took me about 6 months to fully understand and perfect everything, I will never surpass the amazement of that first night. An 'audiophile' friend visited the following week and asked 'OK what's the trick, you have added some sort of surround sound?', another simply said 'where do you go from here' and basically, more than two years later the answer is 'nowhere' (after changing to DEQX crossed-over Open Baffles)

It's that good

So, Psag and Ptss, here is no need to remove DEQX from the system - nothing else I have heard comes close to this and the realism of the music is often breathtaking. If and when my HDP3 processor stops working, I will buy an HDP4 (or better if they ever produce something) immediately and without hesitation

Ozzy
Yes you can set the DEQX yourself, Bifwynne is just arranging a demo by the dealer

Calibrating is relatively easy once you follow the (enormous!) manual and most aspects have automated settings to get you a long way down the track. Achieving the final 20-30% to 'perfection' takes more time and many don't bother. I did and it is worth it

There is also a chargeable service called DEQXpert where you can dial in and be guided through setup if need be

It is not that difficult to calibrate DEQX using the manual and most processes are automated. This achieves a lot of what it can do without specialist skills. It is only the last part, interpreting the graphs to achieve precise time alignment to subs that takes understanding

The best aspect is doing this whilst listening to music so you can instantly hear when it is dialled in correctly

A novice can still hear a significant difference and for most this will be a long way beyond the sound they had before (speakers corrected for phase & timing at all frequencies and room effects removed)

Bifwynne
Measuring outside gives plots on the software where the first reflection is quite distant and easily identified - this helps greatly with the accuracy of the calibration

Measuring inside does colour the result and when I compare by listening, an inside measurement/calibration sounds more hollow and artificial whereas an outside measurement results in very pure and neutral sounding music

If your dealer is willing and the weather permits, I strongly recommend you take this option. It will really show how special this processor is

If you measure indoors, DEQX will hear room effects and the calibration will be much less accurate & the finished result compromised. It can still be effective, just not as good as it should

Here's a youtube video of someone doing it from their car (white coat optional !!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1tSsj-DK1A

If you live in a house with a garden then great & use an extension lead, if you don't then I guess you have no other option for now

So, if you have to go with an indoors measurement, lift the speakers up in the air ('platform' in the centre of the room, put the speaker on it and measure one at a time of course, making sure you record which measurement relates to which speaker), preferably angled slightly upwards - cover the floor in front with cushions and other soft materials to kill the reflections as much as possible

If the dealer is doing it correctly, he will know all this anyway

I used to use DEQX for both analogue/digital, now only analogue (although it contains an excellent DAC, I now use something even better). The two analogue inputs are configured as below

1) RCA Phono analogue input: Turntable/phono amp
2) XLR Balanced analogue input: balanced connection to Graham Slee Majestic DAC/preamp. This has an anlaogue input that I use for SACD/second TT, plus multiple digital inputs (coax, optical, USB) for the CD transport/digital streamer/laptop etc

I also use the DEQX analogue volume control. Overall there is no trace of anything 'digital' in the sound I hear which is a testament to the smoothness of the DEQX processor. You have to hear it to believe me of course!

Psag, yes I am introducing further conversion but the musical benefit easily justifies that for me. Using the inbuilt DAC, digital sources were a little more 'fatiguing' to listen to. Maybe it's the combination of open baffle speakers/ribbon tweeters which are very revealing of the tiniest details

The Majestic DAC is very analogue-like and neutral & I hear less harshness at the extremes of treble. If I play the same album on vinyl and then CD, the resulting sound is very very close. If there is a drop in transparency and resolution, I don't notice it

Psag: "Drewan77, I didn't realize you were using the DEQX mate, which does not have the digital inputs."

I am not using the DEQX Mate, that was a reply I gave to Ozzy as he was looking for something with only speaker correction. My DEQX is the HDP3 which has both analogue & digital inputs, including a DAC which I no longer use

Glad to hear you had a successful demo Bif. I am happy to help if you need any advice once you receive your unit. Did you go for the DEQX Mate?

