Lush^2 - Share your configuration experiences

[zettelsm]

 

13 hours ago, John Haines said:

Just 2 questions as to you users of the Lush^2

Many appear to be using it with the Uptone Regen device, (I do own the Amber & the ISO Regens with LPS 1.2)

As the recent seems very much to using with the Regen, & mainly ‘debating’ whether ‘before or after’ is preferred, (with the consensus seeming to be ‘after’ which is of course different as to it’s ‘normal’ position) with apparently some othe cable, (or connector) going ‘to’ the Regen. 

Why are you actually using the Regen?

On any other cable thread such is normally not mentioned. 

But my MAIN question is to anyone using the Lush^2 purely straight to their DAC, no Regen. 

There must surely be a lot of people using the cable in this manner. 

Can comment as to the cable used in this, (more ‘normal’) way??

 

I’m using the Lush^2 directly to my DAC. Well, more correctly I am using it from Innuos Zenith server directly to a Chord Blu MK II CD player/M-scaler, which in turn feeds my DAC (via dual BNC coax). The Chord Blu Mk II is not a filter or isolation device, nor a reclocker or other auxiliary device. It is a combination CD player and FPGA upsampler. For all intents and purposes it is an extension of my DAC.

 

If you scan back through this thread and look for my avatar in the upper left corner of my posts, you can read my impressions of the Lush^2 USB cable in various configurations. 

 

Hope this helps, John.

 

Steve Z

[manisandher]

12 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

 

OK, I'll bite.

 

What is this? A Blaxius^2...???

 

Mani

[Jiffi32]

1 hour ago, manisandher said:

 

OK, I'll bite.

 

What is this? A Blaxius^2...???

 

Mani

Looks like it!

 

@PeterSt did I sow this seed when I asked if you could do a shielded blaxius? i'm happy to be a guinea pig and try the first pair, as a pair of Blaxius is currently working brilliantly between my Dave and Blu2

[John Haines]

 

Just a thought.

In that you already have a nice ‘sprouting’ of leads coming out, have you ever considered adding to the colourful display & bringing out both voltage leads???

To 2 small connectors that most people would leave connected, but available to be connected to non computer sourced power.

Perhaps incidentally, my DAC needs the +- all the time, not just initially.

IF the lines were ‘available’, owners could have the choice to use such as the LPS 1.2 to have, 

‘cleaner power’. 

That is also, a long way of saying, in your experience, what degradation is there from having the power directly from a PC/ laptop?

I have no doubt that you have the power & signal sides effectively isolated. 

As I say, ‘just a thought’

Regards to all. 

 

 

 

[PeterSt]

3 hours ago, John Haines said:

have you ever considered adding to the colourful display & bringing out both voltage leads???

 

John, it is a good thought. This subject was touched one or two pages back (thus recently), but IIRC this was without thinking of the external power possibility. My current and initial answer : I don't know.

 

Outside of the extra mess in there, we must wonder what it causes. Btw extra mess is : have both ground and plus cut, lead out 4 more wires for it (source gnd/+ and target gnd/+) and provide the possibility to leave out the + connection. Because mind you, that is what would be required when no LPS 1.2 etc. is involved. In that case one would need the ground and not the +. Or, one my like to just use the gnd/+ as is, thus both connected (for example because at the target end no + is used anyway). Or as you suggest, connect the LPS to both gnd/+ of the target (not only the +, that wouldn't work). And then of course it can't be random "wires" with breadboard connections, but it should be double pole connectors which connect to that LPS, without the possibility of accidentally switch polarity. But of course this connector can't be random because many people won't be able to use it, plus it must suit the direct connection from source to target if one doesn't want to change things.

I know, people like to have nests and piles of USB boxes and connections, but it is getting worse and worse.

 

But this is all outside of what it may cause ...

