Lush^2 - Share your configuration experiences

[PeterSt]

51 minutes ago, Jiffi32 said:

Sort of tempting to add a 'green sheild' to my set of Blaxius^2D🤔

 

Haha. You feel wronged, eh ? 

[mrkoven]

Is the stock config of Lush^2 any good? Don't feel like tinkering much, just want a nice USB cable..

[PeterSt]

2 hours ago, mrkoven said:

Is the stock config of Lush^2 any good?

 

Yes. The biggest "problem" is that I like people to try out new configurations and find a better one than the stock shipment, but that like you, people don't feel much like "tweaking" once it is OK as it is. And to be honest, I myself am the same ...

Anyway, we ship the Lush^2 with the config with "consensus". No worries !

[Confused]

First a word of thanks to @PeterSt.  I ordered my Lush 2 on Monday evening, Peter advised it would be delivered Wednesday, it was delivered Wednesday.  A small thing, and it is how things should be, but as someone who is still waiting for the "End November batch" LPS-4's that I ordered in October, service like this is rather refreshing and much appreciated.  So thanks from me.

 

Now onto the technical stuff, and go easy on me here, I am a Lush 2 Newbie.  My Lush has arrived with the "stock" A:B-W-Y-R, B:B-W-R, is the consensus that this is as good a place to start as any?  Or is there perhaps another configuration that might be good to start with?  I am guessing that the answer to this will be system dependent, well, I am pretty happy with the sound of my system at the moment, but one niggle is that the HF has maybe a slightly metallic feel to it.  Treble clarity is excellent, this is not a major issue, but if that metallic edge could be toned down a bit I would be happy.  So I guess that in marginal terms, I am hoping to head a touch warmer / "full-bodied" rather than more clinically detailed.  Any ideas?

 

Maybe I should just plug it in, see (hear) what happens, and spend my day reading this thread from the start?🙂

[PeterSt]

38 minutes ago, Confused said:

Or is there perhaps another configuration that might be good to start with?

 

Hi again, Confused-you. 

I think it is very safe to start with the shipped configuration. Also:

 

41 minutes ago, Confused said:

Treble clarity is excellent, this is not a major issue, but if that metallic edge could be toned down a bit I would be happy.

 

You are not familiar with the original Lush, but that would already take care of that (at least that would be my expectation). So I think you are good in the base, because the original Lush is the base of the Lush^2. Its character is rather the same and I don't recognize at all it can exhibit-"back" digital (mere) nastiness as how we were used to (say prior to the Lush, if I may say so). However, what the Lush^2 could do for you compared to the stock config, is this:

 

- Create much more clarity (no nastiness but in the realm of more / too much forward);

- Create way less clarity (should help really poor in the highs performing systems - just stupid theory);

- Can imply ultra low-stumping disco bass (as an extension of the latter above);

- Can be very laid back up to complete flat together with ultra wide (one of the latest findings and not good);

- And supposedly anything in between everything.

 

Generally the extremes hover between this (my own experience): 

Too much disco bass or too much in-your-face forward (I think I recall a config where both even happened at the same time).

 

49 minutes ago, Confused said:

I am guessing that the answer to this will be system dependent

 

That would be the most logical idea in advance of all. Still I created this thread to find out, and what now seems to happen is that this is not system dependent. To placebo people seems not easy and might I myself genuinely think to have found a better configuration (hey, shouldn't people listen to me ? ), it gets debunked with reason and elaboration and I must admit that I was wrong (after reconsideration).

[AmusedToD]

1 hour ago, Confused said:

First a word of thanks to @PeterSt.  I ordered my Lush 2 on Monday evening, Peter advised it would be delivered Wednesday, it was delivered Wednesday.  A small thing, and it is how things should be, but as someone who is still waiting for the "End November batch" LPS-4's that I ordered in October, service like this is rather refreshing and much appreciated.  So thanks from me.

 

Now onto the technical stuff, and go easy on me here, I am a Lush 2 Newbie.  My Lush has arrived with the "stock" A:B-W-Y-R, B:B-W-R, is the consensus that this is as good a place to start as any?  Or is there perhaps another configuration that might be good to start with?  I am guessing that the answer to this will be system dependent, well, I am pretty happy with the sound of my system at the moment, but one niggle is that the HF has maybe a slightly metallic feel to it.  Treble clarity is excellent, this is not a major issue, but if that metallic edge could be toned down a bit I would be happy.  So I guess that in marginal terms, I am hoping to head a touch warmer / "full-bodied" rather than more clinically detailed.  Any ideas?

 

Maybe I should just plug it in, see (hear) what happens, and spend my day reading this thread from the start?🙂

 

Probably a matter or burn in. In my case, the Lush^2 needed a good amount of time to fully burn in (probably in excess of 150 hrs, but I can’t say for sure).