Quote: "Al, you and I are both old enough to know that some questions are best not asked. I'm "freeze tagging" on the DEQX's analogue functionality viz my phono. The thought that my Ref 5 SE could be an irrelevant artifact is too difficult to bear"

I am nearly 60 and although I also have around 4000 CDs, a few dozen SACDs and (at last count) around 54,000 (!?) mostly FLAC digital files (Rock, Hard Rock, Blues, Folk, Indie, Electronic, Folk) I still prefer Vinyl through my DEQX - 2 TTs via phono amps. 3 very fine preamps are now in other rooms or unused and will never be in the main system again

Interesting observations by Forrestc and Bifwynne

I became an 'advanced' DEQX user and learnt over the past two years how to improve my initial setup with small tweaks and modifications along the way. You do eventually reach a point where further meddling becomes unnecessary and counter productive of course

Learning was by a combination of email support from Alan Langford at DEQX, from my own dealer (DEQXpert), from discussing with other DEQX users and studying the principles behind time alignment and how to properly interpret the graphs. I wouldn't say I am particularly 'tech savvy'.... more inquisitive and willing to experiment and learn

For anyone reading this who is not a DEQX user and put off by the apparent complexity, don't be - most setup widgets have a default setting as part of the automated process and DEQX takes care of phase and time alignment of the speakers automatically. It is only alignment between different speaker sets (ie main-subs) and room effects that require manual intervention. These two aspects can be adjusted in real time and with music playing so the resulting changes can be heard immediately

There are 4 presets so you can make different versions of a similar configuration, modifying one aspect subtly between them and change via the remote whilst listening and then settle on the best one. My final setup has 4 similarly configured presets with the only change being the amount of bass boost/room eq to compensate for a bass heavy album (preset 1) all the way to a thin sounding album (preset 4). Preset 2 is used for most listening (by the way I have never used the hundreds of eq settings available on the remote and the use of preset 1 as a 'Bypass' is only worth it the first time you ever use DEQX, after that I have configured it as with the other 3)

Ruler flat eq curves do indeed sound very dull - for instance if you use the 'inverse' eq facility to map and neutralise the room frequency plot, it sound too sterile. Learning how to work with DEQX to achieve a natural and full sounding frequency range 'in your room/to your taste' can be both time consuming and enjoyable at the same time

Adding two subs to the room (directly fed by the DEQX as Bif mentions) makes a big difference as does experimenting with the crossover point. I tried several settings between 80 and 120hz before finally settling on 100hz as the most natural sounding - below that the OB speakers struggled to fill-in and above that, mid-bass started to sound a little 'nasal'

In my experience, building passive crossovers and sloped baffle speakers and using acoustic room treatment CAN achieve similar results but it is so much more 'hit & miss'. You normally get one go at a crossover and invariably find fault over the subsequent weeks & months. It's a real hassle to then make changes and always a bit of a stab in the dark. Likewise with acoustic treatment I could take out SOME bass humps but never satisfactorily fill in the voids.

With DEQX, the potential to correct with music playing until it sounds exactly as you want is infinate. Maybe for that reason alone, I do consider it to be a game changer

Al, great to hear. I am confident that you will be equally impressed when you get the HDP4. If you need assistance with any part of the configuration or interpreting the graphs, I am more than happy to help

There are some really useful features that even the enormous manual doesn't make clear. I am also much cheaper than the DEQXpert service (ie free !)

Regards
Andrew

Bif, SACD has a sample rate of 1 bit/2,8224Mhz vs 16 bit/44.1Khz for standard CD. It cannot be handled by a conventional DAC so processing is done by the SACD player and enters the DEQX via an analogue input

I believe the CD-8 will only play regular redbook CDs, SACD requires a dedicated player (inc some Bluray players)

There are also relatively few SACD disc being produced these days, most of mine were purchased when originally issued. As always in audio, mastering of the original recording has the greatest audio impact (IMO), so a really great CD or digital file sounds better than a so-so SACD or LP

I have a lot of FLAC files at CD quality, quite a few at 24/96 and some at up to 24/192. The same comment about mastering applies so I don't get too hung up about it. The 'best' vinyl beats everything else but then maybe I am a dinosaur?

