Amps Atma-Sphere M-60 Mono blocks OTL design

Thanks ozzy and Al! 
I have been reading and rereading the manual, as well as the thread Al linked to.It is a lot of information, and I am not the most technidally proficient person. So, sorry if I repeat something that has already been answered.

Has anyone used the DEQX on phase aligned speakers like Vandersteens? As a Treo owner, I would be curious to see what a phase aligned speaker would show on a graph. I think I saw a mention on the long  thread Almarg linked to, but I can't find it again.
Bob

Hi Bob,

I don’t recall anyone reporting having used a DEQX with a time coherent speaker (e.g. Vandersteen, Thiel, Green Mountain Audio).

BTW, time coherence implies phase coherence, but phase coherence does not necessarily imply time coherence. Many speakers are phase coherent without being time coherent. See the post dated 7-15-2014 by Roy Johnson of Green Mountain Audio in this thread:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/sloped-baffle

As you've probably seen in the past, though, John Atkinson’s measurements that are presented in conjunction with most speaker reviews in Stereophile sometimes provide impulse response graphs (and associated commentary), and usually provide step response graphs, which can also provide insight into time domain performance.

Presumably the time alignments provided by DEQX would not provide a benefit in the case of a speaker that is inherently time coherent, such as your Treo. But of course the frequency response and room corrections it provides would presumably still be applicable. As well as preamp functionality that is provided by some models, and A/D and D/A converter functionality.

Best regards,
-- Al

@almarg , et al.
Considering how much you are doing to the original signal (when processing through the DEQX), do you think you are altering it to something 'unnatural'?
Bob

Hi Bob,

It is certainly possible to overdo the DEQX calibrations/corrections, resulting in unnatural sound. But as my dealer advised me (Nyal Mellor of AcousticFrontiers.com, who is wonderful), corrections should be applied conservatively. Especially with respect to the natural upper treble rolloff that most speaker/room combinations tend to have at the listening position.

My Daedalus speakers are rightly known for having a very natural sonic character, and that was only improved as a result my use of the DEQX. Most notably in the case of recordings having sound quality that is mediocre or worse, especially in terms of harshness or excessive brightness in the treble region. As I said in one of my posts in the DEQX thread:

Perhaps most notable among the differences that I and my wife perceived were on some recordings having overly bright string sound, including some string quartets as well as symphonic recordings. Those became much more enjoyable with the filters engaged. Not because the sound was dulled down, but because there seemed to be increased detail and improved definition in the upper midrange and lower treble, as opposed to a more homogenized presentation of those notes, which in turn resulted in the brightness being less objectionable.

I can say also, in the case of my HDP-5 and as Ozzy and numerous others in the DEQX thread have attested to in the case of other models, that with the corrections bypassed the unit is amazingly transparent. Even when an analog source is being used (via unbalanced connections, at least; I haven’t used its balanced analog interfaces), and is therefore processed through the unit’s A/D and D/A converters. I can’t say that there is zero effect on the signal, but it is remarkably small, and easily outweighed by the benefits the processing provides.

Best regards,
-- Al

Ozzy,    Why did you decide upon this particular DIY speaker design?   What were you looking for?