[Confused]

4 hours ago, AmusedToD said:

 

Probably a matter or burn in. In my case, the Lush^2 needed a good amount of time to fully burn in (probably in excess of 150 hrs, but I can’t say for sure).

To be clear, the SQ issues I mentioned in my earlier post were prior to installing the Lush 2.  So I can't blame the minor HF harshness issue on the Lush 2.  In fact, the nice new Lush cable is still on my dining table, not connected to anything.  I tried the new SOtM firmware this morning and I am not sure that I like it, so I can't install the Lush just yet, if I change two things at once I will be truly confused!  I am not a huge believer in cable burn-in, but you just never know, so I will take your good advice and stick a good 100 hours on it before fretting with various configurations, it at least removes burn in as a variable, so why not.

[89reksal]

I've been happily using a Lush^2 and Blaxius^2 digital in my system for about 6 weeks now. The Lush^2 connects a SOtM SMS-200 Neo to a Schiit Eitr usb/spdif converter. The Blaxius^2 connects the Eitr spdif output to my Bryston preamp/dac rca spdif input. The Blaxius^2 came configured as A: [W] B-R, B: [W] B-R. The [W] is always connected. The Lush^2 came configured as A: B-W-Y-R, B: B-W-R.

 

I used the cables in that same configuration for about the first month. I was very happy, with no real interest in experimenting with any different configuration.

 

On Jan. 16, I switched the Lush^2 to A: B-W-Y, B: B-W after reading the positive comments. I left Blaxius unchanged. I liked this combination and continued using it until Jan. 23, when I switched the Lush^2 to A: B-Y, B: after reading comments from Peter. Blaxius was unchanged. I liked this as well, although I thought something was off slightly with the very bottom bass. It almost seemed like there was some kind of new room response node at the lowest frequencies.

 

I would say at this point my Lush^2 preference was a toss up between A: B-W-Y-R, B: B-W-R and A: B-W-Y, B: B-W with A: B-Y, B: being a close third choice.

 

At this point no changes had been made to the Blaxius^2. On Jan 24 I decided to try the Lush^2 with the same configuration as the Blaxius^2, thinking (at least to my uneducated mind) that it might make sense if the cables were all using the same shielding scheme. I changed the Lush^2 to A: W-B-R, B: W-B-R which I'm assuming is the same as the Blaxius^2 with A: [W] B-R, B: [W] B-R.

 

This sounds very similar to A: B-W-Y, B: B-W to my ears but there seems to be more depth with the new configuration. Also, I think the bass is the best for me with this latest config. I do believe it took a good 8 hours or so to stabilize/break in, again, to my ears. Whether this was true break in or simply me getting used to it, this quickly became my current favourite. I'm on my third day so far.

 

I looked back to see if anyone had mentioned this particular configuration before and all I found was this post from Peter on September 17:

 

"Yes, that is my latest "crazy config", which adopts the idea of a "cage" being around the middle, floating shield. This is :

A: B-W-R, B: B-W-R

Notice the lacking Y which is the middle shield. So it sits there in between the two others, those (the Middle and Outer) connected to the connectors at both ends, the middle completely floating in between. What would it do eh ?"

 

No further posts or comments on it but from this the next configuration was the long time favourite A: B-W-Y-R, B: B-W-R, which is very similar with only the addition of the Y connected at A end. I'd be curious to hear if Peter made any notes on A: B-W-R, B: B-W-R and what his (or anyone else's)  listening impressions were.

 

 

[Jiffi32]

On ‎1‎/‎25‎/‎2019 at 11:31 AM, PeterSt said:

 

Haha. You feel wronged, eh ? 

Just Shield envy 🤣

[FileMakerDev]

Dear friends, I realize it is somewhat late in the day to be proposing this, and believe me, no hard feelings if people don't think this is worth doing... but...

 

To me it would make more sense to eliminate the hyphens and document configurations like so:

 

    A:BWYR   B:BWR     (  as opposed to A:B-W-Y-R   B:B-W-R  )

    A:BW,YR  B:BW     (  as opposed to A:B-W,Y-R   B:B-W  )

 

The hyphens don't add any additional value and make the configurations harder to read. In my opinion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[PeterSt]

14 hours ago, FileMakerDev said:

The hyphens don't add any additional value and make the configurations harder to read.

 

That is appreciated. And would we have made up such a notation ahead of things, then it would be a best idea. But we did not (it emerged along the way and coincidentally with the hyphens) and now all is there with hyphens, I regularly seek for configurations (or A: / B: parts of it) which now goes with hyphens. And we can't change the posts about it in retrospect. 

