Ayre Acoustics QX-5 Twenty – The Digital Hub

[GrubTheHedgehog]

I think it is the USB ports on my PC motherboard causing the WASAPI issue. If I swap my usb devices around and change ports it works again.

[audiom3]

I finally received my QX-5 after about 9 weeks. I have a KX and VX-5 as well. I have to admit though, on first listen last night and more listening this morning, I wasn't too thrilled with the sound quality. So I decided to switch the (USB) mode to Measurement and I much prefer it over music. So I'm curious what all of you guys prefer when listening to yours? 

[CG]

I think that in Windows 10 and beyond there is a long standing affect that occasionally looks for an already assigned COM port in the wrong place.  If I recall, there's some COM port managers available for download that let you adjust this.

 

But, I am hardly a Windows expert.

[Axiom05]

9 minutes ago, audiom3 said:

So I decided to switch the (USB) mode to Measurement and I much prefer it over music. So I'm curious what all of you guys prefer when listening to yours? 

I also prefer the Measure filter. I find the high frequency loss due to the early roll-off of the Music filter too noticeable on 44.1/48KHz sampling rates. With the Music filter it was always obvious when I was listening to a CD rip, High Res files sounded much "brighter" and less dull. Many of my best sounding classical CD rips lost their "sparkle" until I switched to the Measure filter.

[audiom3]

Just now, Axiom05 said:

I also prefer the Measure filter. I find the high frequency loss due to the early roll-off of the Music filter too noticeable on 44.1/48KHz sampling rates. With the Music filter it was always obvious when I was listening to a CD rip, High Res files sounded much "brighter" and less dull. Many of my best sounding classical CD rips lost their "sparkle" until I switched to the Measure filter.

Precisely. I was thinking the exact same thing but I have many dsf rips. They sounded worlds better than any 44.1kHz rips. Thank you very much for your feedback! And glad I'm not alone. 

[CG]

6 minutes ago, audiom3 said:

I finally received my QX-5 after about 9 weeks. I have a KX and VX-5 as well. I have to admit though, on first listen last night and more listening this morning, I wasn't too thrilled with the sound quality. So I decided to switch the (USB) mode to Measurement and I much prefer it over music. So I'm curious what all of you guys prefer when listening to yours? 

 

I'll give you the short version.

 

We use a QB-9 Twenty, which is fundamentally very similar to the QX-5.  The big difference is that it is limited to a single USB input.  No SPDIF, no Ethernet, and so on.  Of course, there's other detail differences which certainly matter, but most people who have used both the QB-9 Twenty and the QX-5 Twenty find them to sound similar.  Just far less flexibility with the QB-9. 

 

We find the Listen position to be superior here.  We being my wife and I.

 

But, here's the thing...  We (OK, this part was on me) also found that almost every USB driven DAC, Ayre included, suffers from various common mode current and ground loop limitations.  Some are obviously better than others, with Ayre being better.  It's somewhat inherent to most digital connections.  This limitation can make the sound to appear less transparent, for lack of a better term.  The solution for us was USB isolation.  And, an AC filter of the right kind of the AC input to the DAC.  It sounds a bunch better to us.

 

I'd surmise - which means I am guessing - that since the Measurement mode has more high frequency content because of the filter shape, it might sound more transparent.  Kinda like turning up the treble a bit.  But, again, that's just a guess on my part.

 

A little OT, but maybe not...  On this iMac, I use an AQ Cobalt DragonFly DAC connected to some powered Emotiva monitors that are no longer made.  Sadly.  It sounded OK in the normal way you'd set it up - Cobalt plugged into an USB port, then to the powered speakers.  But, when I added a proper USB isolator between the iMac and the Cobalt, the performance shot up in a way I was very surprised at.  In summary, everything about the sonic presentation was much clearer.  Not as good as the big rig with the QB-9 that's in the living room, but it morphed into something that's really enjoyable to listen to.  Is that the kind of thing you're describing?

 

 

[audiom3]

@CGthank you and well said. I know my QX-5 still has a long ways to go on break-in. But even with the measurement filter, I'm hearing a little less mid treble openness than I'm used to. I listen to some pretty heavy stuff at times, and the guitar distortion is a bit subdued in that area. It's also just a tad bloated... The highs extend beautifully, and the bass depth is noticeably deeper/better than my PC DAC (Codex) that I was using for the past few months while waiting. Hopefully, those frequency ranges will open up a bit with break-in. Think I'll loop some music in Roon and leave the QX on for several days. 

[CG]

For anybody who likes measurements, here's one.

 

This is my lab bench test set-up.  I'm using a Topping D10S DAC for the source.  The A-D conveyer is an E1DA Cosmos.  These both use ESS converter chips and you can see how low the harmonic distortion is.  They both connect to the computer controlling the system through USB connections.  

 

I won't go through all the permutations of what I tried.  The permutations just gave variations on this performance.  That even included using a separate computer on a separate AC outlet and breaker for the A-D.  It was different, just not much better.  Certainly, a fully balanced audio connection system would be better.  But, this just shows what happens when you add a USB isolation device in line with the USB connection to the DAC.

