Is DEQX a game changer?

Andrew (Drewan77), awesome! Thanks!

11-19-14: Timlub
Hi Guys, I have read several post, but not near all, this may have been addressed. I have no doubt that the DEQX could be a game changer, but it would require Biamping, triamping etc.

Tim, my hope and expectation, based on the inputs from several DEQX users in this thread, and on Kal's review, and on the comments on time coherence by Bombaywalla and others in this thread and the recent "sloped baffle" thread, is that that is not the case. My Daedalus Ulysses speakers are not even biwirable or biampable, having just a single pair of terminals. Designer Lou Hinkley doesn't want users doing those things, and in the process risking introducing compromises to what he has worked hard to achieve. I simply hope and expect that the sophisticated time alignment and room correction features of the DEQX, and possibly a little bit of additional equalization here and there, will enhance the already good sound I am getting from them to a significant degree. As well as perhaps also providing an upgrade to my preamp, and maybe even to the DAC and analog sections of my CDP.

As Kal said in the conclusion of his review:

It made my very good speakers undeniably better, smoother and cleaner, and endowed them with a bigger soundstage. It mad dense complicated music easier to resolve, and all music more of a joy to hear.

Best of luck with the Mini-DSP, btw. I am not familiar with it.

BTW, I'll add to my previous comments about the system configuration in which I intend to use the DEQX that I do not envision adding subs in the foreseeable future. A majority of Ulysses owners do not use them with subs, although Lou offers what is apparently quite a good (and somewhat expensive) passive sub that is designed to mate with them. But the Ulysses are rated down to 28 Hz +/-2 db, which is good enough for me. And that rating seems consistent with evaluations I have performed using test tones, as well as listening to well recorded organ music, etc.

John, LOL! :-) I wonder what the "three amigos" would have to say about that. (To the others, that's an inside joke; don't ask). Come to think of it, though, I don't want to know :-)

Best regards,
-- Al

11-19-14: Almarg
John, LOL! :-) I wonder what the "three amigos" would have to say about that. (To the others, that's an inside joke; don't ask). Come to think of it, though, I don't want to know :-)

I'm glad someone got it Al, I knew I could count on you. ;^)

I just have to laugh at the 2014 marketing phrase of the year: Game Changer.
It seems like everything out there these days is a game changer.....sigh.

Cheers,
John

Hi Al,
Thanks for the reply. When building speakers, we time drivers are not time aligned on the frontal plane by adding padding/baffle step compensation to change the delivery of the tweeter and mid hitting your ear at the same time. This is built into the crossover. An External device cannot change that as far as true timing speed is concerned. Using a 2 way as an example: When bi amping, you can change the delay of the response of any driver to properly align when the response of each driver will hit the ear.
What the DEQX would have to do is send a delay of given frequencies of one driver or the other to compensate for the work that has been done in the crossover....
My point was more that by completely removing the crossover, you should gain the attack, leading edge info and detail that hundreds of foot of copper coil can diminish in a crossover. There should be no comparison of the speaker with a crossover vs without. Any multi driver speaker with a DEQX with proper delay and room compensations tailored and the passive crossover removed should be a whole new world compared to the same speaker with the crossover left in tact. Theoretically, you should be able to take any 2 or 3 way with quality drivers and customize the DEQX settings (eq out the bumps, bring up the dips, time align, eq for room) to be a world class speaker system. Yes, it can certainly help a speaker without removing the crossover, but even with the best speaker systems available, if the DEQX is biamped (2way) there should be no comparison.

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