In theory, adding additional processing into the signal path should have a negative effect. Maybe...but the benefits in my experience greatly outweigh any theoretical drawbacks and I only hear improvements. I certainly cannot detect any loss of transparency - in fact I have never had such a sense of real performers in a believable soundstage

Contributing to this thread has made me put a lot of thought into what it really is about DEQX that I find beneficial. So, in order of significance, this is the impact on MY system after using DEQX for two and a half years:

1. The ability to adjust almost everything on-the-fly whilst listening to music in your own room. - Irreplaceable, I could no longer own a system without this feature. Everything else was 'guesswork, trial & error'

2. Measuring & correcting non time-coherent speakers. Phase and timing is aligned at all frequencies, not just a 'theoretical' passover compromise - Huge impact

3. Time aligning subs - Huge impact, it is no longer possible to detect a crossover or any nulls or peaks, no matter what type of music is played

4. Ability to create crossovers at up to 72dB slopes and adjust crossover frequencies so amps & drivers operate in narrow & more efficient frequency bands, also the choice of different crossover types - Very big impact

5. Room correction - Reasonable impact (not so necessary when all the above are already dealt with anyway)

6. Preamp ability - Neutral... it seems to have no sonic signature I can detect. One more analogue input would be useful, that's all

7. Four presets selectable by remote control, each giving a slightly different adjustment to the lowest frequencies to compensate for thin or bass heavy albums - Not often used but very useful when necessary

8. DAC. Very, very good but slightly clinical - I can live without this

9. The ability to create and save further equalisation from the remote control (a huge number of presets) - Not used

Additionally:

- Ease of setup - logical but a lengthy process to do it properly. Automated widgets make a pretty good result quite easy and far simpler than any equivalent DSP I researched. Take the time to understand it and the results are fabulous

- Ease of use once understood - logical, practical and infinitely adjustable until 'perfect' at the listening seat

- Overall, the combination of 1-5 above makes the effect of your room an irrelevance and it no longer has any audible impact on the music you play. - therefore this equipment is irreplaceable (for me)

As I have said previously in this thread, please keep an open mind until you hear a fully corrected system. I was one of the biggest cynics out there until I decided to try it for myself

"Bombaywalla or perhaps Drewan77 --- what is the DEQX's digital capabilities?? Can I use the CD-8 as a transport and the DEQX as a pure DAC to play SACD?"

No, you can only use the onboard DAC for up to 24/192 processing, not SACD. It is good for CD or streamed MP3, FLAC, ALAC, WAV etc. The CD-8 can be used as a CD transport but for SACD you need to input from a dedicated player via one of the analogue PreMate inputs

"So, if I have a Dac that I like and only want the speaker correction function , is there a Deqx unit that just does that?"

Yes, the DEQX Mate does that. Use this link....

http://www.deqx.com/product-deqxmate-overview.php

....and look at 'comparison' on the drop down RH side bottom to see the various features of each processor

(Apologies to Almarg as I notice I accidentally added a second L to his forum name)

Bif, when I compared the DEQX DAC to the Chord 64 I was previously using, it was more lively sounding and I happily used this as a replacement. I like very precise transient attack, including bass that is clean & deep but starts/stops very fast. Much more realistic to true life and the DEQX DAC has that

The DAC I changed to at the beginning of 2014 was auditioned first and sounded just as lively but somehow has almost the same analogue 'smoothness' as vinyl (input via the HDP3 balanced XLR input). It gives me exactly what I was looking for

I did a back-to-back comparison yesterday to check again before posting and the DEQX DAC still sounds slightly more artificial and brittle at the extreme top end, a bit more 'Hi-Fi' than natural to my ears

Answering about the Chord DAC, this was input to the DEQX via the phono analogue input so maybe this has some bearing on the slightly dull sound. Having said that, my current DAC inputs via the balanced XLR analogue input and sounds fabulous, definitely smoother and more realistic than the DEQX DAC

Answering about isolation, I already use expensive chords, a dedicated electrical circuit and power conditioning so I am confident that is sorted

Answering about the Chord DAC, this was input to the DEQX via the phono analogue input so maybe this has some bearing on the slightly dull sound. Having said that, my current DAC inputs via the balanced XLR analogue input and sounds fabulous, definitely smoother and more realistic than the DEQX DAC

Answering about isolation, I already use expensive chords, a dedicated electrical circuit and power conditioning so I am confident that is sorted

Allmarg is correct, apologies if I confused everybody, in my country a single ended input is often called a 'phono' socket. A phono stage is something else entirely

I should also point out that the latest HDP4 processor uses an entirely different (presumably improved) DAC compared to the HDP3 that I have. I still maintain that the primary benefit of DEQX is the speaker correction facility. Anything else is a bonus

Psag, maybe you misread what I said - here was my comment from an earlier post:

"when I compared the DEQX DAC to the Chord 64 I was previously using, it was more lively sounding and I happily used this as a replacement. I like very precise transient attack, including bass that is clean & deep but starts/stops very fast. Much more realistic to true life and the DEQX DAC has that"

The Graham Slee DAC sounds more life-like than both, being fed either CD or FLAC files. It's just as dynamic as the HDP3 DAC but more realistic at the top end. You are correct about the logic of converting an analogue signal though, it must surely have a tiny impact (I tend to judge a system on what I hear though)

Psag: "Drewan77 if you are using the HDP3, then you are utilizing its DAC. The device operates in the digital domain. The last step is digital to analogue conversion."