 

Guess which plot is with the isolator and which one is without.  No other changes.

 

 

 

[CG]

It occurred to me that the previous graph might get misinterpreted.  After all, it shows the ratio of, umm, junk to a single tone at full scale from the DAC.  Nobody ever listens to a single tone at full scale.  It's boring, maybe damaging to the loudspeakers, and often painful.

 

So, this is the noise floor alone of the previous set-up.  No tones being fed to the DAC.  You'd get this as the noise floor.  With music, it'll vary some, if you compare the two plots.  Again, no two systems will behave exactly like this.

 

Most of the junk is at -100 dB or so.  That's pretty low, right?  Well, yes and no.  That's -100 dB relative to a full scale tone coming out of your DAC.  Most music files aren't really full scale - queue the dynamic range wars - and the total power of music is the sum of all the individual tones making it up.  Can't go above full scale for the total power.

 

So, while the total power might be full scale, the notes of each instrument aren't.  So, the reference line of the notes you want to hear is then well below that 0 dB line.  So, maybe, we're talking about -80 dB or even worse.  These are all signals that aren't really correlated to the music, so any masking they cause isn't musical in nature.

 

The difference at the low frequencies is also misleading.  Without the isolator, the spectrum below about 200 Hz or so "breathes" up and down, like the tide coming in and going out.  So, what you see in a single picture depends on when you happen to take the capture.  I guess I could've/should've captured the peak rather than the average to show the full effects.  ("Wait till you see the full effect with the hump." - J. Clouseau, 1976)

 

[CG]

These two plots might be better for understanding.  These were made using the great MultiTone software from Paul Kanevsky.  Same hardware as before, exactly.  The total power of all the tones is equal to full scale out of the DAC.  Music would be less, depending on where you look in the spectrum.  (Maybe I should've used a "pink" weighting filter.)

 

Again, guess which one has the USB isolator in place.

 

OK, I'm done hijacking the original point of this thread.  Sorry to those who were bored or otherwise annoyed!

 

 

[scottsol]

On 5/13/2023 at 11:22 AM, audiom3 said:

@CGthank you and well said. I know my QX-5 still has a long ways to go on break-in…. Think I'll loop some music in Roon and leave the QX on for several days. 

Several days isn’t close to enough.

[audiom3]

1 minute ago, scottsol said:

Several days isn’t close to enough.

Yeah, I forgot to update that I really have no complaints now.   It took a good 3-4 days of continual use to really open up that frequency range.  Sounding great now!  Thanks for the post.

[audiom3]

Having a bit of an issue with the implementation of the trigger via my KX-5/QX-5.  I have tried to 'program' the input in the KX-5 telling it that a QX-5 is on that input, but it will not power it on when I select that input.  If I shut down the system, it powers down my VX-5/QX-5 fine though.  Is there a trick to getting my KX-5 to power on the QX-5 when the proper input is selected and then power it down when I select a different input (ie. record player)?  I have used a daisy chain approach with the phone cable as well as the 2nd output of the KX-5 (one lead to my VX and the other to my QX) and it was no different.  One thing I have not tried is a KX -> QX -> VX daisy chain.  I guess I can try that but it seems the issue lies somewhere else.  Thanks.

[Axiom05]

2 hours ago, audiom3 said:

Having a bit of an issue with the implementation of the trigger via my KX-5/QX-5.  I have tried to 'program' the input in the KX-5 telling it that a QX-5 is on that input, but it will not power it on when I select that input.  If I shut down the system, it powers down my VX-5/QX-5 fine though.  Is there a trick to getting my KX-5 to power on the QX-5 when the proper input is selected and then power it down when I select a different input (ie. record player)?  I have used a daisy chain approach with the phone cable as well as the 2nd output of the KX-5 (one lead to my VX and the other to my QX) and it was no different.  One thing I have not tried is a KX -> QX -> VX daisy chain.  I guess I can try that but it seems the issue lies somewhere else. 

My Ayrelink is setup as follows: QX-5 > KX-5 > VX-5. I did not think that the power-up/down of components worked the way you're trying to do things. The way mine works is that you power on a source, e.g., QX-5, and that will in turn power up the KX-5 and VX-5. If you have multiple sources, the KX-5 will automatically select the correct input for the source that  was powered-on. To shut the whole system down you need to hold down the KX-5 power button for five seconds. Just switching sources will not shut the previous source down (unless there's something that I'm not aware of).

[Axiom05]

Is anyone running their QX-5/20 directly into a power amp and using the digital volume control, any impressions on sound quality vs using a preamp? I tried connecting my QX-5/20 directly to my VX-5/20 and it definitely sounds "different" but I can't say whether it is truer to the source than going through my KX-5/20. I need to spend more time with this configuration but was wondering if anyone else has given this a try and formed an opinion.

[Tecnik1]

Yes I use the QX5 currently direct to my Accuphase A65 previous pre amps used Accuphase 3800 and Audio Research Ref3, the QX 5 direct to me gives a more transparent sound but won’t go has clear and loud as with the pre amps. With normal listening levels for me between 70and 80 db the direct connection sounds great but with the above mentioned pre amps the sound is better. I prefer a great pre and am looking into the Accuphase 3900. 