[PeterSt]

18 hours ago, lasker98 said:

I'd be curious to hear if Peter made any notes on A: B-W-R, B: B-W-R and what his (or anyone else's)  listening impressions were.

 

No lasker, I did not. These are my documented comments:

 

Sept. 6, 2018:
A: B-W-R, B:B-W-R
Eh, WOW ?

 

After that indeed the A:B-W-Y-R, B:B-W-R emerged.

 

But what a valuable saga you put up there. I may be able to add something to it:

 

18 hours ago, lasker98 said:

I do believe it took a good 8 hours or so to stabilize/break in, again, to my ears. Whether this was true break in or simply me getting used to it

 

So coming from the A:B-W-Y-R, B:B-W-R I tried an other one for a couple of days. I liked the other one, then thought to try something else, but first go back to the A:B-W-Y-R, B:B-W-R in order to reset my mind/reference.

Ouch !

It was way louder and especially the sub-low was crazy (easy to feel on the woofers as well). Say even difficult to breath because of the pumping air. After checking, rechecking, rebooting all, I sustained for the evening (but literally hated the sound).

The next day, yesterday, this was still there, though much better and quite enjoyable again. But certainly not on par with say a week ago.

Now what could have happened in relation to the first time I went to this one, which thus came from mentioned A: B-W-R, B:B-W-R above.

 

- This time I came from A:B-Y, B:. Can that matter ?

- This time my Lush^2 was broken for ~5 months. Will that matter for "changes" as such ?

 

I just can't wrap my head around this. But it seems obvious that it is not allowed to try a configuration, debunk it in the minute and continue with an other.

But also it goes too far for me to think that this is about some sort of burning in. Ground loops which must settle ? perhaps. And let's not forget, this is only about shielding.

 

Anyway, it is quite impossible that this is about "getting used to". There is just too much of a difference. Is or was (because it seems to die out).

 

 

[fas42]

Something to keep in mind, that every time you fiddle with a cable, for whatever reason, is that you typically will bend or alter its positioning. So all the materials of the cable, whether metals or plastics, will undergo stress; they have been shifted out of their previous state of physical equilibrium. Now, this may, or may not, alter some physical behaviour which has electrical consequences - which unfortunately are audible.

 

I would make changes in the linkages in a manner such that the cable itself is disturbed as little as possible while doing it - just a way of reducing the parameters that may be relevant.

[bodiebill]

why don't we give them all a nickname?

(work in progress...)

[Abtr]

For those interested in numbers , I found that if one randomly plugs any combination of BWYR into the 4+2 connectors of the Lush^2 then there are 835^2 = 697225 possible configurations. Of these, only 205^2 = 42025 are without redundant connections such as BWY & R (R is redundant) or Y & B (both Y and B are redundant). And, of course, only 15^2 = 225 configurations are electrically different from eachother (see post #470).  

[PeterSt]

[FileMakerDev]

On 9/3/2018 at 7:14 AM, PeterSt said:

A: B-W & Y-R, B: B-W
This showed a super sound.
It completely changes the sound from a somewhat congested (too white) highs to ever so lasting colored cymbals. Btw, this is what I had in mind with it for a change (I found the highs too profound).
What came with it is a super fluid/liquid bass which sings and plays music. I actually never experienced the bass like that.

 

At the risk of saying what has already been said in this topic numerous times, the Lush^2 is extraordinary. Thank you Peter.

 

Recently I made some changes to my system resulting in a more relaxed, less aggressive presentation, and yesterday I decided it was time to start experimenting w/ various Lush^2 configurations again. For the last couple weeks I have been listening exclusively to...

 

         A: B-W-R    B: B-W 

 

...which as bluebeat commented, seemed "a bit dark", and which I considered to be "sensibly weighted". This was a good thing when my system was more aggressive, but now that it's more relaxed, I am currently liking this one the best...

 

     A: B-W & Y-R    B: B-W

 

...and generally agree w/ Peter's assessment from last September (except I like what it does on the high end). My notes for this configuration say: "Nice highs, punchy bass, lots of dynamic slam." Micro details really stand out in this configuration, e.g., decay on cymbal splashes, fingers moving across guitar strings, etc... and the bass is very musical. Voices are a bit more prominent, but in a good way.

[PeterSt]

@FileMakerDev, Thank you so much for your elaboration. This is really valuable to people, but just the same to me myself.