Partly true...I will explain:

The internal DAC for processing incoming CD or streamed data is not used as the processing is handled by an external DAC & these sources enter the DEQX as analogue signals (via balanced input)

You are of course correct that once inside the HDP3, digital conversion takes place but this is to process the crossovers, speaker calibration, phase, timing etc which is entirely different to the internal DAC handling the initial music processing. That is a separate standalone component of DEQX which I am not using

Alan Langford from DEQX Australia has viewed this forum topic and emailed me as below:

"....Andrew, Just noticed your last few posts, it would be good to point out that your HDP3 used DACs from Analog Devices AD1853. The New HDP-4 & PreMate use a DAC by Burr Brown PCM-1795 and completely new I/V and analog output stages that has completely changed the sound when compared to the HDP-3. All the latest models are complete redesigns other than the DSP and some logic...."

I will only find out when I eventually change to an HDP4, it is quite possible that I may prefer this DAC over the HDP3

One of the reasons I jumped in with DEQX was because every review I could find was 'enthusiastic' (rather an understatement, read John Atkinsons previous comment here: http://www.stereophile.com/content/gob-smacked-deqx). Then I heard what it did for myself and I knew it was what I needed - initially just to sort out the bass my room. The speaker correction part was a bonus

I agree Bif, I thought my old Shahinian Obelisks were pretty good until I heard what DEQX did to them . I literally swore out loud in amazement the first time I played them afterwards

Responding to Roscoeiii - using the 4 DEQX presets as part of the setup process, this has been my experience over the past 2 1/2 years:

1. With DEQX processing switched out of the system, I thought music sounded OK but imaging was rather flat and 2 dimensional. The subs were blended pretty well but occasionally a particular low frequency jumped out or there was some boxiness or a dip. The speakers didn't cope so well with the different frequency wavelengths and room reflections, as well as imperfect time alignment between the drivers themselves

2. With just DEQX speaker correction (I use active crossovers sub-mid-treble) the system sounds very different, images become much more pin-point and the soundstage sounds more natural. Music starts to sound 'realistic'

3. With time correction added (set manually after measuring) it is like turning the focus on a lens and at the right setting the difference is quite stunning, even from the last stage above. Images sit in a believable 3D soundstage (if on the original recording). The acoustics of the recording venue become very apparent for the first time. Vocals sound like the performer in front of the listening seat and even in a complex passage you can hear all the instruments individually and clearly. This is not like being at a live venue however (which I do A LOT), I guess it must be more like being in the original recording studio

4. Room equalisation becomes almost unnecessary even though at stage 1 there were dropouts and humps, especially in the bass. At most I have only needed +/- 2db in a few of the lower frequencies. Switching room eq in/out actually makes relatively little difference. With this in place, I have a system that betters anything else I have heard in over 40 years of trying. Not to say that there isn't something better of course

I use 3 of the 4 preset settings to subtly alter bass response to accommodate different recordings (some albums are bass light, others heavy) - listening most of the time to setting 2 of 4 which is 'flat'. The final preset (same settings as preset 1) uses very steep crossover slopes which give faster dynamics and transient attack on an appropriate recording or when I feel like it!

