Lush^2 - Share your configuration experiences

[PeterSt]

9 hours ago, TheAttorney said:

Okay, I'm going to stick my neck out again and challenge the established expert by saying that I think Peter has got it wrong.

 

Enough credits to take your chances... 

 

9 hours ago, TheAttorney said:

I'm pretty sure that my Blaxius had arrived as I had written

 

Noting has changed to the shipped configs ever. However, taking that "typo" in the with going paper into account, you have to know that I had to ask how the configs factually was done, before I could correct the paper (I don't make the Blaxius^2 myself). I was told it is/was done as intended, and so I changed the paper accordingly. Now notice that the fact I had to ask already smells for error... It was ambiguous. 🙄

[austinpop]

 

13 hours ago, TheAttorney said:

.

I will try the BRY BRY option, but won't be able to for a couple of days.

 

I freed up time this evening to do some comparisons on the Blaxius^2D cables. I compared this:

    A:[W]B-Y-R, B:[W]B-Y-R (my shipped default)

 

with

    A:[W]B-Y, B:[W]B-Y (your winner).

 

Wow no contest! Your winner is soooo much better. I heard more air and smoother less fatiguing tone. It seemed the noise floor had dropped perceptibly.

 

I had forgotten how much of a difference these shielding configs can make. Brings to mind how much I was blown away by Larry’s first JSSG360 Lush.

 

Thank you so much for you B^2D experiments. I will stick to your top BY BY config for a while to see how it holds up longer term.

[rickca]

45 minutes ago, austinpop said:

Your winner is soooo much better.

Does this result apply to the Lush^2 as well, or just to the Blaxius^2D?  I don't own either, so I don't understand whether this is a valid config for the Lush^2.

[PeterSt]

Does this result apply to the Lush^2 as well, or just to the Blaxius^2D?

 

What TheAttorney did, was taking the Lush^2 results as the basis for his Blaxius^2 comparisons. Of course with the reason of what else to start out with (lack of data). 

A bit of a dangerous thing to do, but IMO allowed as long as we all understand it went like that. And helpful it seems to be... 

 

[Confused]

I had wondered about using the Blaxius 2 as a clock cable.  (maybe a crazy idea, I am not sure)  @austinpop - had you thought of trying it versus your Habst?  (although maybe your Habst is 50 ohm?  I can't remember)

[TheAttorney]

10 hours ago, PeterSt said:

Noting has changed to the shipped configs ever. However, taking that "typo" in the with going paper into account, you have to know that I had to ask how the configs factually was done, before I could correct the paper (I don't make the Blaxius^2 myself). I was told it is/was done as intended, and so I changed the paper accordingly. Now notice that the fact I had to ask already smells for error... It was ambiguous. 🙄

 

Short of an un-boxing video, I'm as sure as I can be that my B^2D arrived as I had stated. Knowing that a 3rd party built the cable, it's most likely that on at least one occasion he interpereted the printed-at-the-time notation of   A:[W]B-Y-R, B:[W]Y-R   as no B wire at the destination end. So in effect we were both right, and so honour for both sides has been maintained. Phew! Now I'll quickly lower my head back below the parapet 🙂

 

6 hours ago, rickca said:

Does this result apply to the Lush^2 as well, or just to the Blaxius^2D?  I don't own either, so I don't understand whether this is a valid config for the Lush^2.

 

Remember that this started with kurb1980 saying this was the best setting yet for his Lush^2, and he's been doing this for several months, so it's a good sign. OTOH, lmitche wasn't convinced on first pass. We just need a few more impressions from others. One thing I have noticed is that everything else still matters. E.g. Whether of not I have a ground wire connected to DAVE. To get the most impact, all planets still need to be in perfect alignment.

[oilpaint]

I really enjoy trying the different combinations, but find myself coming back to the PNF, and for my two pence, I would show the 6 pin options like this.....A:BW_ _ YR / B:BW_ _ _ _

[d_elm]

I prefer the original notation, eg. A:B-R+W-Y  B:B-R, and any new and improved schemes are just

confusing for me.

[austinpop]

6 hours ago, Confused said:

I had wondered about using the Blaxius 2 as a clock cable.  (maybe a crazy idea, I am not sure)  @austinpop - had you thought of trying it versus your Habst?  (although maybe your Habst is 50 ohm?  I can't remember)

 

Not yet. Yes my Habst is 50 ohm, but I have other 75 ohm cables I can compare to. 

[frederick184]

Tried the latest Kurb1980 config on my Lush^2 a couple days ago - A:B-W-Y and B:B-W-Y.  

