Pre-Amp/Linestage With Subwoofer Outs

[dallasjustice]

I'm gonna checkout the Devialet. It may take a bit to get one. I'll report back on it. I saw some screenshots from configurator. It looks like it can do dual mono subs. I would have to use the Devialet crossover and delay. It is nice that the delay/phase can be rotated in microseconds. I prefer linear phase crossovers but it may be one of those one step back, two steps forward situations. I'll know when I hear it. The other advantage would be that I could connect over Ethernet and simplify things more.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

If no one has suggested it, I think you might take a look at the Illusonic IAP-4 http://www.illusonic.com/audio-processors/iap-4/

 

[dallasjustice]

http://www.gracedesign.com/products/m905/m905.htm
The 905 has up to two sub outs. I love the remote. It has a volume read out and a live SPL meter.

Here is the new 8CH monitoring controller from grace:
http://www.gracedesign.com/products/m108/m108.htm

It also works with same cool remote.

 

[Nyal Mellor]

http://www.gracedesign.com/products/m905/m905.htm
The 905 has up to two sub outs. I love the remote. It has a volume read out and a live SPL meter.

Here is the new 8CH monitoring controller from grace:
http://www.gracedesign.com/products/m108/m108.htm

It also works with same cool remote.

No sub filtering though, right? And how many channels to / from computer?

 

[dallasjustice]

No sub filtering though, right? And how many channels to / from computer?

I'm not sure Nyal. The manual doesn't indicate whether there's any delay or crossover for the sub outputs and it doesn't say whether the USB driver is only 2CH or has a MCH mixer. I was a more interested in the new m108 product as a MCH volume control. I only showed the m905 because i think the remote is really cool and it can also be used with the new m105.

I do think the "x-feed" DSP for the headphone HRTF effect is a really cool feature for headphone listening.

Grace isn't the only pro company which recognizes the need to monitor with multiple subs. Reading the Avocet manual for that monster MCH controller is like reading a Floyd Toole book on subwoofers. The avocet also has subwoofer outs. It just looks so clumsy and ugly. I couldn't stomach something like that in my room.

It looks like the EMM labs switchman is now out of production (only 6CH). That's a shame since it was a universally loved product. The new emm labs 2CH pre can be daisy chained for a MCH configuration, but the cost would get pretty ridiculous with 8CH. The Pass Labs xp30 can do the same thing for even more money.

You would think with the push toward immersive sound (eg. atmos), there would be many more options available. If the Merging NADAC had a proper USB input, I'd be all over it. I'm not interested in hitting that AES67 barbed wire first. Let someone else do it.

 

[stephen_volker]

Hi there,

I think I am confused by the thread. I am currently running my VAC Signature Mk. II with 2 pre outs that I am using with the towers and 2 pre outs for JL Fathom subs being run stereo. Is this what you are looking to do?

 

[dallasjustice]

Hi there,

I think I am confused by the thread. I am currently running my VAC Signature Mk. II with 2 pre outs that I am using with the towers and 2 pre outs for JL Fathom subs being run stereo. Is this what you are looking to do?

No. I have a 6 channel system. There are 6 discrete channels coming out of my DAC (Lynx Hilo). Four of those channels go to subs and then R/L. I am looking for a component which can volume control at least 6 channels. I prefer something which could control up to 8 channels, since I will likely add a couple of rear surround speakers later on.

 

[stephen_volker]

Ahhh. OK! Would this not be the job for a high end surround processor?

 

[stephen_volker]

Sorry for my ignorance. Your setup is more difficult than mine!

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Ahhh. OK! Would this not be the job for a high end surround processor?

Maybe. But, I am a dedicated Mch music listener, and I have eliminated the Mch preamp-processor from my system entirely. Actually, Nial gave me the inspiration in some posts in some threads in another forum years ago. I am quite happy, and have been with this setup for a couple of years, a few inconveniences aside. It has been more than well worth it in sonic terms.

Like dallasjustice, I use JRiver in a 7.1 system. It is my only library and player tool. My DAC is an Exasound e28, which synchronizes with the volume control in JRiver, although I do not know how important that volume control integration is. I doubt it is significant. I am not clear on why he cannot just use the JRiver volume control or why he wants an analog volume control. My own personal goal is to get as much analog processing eliminated from my system as possible. Personally, I think properly designed, bit shifting digital volume controls are superior to most any analog volume control in terms of noise, tracking accuracy, etc. And, that is even well before the typical analog control's mechanical contacts start to get dirty.

 

[dallasjustice]

Maybe. But, I am a dedicated Mch music listener, and I have eliminated the Mch preamp-processor from my system entirely. Actually, Nial gave me the inspiration in some posts in some threads in another forum years ago. I am quite happy, and have been with this setup for a couple of years, a few inconveniences aside. It has been more than well worth it in sonic terms.