 

One of the explicit thoughts in the Lush^1 design is the interaction between the possibly used USB voltage and not using it. This, while the ground is always required for "handshake" purposes (thus, also if the target does not use the USB 5V). Now, the topology of a USB cable is such that the data+/data- wires are not (to be) disturbed by the both power wires (gnd /+). At least that is what cable makers hope while I can easily tell you that this is a big mess in itself. This is also how niche cable makers (say like Phasure by now) also "just" do something and if it works and sounds good, it is OK for them (obviously). Meanwhile though, most of these cables don't meet highspeed (480Mbs) connections. Btw, I am talking about USB2 only because USB3 does not exist anyway for DACs, as far as I can tell.

 

The power wires imply a field around them (the data wires do too) and they are thus likely to influence the data wires (and thus the other way around, but less severe). Point now is that when this has all been set up to meed impedance requirements, they readily fail (to a smaller or larger degree depending on the cable) when USB 5V it not used. So how to make this cable ? -> take into account both situations as good as possible. But think of it explicitly instead of thinking that it probably won't matter. Point again here is : we are talking - as usual - in domains of not measureable matter, unless an eye diagram spec is met. If that is OK, it is fine. And it is. But not for audio, ... ehm ... see the Lush^2. It doesn't even use or utilize implied properties. It works with the shields ...

 

To make a long story longer, I wouldn't mess with the set up of the power wires because you will be influencing the consistent setup of the data wires. So just envision that part of the cable as a whole now needs to be interrupted (lead out the both power wires) and in that part all is different. There will be a field again (Lush^2 proving that fields are matter to deal with) and this field will be out of our control. It will depend on how the external wires are guided and for example them laying parallel to the cable will imply another field than vertically, bend, and re-enter vertically.

It would imply the redesign and testing of the whole cable and then with some box on top of it which can't move for its position, so what once has been tested and approved, won't change.

So, ...

 

The very short answer could have been : The Lush^2 is based upon the original Lush and this is approved by by now thousands. We should not try to alter any single base property which is about the design in itself. The thinking here is : it now should be possible to find a configuration which exhibits the same (SQ) behavior as the original Lush and next it can only be for the better (but depending on the configuration). Imagine the other way around : create a completely new cable, add some reptile tentacles implying 10k+ possibilities and hope that a few in there imply good sound ?

No.

 

Peter

 

[John Haines]

Hi Peter, 

That would probably have to be the most technically considered & thoughtfully reasoned replies ever provided. (Top 3??)

’Deep’ but able to be understood by all. 

I can say, totally ‘understood’. 

Thank you for your time to even ‘bother’ with this ‘strange idea’. 

 

[MM]

Peter - a big thank you

 

This cable has had a profound impact on my system.   Much more than the Lush v1 (which I really liked!).   How is it possible?   Initially the sound was much sweeter/softer - nice but maybe a bit closed in.  Too soft (?) and I was a bit disappointed.  After (quite a lot!) of burning in it has started to open up.  The sweetness is still there but I now have transparency and even more noticeably I have a much greater sense of tangibility - a 3D sound experience!.  If it was just tonality then I would blame the change on myself getting used to the new sound.  But the change is more than that... The type of change that when you are listening to a piece of music you know so well you are suddenly jolted by something new - not so much detail but a new dynamism/coherence/tangibility.  

 

This is a strange hobby - my last big upgrade was from Uptone LPS1 to LPS1.2 and that was a noticeable change too...  But not as big as Lush 2.

 

PS I’m running the default configuration and it sounds great.  I daren’t go down the rabbit hole of changing anything..

 

 

[PeterSt]

13 minutes ago, MM said:

Peter - a big thank you

 

Haha, nice !

Allow me a small question :

 

14 minutes ago, MM said:

I’m running the default configuration and it sounds great.

 

Which default configuration would that be ? I mean, I can't see from your nick (MM) who you are and now I (we all) also don't know that config (it now changed 2 times, so the Lush^2 has been shipped with 3 different pre-set configs).

 

Regards,

Peter

[Abtr]

2 hours ago, PeterSt said:

...