Time delays have a very marked impact on a speakers' output and in fact you can tailor the sound quite dramatically using this alone. Delaying mid-treble to sub-bass slightly longer than 'correct' will create a quite pleasant 'growl' to bass guitars if that is what you want. Likewise it is worth tweaking the sound slightly beyond 'flat' to give exactly what you prefer...always retaining a smooth response, unaffected by the room in any way. That is a real benefit of DEQX - you only hear the recording via natural sounding speakers, not the room you are in. If you use low order crossover slopes, music is generally more laid back whereas with the steepest slopes, transients can become quite spectacular. Yes, a more forward or laid back sound can easily be produced from any given set of speakers, in fact I have discovered that you can tailor to EXACTLY what you want. For me, DEQX combined with Open Baffle speakers and subs does that

Answering the final point about different brands of speakers, I tried that too back in 2012 (B&W, Shahinian, Royd, Castle, some floorstanders, some not) and in 3 different rooms. All end up sounding remarkably similar which makes sense I suppose because you start the process measuring (outdoors in my case) and calibrating 'flat' and then again in the room. DEQX creates a set of filters that replicate the same 'flat' response, adjusting driver phase and timing accordingly for each type so the end result is much closer than you would expect

I implied it previously in this thread but I will repeat it again - DEQX repays the effort you put into understanding it fully as long as you take advantage of everything it has to offer. This is as near to ideal as I could possibly hope for and in the past few years I tend to just listen to the music itself. Isn't that the whole point of this?

Al, for the configuration you plan on using you won't need to worry about any manual time alignment as the 3 sets of outputs won't be feeding multiple power amps or subs (which is what they are really designed for). The only graphs you will need to interpret manually will be the in-room measurements at the listening position and that's very easy

That makes your setup much simpler as the HDP-4 will automate correction to speaker drivers driven by one power amp. It will hear your speakers as a single set of frequencies with any passive crossovers included in the signal path and adjust accordingly. You won't use the active crossover facility, just speaker correction to one stereo pair and the potential for room equalisation as you see fit

At a later date you have the opportunity to try all the other features, adding more power amps, speakers without passive crossovers, maybe subs etc. As long as you always measure with the power amps and cables linked to the drivers they will be running, you can even use different brands and wattages of amps for bass-mid-treble and DEQX calibrates and adjusts accordingly. Better to stick to one brand/rating though but it does allow you to adapt the system without needing to purchase 3 new sets of power amps in one hit

Regards Andrew

That's what I did for the first year Roscoeiii until everything was just as I wanted. The rest of my gear was/is great sounding but the speakers/room used to be the spoiler. Not any more :)

Yes Al, you can be confident that your Ulysses will sound so much better with the HDP-4. Unmodified Shahinian Obelisks were my first foray with DEQX and I was amazed at the improvement in clarity and realism it brought to them

Bi & tri-amping is the ultimate but nevertheless this manages to transform literally every type of speaker & room I have tried

You have an enjoyable time ahead - just be prepare to lose the rest of your life to the music :)

Timlub, whilst you are correct and I have used DEQX in all the configurations you mention, even on a speaker containing a passive crossover, the sense of reality and coherence is very impressive. However Bi-amped with Subs or Tri-amped is at a whole new level and I will never go back

Good to read your comments Denis and you have reminded me of an important aspect that Almarg may want to consider

A full range speaker such as the Ulysses that he describes will benefit from DEQX (automated) phase and time alignment, however the larger drivers will still need to handle all lower frequencies up to the passive crossover point

If you can reduce the number of frequencies a driver has to cope with and use a steep crossover, each cone has less work to do to reproduce the remaining range cleanly

Adding a sub to such a speaker gives the facility to remove deep bass frequencies via DEQX (in 'our' case below 100hz) which means the larger drivers will only concentrate on mid-bass upwards and this makes a significant difference to transient attack and overall cleanness of the sound. It is exactly what I originally did with my old Obelisks ad still do with the OBs

Your points about voicing are very valid and yes crossover frequencies and slopes can be tested via the presets as part of the configuration process until you arrive at your optimal voicing. For all the uninitated reading this - it means your system can sound exactly how you want it, in my case clean fast, dynamic & punchy right down to a measured -2dB at 16hz

Hi Bruce. If you mailed me your configuration file I could have a look at how it's been set up (its a .mzd file stored in the DEQX folder on your PC/Laptop). This would allow me to see all your measurements and how Larry set it up. If the file is too large we could use Dropbox or similar (my working config file is 9MB but this has measurements for 4 sets of speakers and 3 types of Sub, yours should be much simpler)

This doesn't mean I would change anything unless you wanted me to but if you then asked questions about any of the features, I could modify the file, save another version and send it back to you to load and try out
Cheers
Andrew

Unsound - yes programmes like Dirac can achieve a similar result but require a computer to be running the system whereas DEQX is an elegant 'hi-fi, one box' solution. Because everything can be automated via widgets, it is also quite logical & easy once you get the hang of it

I would be nervous about adding a potentially 'noisy' laptop or PC into my high end system when listening. I connect my Macbook (running a windows emulator) during setup or modifications, then unplug once I have everything sounding the way I want it. The best DEQX products also contain a linear power supply and are very transparent

Bifwynne: ...He didn't touch the original time alignment adjustments...

