Is DEQX a game changer?

11-22-14: Bifwynne
... my "redbook" ARC Ref CD-8 CDP is hooked up to the PreMATE via two modalities: (1) analogue through my ARC Ref 5 SE preamp in "normal" analogue fashion and (2) digitally via the digital output of CD-8 directly into the PreMate's XLR input. In the later case, my CDP is acting merely as a transport and the PreMATE is the DAC.

Hi Bruce,

At the risk of adding further complication to an already very complicated assessment and adjustment process, I'll mention that I would keep in mind the possibility that the sonics you hear from the analog and the digital outputs of your CDP MIGHT be affected, at least slightly, by having both of those outputs connected into your system simultaneously.

Having multiple paths in the system through which signal return (ground) currents can flow, some of them associated with digital circuitry and some with analog circuitry, raises a caution flag in my mind about the possibility of one affecting the other, at least slightly. And also the possibility of issues arising from ground loops involving those signal return connections and the AC safety ground wiring of the three components. And, finally, the possibility of low-level "crosstalk" within the DEQX between the digital and analog inputs, if and when signals are provided to both at the same time.

Best,
-- Al

Thanks Al. Interesting point. Admittedly, I have an irrational bias (pun) to using the DEQX in analogue mode. That is, my CDP is hooked up to my Ref 5 SE preamp, and the DEQX is inserted in between the Ref 5 and my amp. I suppose I can't bear the thought that my Ref 5 is no longer needed.

Al ... I'll check the sound playback on a with and without basis. As far as ground loops are concerned ... nothing I can discern at this point.

Now ... the cross talk point may be relevant. At times, it seems that my CDP is playing in "mono'ish" mode. I wonder .... uuhhm.

Cheers,

Bruce

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

Unsound,

You are right: certain software packages can do that. I'm not sure Dirac can, though. I believe it is focused on digital room correction only.

Acourate (another software package) can do digital room correction, and digital crossovers and allows to time align the different channels, and also linearize the drivers. In fact it's in my plans to use Acourate in my server and feed a multichannel DAC to drive two powered subwoofers and three stereo amps driving tweeter/midrange/woofer, and no XO on the speakers.

My advantage in taking this path is I have disposed of other sources and now just use a very optimized PC (optimized in hardware and software). Clearly not the same as using a laptop either.

Like Bifwynne, I'm having a hard time of letting go of my beloved tube preamp - Lamm LL2 in my case.

For those interested I suggest reading a couple of articles over at computeraudiophile.com by member Mitchco, who's very knowledgeable:
An intro to Acourate
Time alignment walkthrough

I follow this thread with much interest as I see the DEQX as able to do the same things, in a simpler way albeit more expensive.

Al, since I'm posting I wanted to throw in a comment directed to an earlier post of yours. In Acourate, the treble, mids and bass need to be in different channels for the software to be able to time align them. I believe the setup you were planning with DEqX had just one channel for right and one one for left (from a digital processing point of view). I would double check DEQX would allow you to time align the drivers in such a setup.

Lewinskih01, i thought that we had a lengthy debate on Acourate in the "Sloped Baffle" thread with Roy Johnson & others & we (mainly Roy J) concluded that Acourate did not have the Math right to correctly check the impulse response of the speaker & correct its response? I'm pretty sure that you were part of that discussion. Despite this did you still decide to use Acourate? thanks.