I wouldn't mess with the set up of the power wires because you will be influencing the consistent setup of the data wires.

...

Hi Peter,
Are you saying that disconnecting the 5V power may impair the sonic properties of the Lush^2? Would a DAC that doesn't use 5V USB power (thus effectively disconnecting  the 5V power from the Lush^2) influence data transmission quality?

[PeterSt]

19 minutes ago, Abtr said:

Are you saying that disconnecting the 5V power may impair the sonic properties of the Lush^2?

 

Abtr, no, that is not what I am saying at all. But I recall heavy confusion on the very same subject with the Lush^1 and I was thinking about that when writing that text a few hours back ...

What I am saying is exactly the other way around : the Lush(^2) has been made independent from the current use through the voltage wires. The internal shielding takes care of this (already in the original Lush which is embedded in the Lush^2).

 

Maybe it helps if I say that back at the time (about 18 months ago) when the original Lush was developed, half of the NOS1a DAC owners did not use the USB power, while the other half did because they had already upgraded to NOS1a/G3 version, which uses a USB isolator inside and which uses the USB power. Besides that, in the G3 the internal isolator can be bypassed so suddenly no USB power is used. Obviously the Lush had to be applicable for all those customers in the first place (well, that's my idea about it).

 

More "proof" of this can be found in the Clairixa USB cable (this should be the best 90 Ohm compliant cable ever), which was shipped with tabs people could stick on the 5V pad in the A and/or B connector.

 

  

 

So the Clairixa (pictures above) was (still is) NOT made "5V proof". But people could find out themselves whether cutting off the 5V would help for the better.

 

 

[PeterSt]

16 hours ago, manisandher said:

On 10/12/2018 at 8:12 AM, PeterSt said:

 

 

OK, I'll bite.

 

What is this? A Blaxius^2...???

 

Mani

 

  

 

So I'm afraid it is. Don't look at the stains. These are my own first prototype.

 

  

 

Again with A and B side (use in the direction from A to B) and with latest Lush^2 configuration as a first attempt.

 

[PeterSt]

 

 

17 hours ago, Jiffi32 said:

@PeterSt did I sow this seed when I asked if you could do a shielded blaxius? i'm happy to be a guinea pig and try the first pair, as a pair of Blaxius is currently working brilliantly between my Dave and Blu2

 

You did for 50%. After you an other person asked for the very same (also M-Scaler) and initially I responded similar (which was in the whereabouts of the Blaxius being a proven cable etc. etc.). But then I thought of something quite else ...

 

I envisioned that - while the guinea pig was on the offer block (that not being you now) - I possibly could create a normal Interlink just the same, meaning, an analogue one (as we know the Blaxius is an analogue cable with (6 GHz) digital capability). I envisioned that while digital should not matter theoretically but does, the analogue Interlink would vastly matter - at least from theory again. But it was worse ...

 

The IC for both the digital application (like for your M-Scaler) as well as the analogue application (in use by a couple of 100 customers, including myself) would be a most very strange one regarding the shields IF I could manage to interrupt the original shield just the same and replace it with one or two others, or add the two others, or ... make any of the again 1000s of combinations. Why ?

 

Why ?!?

Because the shield here is the ground as well !

 

And there I got enthusiastic.

 

So the Blaxius^2, be it in use for digital or for analogue, is a to-tal-ly different application than the Lush^2. Its control is the same though (seen by the connection wires) but the electrical behavior would be right up to "dangerous".

 

Regarding the Lush^2, over here we contemplated current flow over the shield(s) and how that would be diminishable or at least not be of direct influence (I never worked that out but it is my assumption). For the Blaxius^2 this is thus totally different as current does flow directly over the shield. Or not, when you just don't connect it for the "other two". Now it behaves as a real shield - maybe even better when the two additional are connected to one side only.

Never leave them all unconnected at one side, because you'll have no ground return.