Bruce: Your previous post said you moved the couch so this will have changed the relative positions of speakers/subs and therefore alignment to some degree (we are talking milliseconds so any rearrangement will have affected this)

Lewinskih01 is partially correct if Almarg is only using a pair of full range speakers. There will be no opportunity to manually adjust time alignment but DEQX will still take care of this

The processor will automatically phase & time align what it hears during the measurement and calibration processes but there can be no manual time alignment as there would be when using 6 channels or 2-way plus sub(s)

Roscoeiii: Very curious to hear more about others' use of the analog input into the DEQX. As a vinyl guy, I worry about losing some of that analog magic....

I also prefer to listen to vinyl and can confirm that DEQX has only enhanced 'that analog magic'. The TT phono stage is connected directly into the RCA unbalanced analogue sockets. All my other devices are input from a preamp via the balanced analogue XLR connections and I also use the analogue volume control feature. There is certainly no digital glare

The benefits of removing room/speaker influences are astonishing. As an analogy, some years ago I took an eye test because I felt my night driving vision had deteriorated a little but I thought everything was OK the rest of the time. When I first tried the glasses, I was amazed how everything was suddenly pin-sharp even though I hadn't noticed it over the preceding years and didn't even realise

For me that's exactly what DEQX does - "spectacles for my ears"!

Very glad Larry was able to improve things Bruce. With DEQX in circuit, even slight changes in positioning or speaker angles can have an impact, especially noticeable when you re-run a room measurement, adjust time alignment and listen to music

I noticed from the files you sent me that Larry appears to align the sub with the first impulse peak of the main speakers (step response measurements). Although many people time-align this way and it is easier to calculate, I find the result is more realistic sounding when aligning subs to the first impulse rise rather than the peaks. I believe this is also generally held to be more correct (ie Green Mountain and others)

Bruce, I agree with you. Time alignment and room eq can be adjusted independently - whenever I have moved the listening seat slightly, it had an impact on the timing but very little on the eq and I have hardly ever changed that. If your sub sounds like it integrates perfectly and bass is natural - that is what really matters

The working DEQX file can have the time alignment tweaked (via the configurator) but eq is adjusted via the control panel and only affects the configuration if it is 'saved to DEQX' and then the original file is saved again. That's one of the features of this software, you can play about endlessly if you want and return to any previously saved version

Lewinskih01, If I remove the time alignment, imaging and soundstage collapses to a much flatter representation - something I hadn't fully appreciated until I included DEQX in the chain. Recordings which include original acoustics sound quite stunning when DEQX has time aligned all drivers and frequencies

For a three way system + subs you would need to add something like mini DSP for 8 channels as one DEQX unit will only cover 6 channels (ie HDP-4). Use DEQX on the main speakers where the benefits are most significant and another device to time align the subs. Alternatively, leave a passive crossover between treble-mid or mid-bass on the main speakers and use the remaining two HDP-4 channels for the subs

When an initial DEQX measurement is taken, the software will attempt to correct whatever it hears so if there is a passive crossover in the chain and any drivers are out of phase or timing, it will automatically correct that in the calibration it makes. Doing this process outdoors 'anechoically' produces the best results

Subsequent time alignment to subs and then room equalisation will enable you to remove almost all the damage done by your room so whatever speakers you listen to will perform closer to optimum, as Bruce has experienced

OK Roscoe, no problem. Playing around and tweaking with DEQX is a good way to learn

I am bound to agree with Ptss I suppose, given my experience with DEQX. A few hours to get an initial great sounding setup is only the start, it can do so much more than that

Time put into understanding and perfecting a system in this hobby is paid back many times over in the realism of music playback. DEQX does it for me but I am sure other people gain great pleasure by taking a different route

I must admit that both my Turntables also benefitted from hours of attention, to say nothing of a rigorous RCM regime with every used and many new LPs I own

Glad to hear you are making good progress Roscoeiii

Do you have the means to do measurements outdoors once you acquire a microphone stand? This will result in the purest initial calibration which every subsequent adjustment will be based on

Worth it if you can do it, believe me