Like dallasjustice, I use JRiver in a 7.1 system. It is my only library and player tool. My DAC is an Exasound e28, which synchronizes with the volume control in JRiver, although I do not know how important that volume control integration is. I doubt it is significant. I am not clear on why he cannot just use the JRiver volume control or why he wants an analog volume control. My own personal goal is to get as much analog processing eliminated from my system as possible. Personally, I think properly designed, bit shifting digital volume controls are superior to most any analog volume control in terms of noise, tracking accuracy, etc. And, that is even well before the typical analog control's mechanical contacts start to get dirty.

I have been using jriver volume control as well. I think digital volume control is okay, if properly setup. There are a variety of reasons I would prefer to have volume control inside a component. This isn't a thread about what's better; digital or analog volume control. To me, it's more safety/convenience driving this preference toward component volume control. Notice, I say component volume control. I don't say analog volume control. I'm fine with digital volume control.

The exa is fine, but doesn't function well with the software I use. I think we've talked about that before. It can't do a synchronous in/out. I know you use DIRAC LIVE and it has a method for synchronizing two different clox in/out. But Acourate does not and Audiolense has something to compensate, but I don't really trust it. It's not ideal.

We can go through the list of MCH DACs, I've seen them all and none of them work, other than pro gear. The problem with pro gear is that it's designed for pro environment. So, it's all mixers. I'm okay with looking at a mixer. I think they look cool and I have learned how to use one. But I don't want my wife to get anywhere near one.

Believe it or not, I've blown a few drivers over the years. Yes, it's all my fault and I must be the dumbest audiophile on the planet. Looking at a huge mixer which interfaces with at least two additional pieces of software and multiple ASIO drivers before sending several 15hz-24khz logsweeps, one may find that a lot CAN go wrong. When it does go wrong, it's a huge PITA.

It may be the case that I do as Nyal suggested (offline) and just find some inline resistors to protect myself when I do the sweeps. Then I can use digital volume control for normal listening.

Michael.

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

No. I have a 6 channel system. There are 6 discrete channels coming out of my DAC (Lynx Hilo). Four of those channels go to subs and then R/L. I am looking for a component which can volume control at least 6 channels. I prefer something which could control up to 8 channels, since I will likely add a couple of rear surround speakers later on.

I know how dedicated you are to your multi-subwoofer architecture. I also understand that your DAC is limited to 8 channels. BUT, you might be doing an eventual shift to Mch a substantial disservice by ignoring the importance of the center channel. Obviously, on video material, the center carries most of the dialogue. It does that better with a true center speaker. Even so, as a huge Mch music fan, I can tell you that the center channel is quite important. Phantom imagining of the center is several steps down IMHO from having a true center channel. Phantom imaging is not terrible, but with music, the center channel provides not just a better "anchor" to the image center, it also provides better resolution and image depth in that region of high sensitivity where both ears are focused.

The ideal, of course, is to have a center channel identical to the main LR pair. But, I am quite happy using a similaly voiced (same mfr. and DSP EQ full range target curve), but horizontal center channel. Mine happens to be over my video monitor. I find that better sounding and worthwhile vs. no center in comparative listening. I would not be without it.

 

[Barry]

To everyone, it would helpful to me, and maybe the group, if you folks could explain your objective, what you're actually trying to do here with multiple subs (Yes, I have read Geddes et al.). I understand that digital FIR filters will give you both flat frequency response and linear phase relative to your mains, but also, that adding subs can smooth frequency response too. Since every room is different, it would help us to understand this in practice - both objectively (with numbers e.g. dB, phase, ms ) and ultimately subjectively (what you're listening for).

-- When using FIR EQ, why would you add more subs if you already have flat frequency response and linear phase? Is there a sonic tradeoff in your opinion between more subs v. more digital EQ?
- For your subs, what amount of measurable group delay relative to your mains in ms are you targeting? What have you been able to achieve?
- At what ms level does group delay for your subs in your room become audible relative to your mains and at what frequencies?

If I'm asking the wrong questions, please enlighten me.

 

[dallasjustice]

Mark Levinson's brand new no.526.
http://m.news.harman.com/releases/h...featuring-high-resolution-dac-and-phono-stage

It has sub outs and crossover. It also has digital ins (including Ethernet) with a nice ESS SABRE DAC.

It would not work for my setup but it's great that Levinson is working to properly incorporate subs into their systems.

 

[dallasjustice]

Volume control

Nice remote! I can control many basic functions in Jriver by assigning keystrokes to the various buttons/wheels. It works great and volume control is really sweet. It's not wireless but I've given up on wireless solutions.