 

I went to this from the default and then PNF and this is by far the best.  More natural, especially voices, with more presence and air.  As described above, the feeling of a lower noise floor.  It’s a keeper!  For now 😊

 

Colin

[PeterSt]

3 hours ago, TheAttorney said:

Knowing that a 3rd party built the cable,

 

No third party; just not me myself. 😏

[89reksal]

I'm back to A: B-W-Y-R  B: B-W-R with my Lush^2 (shipped default as I received it).

 

I'd been using kurb1980's  A: B-W-Y  B: B-W-Y with jumpers as he described (no idea if jumpers make a difference but I figured I'd try his exact configuration) for about 3 weeks or so. I was happy with this configuration but there just seemed to be something not quite right. Not sure how to describe it but I think of it as a kind of very slight metallic or digital sound, almost a slight exaggeration throughout the entire range that didn't seem quite natural. I've noticed this same quality to varying degrees with almost all the different configurations except one, which is the as shipped default as above. This default config just seems so natural compared to any other config I've tried. Others may sound very good to me but I always seem to end up that something isn't quite right and end up trying another. So for me, the config as shipped default is my overall favourite.

 

I also have the Blaxius^2 and have been happily using it as A:[W] B-Y-R  B:[W] B-Y-R  after reading the comments about this being the new default shipped config as of Feb 2019.

 

I tried The Attorney's A:[W] B-Y  B:[W] B-Y config and immediately really liked it. After a couple hours of listening, I realized I was hearing the same slightly exaggerated quality that I didn't like from some Lush^2 configs. If I hadn't gone through the process with the Lush^2 and ending back to the default and hearing the naturalness that seems so perfect now, I could see me easily sticking with A:[W] B-Y  B:[W] B-Y for weeks before the sense of something off crept back in again but I think I was much more attuned to what I didn't like that I immediately ended up switching back to A: [W] B-Y-R  B:[W] B-Y-R.

 

These configs I now have for Lush^2 and Blaxius^2 just sound so right compared to any others I've heard in my system, at least for now 😀

[kurb1980]

Alright I think I found my personal favorite!  This one has a refined sound, musical, and a lushness to the air around the vocals and instruments.

On a side note I picked up some extra jumper caps so I could do this configuration.  

[lmitche]

13 hours ago, kurb1980 said:

Alright I think I found my personal favorite!  This one has a refined sound, musical, and a lushness to the air around the vocals and instruments.

On a side note I picked up some extra jumper caps so I could do this configuration.  

Hey Kurb,

 

You've invented JSSG360cubed and it is very nice indeed. Too early to say it's a keeper over the default but it sounds very impressive so far.

 

This one is really growing on me.

 

Larry

[lmitche]

On 7/11/2019 at 3:29 PM, lmitche said:

Hey Kurb,

 

You've invented JSSG360cubed and it is very nice indeed. Too early to say it's a keeper over the default but it sounds very impressive so far.

 

This one is really growing on me.

 

Larry

Still really growing on me.

[Doak]

36 minutes ago, lmitche said:

Still really growing on me.

Hmmmmm... sounds like I’ll have to give it a go. 🤙

[TheAttorney]

On 7/11/2019 at 7:08 AM, kurb1980 said:

Alright I think I found my personal favorite!  

On a side note I picked up some extra jumper caps so I could do this configuration. 

 

I'm curious how far you've gone with experimenting with jumper positions.

E.g. Are you saying that jumper on pin 1 and leads on pins 2,3,4 sound better than leads on 1,2,3 and jumper on 4?

And 2 jumpers on pins 5,6 sound better than a single jumper bridging 5 and 6?

What sort of differences are you hearing?

 

And how does that compare with no jumpers at all on the spare pins?

 

I put aside my scepticism to briefly try some different jumper positions, but so far I've not come to any conclusions. I.e. I have nor yet decided if any changes I'm hearing are real or imaginary. I'll need my system to settle down for longer to get a stable reference point (still with [W}B-Y  [W}B-Y as favourite)

 

Unfortunately, it's impossible to try your new personal favourite with a Blaxius^2D.

[austinpop]

12 hours ago, TheAttorney said:

 

I'm curious how far you've gone with experimenting with jumper positions.

E.g. Are you saying that jumper on pin 1 and leads on pins 2,3,4 sound better than leads on 1,2,3 and jumper on 4?

And 2 jumpers on pins 5,6 sound better than a single jumper bridging 5 and 6?