 

4 hours ago, FileMakerDev said:

 

Recently I made some changes to my system resulting in a more relaxed, less aggressive presentation

 

People should pay attention to that too;

I recently experienced going the other (worse) way, when I had to change my Linear Power Supply in the (Mach III) PC to a switcher for reasons (with my ever tweaking for the good cause I blew something and the part of concern stayed out for a month) and this was the typical situation I was not satisfied and so started changing my Lush^2 configuration (you see me write about that in the last couple of posts in this thread). Well, that surely changed matters (as described) but it never brought back the general sound I was used to. I learned to live with it all right, but let's say that fishing could be an other hobby now. 

And now I envision people "struggle" as such, because what is not optimal is just not, and without a real reference you may not know where to go to. This is exactly why it is so good that people give guidance (like your last post) or why it is so good that there's general consensus on at least one all over best configuration. "When nothing works we can always rely on that one". And so it happened with me just the same. I went back to that and let it go.

 

Then a week ago finally that part came in and, oh man, did I miss something (but generally: the Linear Power Supply). And moral: once you lose your reference, you can't do a thing any more and better go fishing indeed. IOW, now I could be trying different configurations again. I think I won't because of sheer happiness at this moment (still so after a week of time), but rest also is priceless.

 

And so I also understand and respect those who do not like to tweak with cable (Lush^2) configurations; Maybe my attitude regarding this changed a little. It could also depend on the rest you have in the rest of your life. Mood is crazily crucial.

[Confused]

I have had my new Lush 2 installed and running for maybe 10 hours now.  To start, I have kept it on the "stock" A:B-W-Y-R, B:B-W-R.

 

It's early days, but my observations so far is that the system sounds a little darker, but without any reduction in treble.  This sounds contradictory I know, but it as if a little bit of HF hash has gone, but left the actual HF behind.  It is a fairly marginal effect, but a very welcome improvement for me.  In my system the Lush 2 replaced an AudioQuest Carbon USB cable.  This is only part of the story though, the system runs sMS-200Ultra to tX-USBultra to Mutec MC+USB to AES/EBU to my Devialet amp.  So all I have done is replaced the last USB cable in the chain, which runs from the tX-USBultra to the MC3+USB, the rest remain AudioQuest Carbons.  So this has me thinking, maybe I should also switch the cable between the sMS-200Ultra and tX-USBultra to a Lush 2?  With this I could do with some advice.  The sMS and tX sit side by side to each other on my rack, so a very short distance between the two and their connectors, but I note the warning on the Lush 2 website about the flexibility of the 40cm cable.  Has anyone tried the 40cm Lush 2 between a sMS-200Ultra and tX-USBultra?, either stacked or side by side?  Or maybe the 70cm would be a safer option?  

[matthias]

1 hour ago, Confused said:

So this has me thinking, maybe I should also switch the cable between the sMS-200Ultra and tX-USBultra to a Lush 2?  

 

Good luck!

With one Lush^2 you can try something like 10.000 configurations, with two Lush^2 maybe something like 100.000.000 configurations. 

IMO, this does not sound like fun for me.

 

Matt

[Confused]

38 minutes ago, matthias said:

 

Good luck!

With one Lush^2 you can try something like 10.000 configurations, with two Lush^2 maybe something like 100.000.000 configurations. 

IMO, this does not sound like fun for me.

 

Matt

I suspect that I will only try a relatively small number of configurations and that over time.  In my current set up it is actually quite tricky swapping the USB cable in and out.  Although you might have a point, maybe the original Lush would be a better option for the link between the sMS and tX?

[oilpaint]

@Confused I used 2 40cm cables when I had the SOtM kit - one from the 200 to the tXUSB and one from the tXUSB to the Mutec. The 200 was on a shelf about 6 inches below the tX - and the Mutec was adjacent to the tX. Currently I have the NUC Endpoint on a shelf 6 inches below the Devialet. It is a stiff cable and hard to turn in certain directions but my cabinet is tight and I need all cables to be as small as possible. But it works.

 

Also don’t I recall that some people thought their system sounded better with the Lush 2 as the first Cable if they had two different brands?

[matthias]

22 minutes ago, Confused said:

I suspect that I will only try a relatively small number of configurations and that over time.  In my current set up it is actually quite tricky swapping the USB cable in and out.  Although you might have a point, maybe the original Lush would be a better option for the link between the sMS and tX?

 

I do not get the idea behind the Lush^2. One of the most valuable you have is your time. Spending time to try shielding configurations of an USB cable? Not for me.

I would go for one or several good conventional USB cables, certainly the original Lush is one.

But YMMV.

 

Matt

[Confused]

10 minutes ago, oilpaint said:

 

Also don’t I recall that some people thought their system sounded better with the Lush 2 as the first Cable if they had two different brands?

1

I had not seen that, maybe something to try when I get some time.  Thanks for the feedback on the shorter cable.

[oilpaint]

I guess I was suggesting putting it first and the AQ second based on what others said.