 

And so I/we designed an Interlink from pure theory, and a very strange theory at it. I say "/we" because it requires sheer sowing capabilities to even start thinking about this. If you see what's in there to let it happen ... no way I could have done it / thought of how to do it. This would make the cable non-existent to begin with.

And yes, it took 10 days of buying and trying things. Even a pair of gardening gloves is part of our tools now.

 

Don't laugh; under way, the first one of the IC being ready, I tried whether it would work in the first place (why wouldn't it, but why not try it before the second, knowing that making one cable of this (3m) length takes a day). So I replaced one of the Blaxius with this first Blaxius^2 and both me and the person wit raw hands (gardening gloves were not available yet) heard an easy difference between the left and right speaker, both playing at the same time.

And then to think that people exist who still think that an Interlink can't make a difference and shoe-laces are fine as it is. OK, at least it is so that for an analogue cable it is allowed to have differences.

 

Last night I played with both the new Blaxius^2 and right in the first track I heard a most profound thing I never heard before. It was the resonating interaction a synthesizer can do with two adjacent low frequencies. The thing I heard there were "beats" (scroll to the bottom), maybe even better explained by my own test and text from 2013 :

 

I have set up one of my synthesisers in order to find the merits of this "beating" and in the end I succeeded in mimicking the behavior easily; It requires two fairly low frequencies to be close to each other (and not too low either because the beat can't be heard then) and I found as example 65Hz and 70Hz to work very well. When these are played together, in mid air (thus not in electronics) these frequencies "beat" and the result is an estimated 4Hz of "tone". BUT : (continue here - My Definition of Ambience).

So, this was the very first occurring. I guess this is about again more energy in the bass but it should merely be about more "control" as such. So if the two frequencies are not sufficiently distinct, the beating can not happen.

 

Peter

 

PS: The first official Blaxius^2 digital interlink (50cm) to go out soon :

 

 

 

 

 

[PeterSt]

On 10/11/2018 at 3:08 PM, PeterSt said:

My next message on this issue should be about the product being delivered and production is proceeding.

 

Dear people, this is today. So with a by now small backlog ...

[AmusedToD]

Received my Lush^2 today, thank you @PeterSt for the speedy delivery and you were right regarding UPS

 

Out of the box the Lush^2 simply annihilated the Chord C-USB cable I was temporarily using. You know when you experience the "night and day" difference in audio equipment. This was such experience.

 

It is supremely musical with a wonderful, lush soundstage, seductive midrange, plenty of bass and excellent extension. However, the bass is still a bit bloated and there is a tiny bit of grain, but I expect these initial shortcomings to disappear after a proper burn in. 

 

I am using the default configuration as shipped by Peter, I expect the consensus here is that it sounds the best, right?

[elan120]

On 10/13/2018 at 6:30 AM, PeterSt said:

 

 

 

You did for 50%. After you an other person asked for the very same (also M-Scaler) and initially I responded similar (which was in the whereabouts of the Blaxius being a proven cable etc. etc.). But then I thought of something quite else ...

 

I envisioned that - while the guinea pig was on the offer block (that not being you now) - I possibly could create a normal Interlink just the same, meaning, an analogue one (as we know the Blaxius is an analogue cable with (6 GHz) digital capability). I envisioned that while digital should not matter theoretically but does, the analogue Interlink would vastly matter - at least from theory again. But it was worse ...

 

The IC for both the digital application (like for your M-Scaler) as well as the analogue application (in use by a couple of 100 customers, including myself) would be a most very strange one regarding the shields IF I could manage to interrupt the original shield just the same and replace it with one or two others, or add the two others, or ... make any of the again 1000s of combinations. Why ?

 

Why ?!?

Because the shield here is the ground as well !

 

And there I got enthusiastic.

 

So the Blaxius^2, be it in use for digital or for analogue, is a to-tal-ly different application than the Lush^2. Its control is the same though (seen by the connection wires) but the electrical behavior would be right up to "dangerous".