What sort of differences are you hearing?

 

And how does that compare with no jumpers at all on the spare pins?

 

I put aside my scepticism to briefly try some different jumper positions, but so far I've not come to any conclusions. I.e. I have nor yet decided if any changes I'm hearing are real or imaginary. I'll need my system to settle down for longer to get a stable reference point (still with [W}B-Y  [W}B-Y as favourite)

 

Unfortunately, it's impossible to try your new personal favourite with a Blaxius^2D.

 

I thought this was a different configuration, not just jumper changes. It looks to me to be:

- A:W-Y-R

- B:W-Y-R.

 

Am I misreading the picture?

[kurb1980]

I have been tying the jumper caps in a vertical configuration meaning that I'm not connecting a jumper cap across the pins.  From what I'm hearing there is a difference if you connect the jumper caps  across the pins vs one jumper per pin.  Red wire in my system yields to bass and drums.  Yellow wire yields to treble focus on the cymbal hits "distinctness" if you will.  I been continuing to mess around in the most current config that I pictured up thread it sounds nice but I it seems to push certain frequencies further back.  I also find the soundstage to be not as wide so I'm gonna continue with tinkering around until I find one that is checking more of my boxes than not.

[elan120]

23 minutes ago, kurb1980 said:

I have been tying the jumper caps in a vertical configuration meaning that I'm not connecting a jumper cap across the pins.  From what I'm hearing there is a difference if you connect the jumper caps  across the pins vs one jumper per pin.

Is there any differences between with jumper caps in vertical configuration vs. no jumper caps installed (leaving pins not connected to wires exposed without jumper caps)?

[TheAttorney]

10 hours ago, austinpop said:

I thought this was a different configuration, not just jumper changes. It looks to me to be:

- A:W-Y-R

- B:W-Y-R.

Am I misreading the picture?

I don't think you're misreading the picture - it's a brand new configuraturation, with no shield connected to ground, or JSSG360cubed as lmitche dubbed it

 

4 hours ago, elan120 said:

Is there any differences between with jumper caps in vertical configuration vs. no jumper caps installed (leaving pins not connected to wires exposed without jumper caps)?

I'd also like to know this, as I'm not inclined to search out and buy additional jumpers.

Also, although I know common sense doesn't always apply to this game 🙃, but I just can't see how the jumper placement on pins 5 and 6 could possibly affect anything - as they are completely unused in this example and not connected to anything else.

[PeterSt]

48 minutes ago, TheAttorney said:

but I just can't see how the jumper placement on pins 5 and 6 could possibly affect anything - as they are completely unused in this example and not connected to anything else.

 

Actually I don't want to know, but if we are (by now) convinced of antenna working and shielding (against that) and how shields themselves can be antennas, then the pins like 5 and 6 on their own already may do something (do they look like little antennas or do they ? 😋) Put a jumper on a single pin and the antenna gets longer, right ? the fact that it is U shaped may do something as well. And as a bonus: put a second jumper next to it (so a jumper on pin 5 and pin 6) and the both may interact.

Disclaimer: I am reasoning towards the result which I don't know myself (so I now just take you people's findings for granted and try to explain it).

[PeterSt]

PS: What we (audio idiots) may not be used to, is working with shields as if it were ground wires. But they are not. They are antennas / shielding for radiation.

Not that I would have made that up a year ago ...

[lmitche]

1 hour ago, PeterSt said:

Is working with shields as if it were ground wires. But they are not. 

Agreed. Did you notice that in Kurb's latest, the so called JSSG360cubed design, the connection between USB connector shells is severed as originally conceived by JS?

 

I don't have a spare jumper so made it A:.WYR122 B:.WYR122 in my parlance. It would be very surprising to learn that the jumpers matter at all. It is almost embarrassing to consider testing this.

 

This one is a keeper for me, at least between my endpoint and ISO Regen. I've had to lower volume by 2 db as more information seems to be getting through to the DAC.

[PeterSt]

2 minutes ago, lmitche said:

Agreed. Did you notice that in Kurb's latest, the so called JSSG360cubed design, the connection between USB connector shells is severed as originally conceived by JS?

 

Yes. At least that is a "construction" which is not very normal and as far as I recall, would not work for our own DAC solution, long way back. I mean, it is or connect it at one end (usually the source, which normally is out of our control (say the PC)) or at both ends (so both are with consensus of specialists) but not nothing on both ends.

So apparently the way the construct is now, should add something which else is provided by at least one end's connection.

 

I can't try myself because currently my whole system is out of order for a while.