[GrubTheHedgehog]

On 5/13/2023 at 1:57 PM, CG said:

These two plots might be better for understanding.  These were made using the great MultiTone software from Paul Kanevsky.  Same hardware as before, exactly.  The total power of all the tones is equal to full scale out of the DAC.  Music would be less, depending on where you look in the spectrum.  (Maybe I should've used a "pink" weighting filter.)

 

Again, guess which one has the USB isolator in place.

 

OK, I'm done hijacking the original point of this thread.  Sorry to those who were bored or otherwise annoyed!

 

 

What isolator device are you using exactly?

[GrubTheHedgehog]

Has anyone tried an optical ethernet isolator/filter with QX-5? Asking for a friend looking for an inexpensive tweak to his network. He has audiophile grade ethernet from his modem but no other network optimizations. 

[GrubTheHedgehog]

On 6/6/2023 at 6:24 AM, Axiom05 said:

Is anyone running their QX-5/20 directly into a power amp and using the digital volume control, any impressions on sound quality vs using a preamp? I tried connecting my QX-5/20 directly to my VX-5/20 and it definitely sounds "different" but I can't say whether it is truer to the source than going through my KX-5/20. I need to spend more time with this configuration but was wondering if anyone else has given this a try and formed an opinion.

I tested pretty extensively and into pre-amp is much better than direct. The KX-5 Twenty has much better volume control than what is on board the QX-5. No contest. Of course, you need to make sure all cabling and power conditioning for all those components are up to par.

[Mercman]

3 hours ago, GrubTheHedgehog said:

I tested pretty extensively and into pre-amp is much better than direct. The KX-5 Twenty has much better volume control than what is on board the QX-5. No contest. Of course, you need to make sure all cabling and power conditioning for all those components are up to par.

I agree with GrubHedgehog. My QX-5 sounds better with the KX-R preamp than direct to the amps.

[CG]

5 hours ago, GrubTheHedgehog said:

What isolator device are you using exactly?

 

I own three different types, a Topping HS02, one I built myself, and a Wavelength Audio USB Spacelator.  They all measure very similarly, but they do not sound the same.  

 

I use the USB Spacelator on the "big" audio system in the living room because it sounds the best of the bunch.  To me, anyway.  That's the system with the QB-9 Twenty.

 

The units I built get used with this desktop computer into an AQ Dragonfly Cobalt and some powered Emotiva monitors as well as in the workbench test set-up shown in the plots.  The remainder of the units I built that were, ahh, surplus I gave away to friends.

 

If you're inclined to argue about measurements versus sound and bias, please don't bother.  If anything, I have a bias in favor of my own design, for what should be obvious reasons.  But, I find that being honest with myself is valuable to me and I prefer the sound of the USB Spacelator by more than enough to keep it where it is.  But, to me, any of the three sound much better than no isolator at all.

[audiom3]

On 7/5/2023 at 11:41 PM, GrubTheHedgehog said:

Has anyone tried an optical ethernet isolator/filter with QX-5? Asking for a friend looking for an inexpensive tweak to his network. He has audiophile grade ethernet from his modem but no other network optimizations. 

When I was experimenting, just about any FMC and generic optical cable improved my system. So much so that I converted my entire LAN to fiber optics a few years back. I only utilize Finisar transceivers and Corning SMF-28 cabling. It's a very large rabbit hole that he's about to dive into. But the ride was and still is fun. 

[GrubTheHedgehog]

2 minutes ago, audiom3 said:

When I was experimenting, just about any FMC and generic optical cable improved my system. So much so that I converted my entire LAN to fiber optics a few years back. I only utilize Finisar transceivers and Corning SMF-28 cabling. It's a very large rabbit hole that he's about to dive into. But the ride was and still is fun. 

The Finistar is an upcharge on the Sonore I’m looking at. Is it worth it?

[GrubTheHedgehog]

4 minutes ago, audiom3 said:

When I was experimenting, just about any FMC and generic optical cable improved my system. So much so that I converted my entire LAN to fiber optics a few years back. I only utilize Finisar transceivers and Corning SMF-28 cabling. It's a very large rabbit hole that he's about to dive into. But the ride was and still is fun. 

Which Finisar? Do you have a model #?
 

This is the kit I’m looking at:

 

https://www.smallgreencomputer.com/collections/systemoptique/products/opticalmodule-deluxe

[audiom3]

Just now, GrubTheHedgehog said:

The Finistar is an upcharge on the Sonore I’m looking at. Is it worth it?

Well thats a tough question to answer. But for me, yes. But I bought 1471 modules instead of the over-priced 1475s. You can find 1471s used But be sure you buy from an IT company with tons of feedback if you go the used route. 

 

Also, in order to get 10G transceivers to work, there are some tricks involved. With a Lumin streamer, they won't work at all either. So I use a 1G transceiver in it with a 1471 on the sending end (switch).