 

Regarding the Lush^2, over here we contemplated current flow over the shield(s) and how that would be diminishable or at least not be of direct influence (I never worked that out but it is my assumption). For the Blaxius^2 this is thus totally different as current does flow directly over the shield. Or not, when you just don't connect it for the "other two". Now it behaves as a real shield - maybe even better when the two additional are connected to one side only.

Never leave them all unconnected at one side, because you'll have no ground return.

 

And so I/we designed an Interlink from pure theory, and a very strange theory at it. I say "/we" because it requires sheer sowing capabilities to even start thinking about this. If you see what's in there to let it happen ... no way I could have done it / thought of how to do it. This would make the cable non-existent to begin with.

And yes, it took 10 days of buying and trying things. Even a pair of gardening gloves is part of our tools now.

 

Don't laugh; under way, the first one of the IC being ready, I tried whether it would work in the first place (why wouldn't it, but why not try it before the second, knowing that making one cable of this (3m) length takes a day). So I replaced one of the Blaxius with this first Blaxius^2 and both me and the person wit raw hands (gardening gloves were not available yet) heard an easy difference between the left and right speaker, both playing at the same time.

And then to think that people exist who still think that an Interlink can't make a difference and shoe-laces are fine as it is. OK, at least it is so that for an analogue cable it is allowed to have differences.

 

Last night I played with both the new Blaxius^2 and right in the first track I heard a most profound thing I never heard before. It was the resonating interaction a synthesizer can do with two adjacent low frequencies. The thing I heard there were "beats" (scroll to the bottom), maybe even better explained by my own test and text from 2013 :

 

I have set up one of my synthesisers in order to find the merits of this "beating" and in the end I succeeded in mimicking the behavior easily; It requires two fairly low frequencies to be close to each other (and not too low either because the beat can't be heard then) and I found as example 65Hz and 70Hz to work very well. When these are played together, in mid air (thus not in electronics) these frequencies "beat" and the result is an estimated 4Hz of "tone". BUT : (continue here - My Definition of Ambience).

So, this was the very first occurring. I guess this is about again more energy in the bass but it should merely be about more "control" as such. So if the two frequencies are not sufficiently distinct, the beating can not happen.

 

Peter

 

PS: The first official Blaxius^2 digital interlink (50cm) to go out soon :

 

 

 

 

 

Looking good Peter, will Blaxius^2 be available in 50ohm impedance as well?

[PeterSt]

Just now, elan120 said:

Looking good Peter, will Blaxius^2 be available in 50ohm impedance as well?

 

 

But the answer is No.

Well, of course it can be made all right, but the Blaxius is a "proven" cable and we can't put out a new one "just like that".

But may I ask,  what would you need the 50 Ohm impedance for ?

[elan120]

5 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

 

But the answer is No.

Well, of course it can be made all right, but the Blaxius is a "proven" cable and we can't put out a new one "just like that".

But may I ask,  what would you need the 50 Ohm impedance for ?

I would be using it to connect my reference clock to two external clocks, and they both setup to have 50 ohm impedance input.

[PeterSt]

2 minutes ago, elan120 said:

I would be using it to connect my reference clock to two external clocks

 

Ah, yes. I forgot that you guys also "do clocks" these days.

Hmm ...

 

I don't know whether we'll go off topic too much, but do you people have the real experience that different cables sounding different in this regard  (connect clock signals) ? I know the question may be daft, but I'm still asking.

 

Also, would it be really so that you'd connect the devices of concern over a reasonable length, like 50cm or more ?

 

Peter

[elan120]

1 minute ago, PeterSt said:

 

Ah, yes. I forgot that you guys also "do clocks" these days.

Hmm ...

 

I don't know whether we'll go off topic too much, but do you people have the real experience that different cables sounding different in this regard  (connect clock signals) ? I know the question may be daft, but I'm still asking.

 

Also, would it be really so that you'd connect the devices of concern over a reasonable length, like 50cm or more ?

 

Peter

Short answer is...yes, different cable in this application does present different outcome in my system.  I have some experience in comparing different cables, but not extensive, and very limited to the length.

 

Based on the success I have using two Lush^2 in my system, I am very much looking forward if you are able to come up with a 50 ohm impedance cable.

[Cornan]

2 hours ago, elan120 said:

Short answer is...yes, different cable in this application does present different outcome in my system.  I have some experience in comparing different cables, but not extensive, and very limited to the length.

 

Based on the success I have using two Lush^2 in my system, I am very much looking forward if you are able to come up with a 50 ohm impedance cable.

 

A tip for any coaxial cable is to make them as short as possible. I use 2 cm coaxial cables for best results. Also using twisted pair center core wires (like QED’s upper range) is highly recommended. 

[d_elm]

5 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Ah, yes. I forgot that you guys also "do clocks" these days.

Hmm ...

 

I don't know whether we'll go off topic too much, but do you people have the real experience that different cables sounding different in this regard  (connect clock signals) ? I know the question may be daft, but I'm still asking.

 

Also, would it be really so that you'd connect the devices of concern over a reasonable length, like 50cm or more ?

 

Peter

I have a 30cm RG400 clock cable, SMB connectors, that I added two layers of shielding to with both ends of the inner shielding connected to the RG400 outer shield and connectors, like a Lush^2 A:B-W-Y-R, B:B-W-R.  The result was poor bass and an overall thin sound.  I probably messed with the cable impedance.  I then removed the added shielding and added three shields on the RG400 to give A:W-Y-R, B:W-R.  That is much better than the previous attempt.  Clock cables do matter and I have proven to myself that I can make sound quality worse.

[PeterSt]

10 hours ago, d_elm said:

I have a 30cm RG400 clock cable, SMB connectors,

 

So yes, a first question would be what connectors people use.

The second I kind of implied already : this shouldn't be about enormous lengths while next any shielding effect should be "more minimal" *because* the shorter length.

And I tend to make traces on a PCB for "clock wires". haha.

 

?

[yellowblue]

Got my Blaxius^2 today. And everything is working fine. No drop outs so far! The cables have a tight fit on the Chord DAVE and there is not more than 1millimeter between the two cables so you have to be carefull connecting them with your equipment. This are really stable and stiff cables so I was forced to change the placement of my M Scaler which was placed 15 cm behind the DAVE using stock cables. I advice you to ask Peter about the right lenght of the cables just for your setutp before you order them.

 

Of course the cables need much more burn in. But already after one hour I can hear a more accurate and deeper soundstage compared to the M Scaler stock BNC cables. I heard no immediate "lush-effect" as with the Lush^2 and I am happy with that because I like it just for its more neutral sound (maybe even a tad less bright than stock cables?). But as I said - things will change with more burn in and with trying other configurations.

Of cause it´s not possible to say how much better those cables are than the stock cables so early (and I won´t change back to stock cables to further compare because it´s a little complicated in my setup to change the Blaxius^2). But I am already sure that I will keep the Blaxius^2, most because I can´t see other BNC cables in their price range that are worth testing for me (and I feel - the Habst cables are far too expensive). Everything that changes for the better with burn in and other configurations is a nice bonus for me. 

 

Thank you, Peter, that you didn´t loose your patience after all my questions about the construction of the cables!

 

[davide256]

mmm,

On 10/23/2018 at 2:19 AM, PeterSt said:

 

So yes, a first question would be what connectors people use.

The second I kind of implied already : this shouldn't be about enormous lengths while next any shielding effect should be "more minimal" *because* the shorter length.

And I tend to make traces on a PCB for "clock wires". haha.

 

?

mmm, time perhaps to start a different thread perhaps on coax?  Hate to see the buzz value of this thread diluted /distracted from your "in market" excellent

Lush 2

 

[PeterSt]

1 minute ago, davide256 said:

mmm, time perhaps to start a different thread perhaps on coax?

 

OK, good idea. Give me an hour or so ...