Lush^2 - Share your configuration experiences

[BigAlMc]

1 hour ago, yellowblue said:

@BigAIMc, in my system the Lush^2 wasn´t fully burnt in until 150 hours. Did you try Peter´s last configuration A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R? If so, would you mind to take a picture (as Peter is so busy).

 

Hi YellowBlue,

 

Nope, not had a chance to try Peters latest suggestion. Good to know that its still burning in tho.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[mansr]

Does changing the configuration require a new burn-in period?

[austinpop]

Hey gang,

 

Kind of losing the plot here with this nomenclature of A, B, R, Y, W. Is this correct as a "key?"

• A, B = corresponding grounds of the USB A and B connector?
• W = original Lush shield?
• R, Y = 2 new shields in Lush^2?

So is original Lush simply A-W-B?

 

And is the JSSG 360 Lush as done by Larry and me then: A-W-B, R-Y?

 

If I'm way off base, please (gently) correct me!

[AudioDoctor]

What kind of gang are we, the kind that snaps their fingers to catchy tunes and dances around, or a more menacing kind?

[elcorso]

6 minutes ago, austinpop said:

Hey gang,

 

Kind of losing the plot here with this nomenclature of A, B, R, Y, W. Is this correct as a "key?"

• A, B = corresponding grounds of the USB A and B connector?
• W = original Lush shield?
• R, Y = 2 new shields in Lush^2?

So is original Lush simply A-W-B?

 

And is the JSSG 360 Lush as done by Larry and me then: A-W-B, R-Y?

 

If I'm way off base, please (gently) correct me!

 

Hi Rajiv,

 

A = USB connector to the computer

B = USB connector to the DAC

W, B, R, Y = White, Black, Red, Yellow external mini-pin connectors in each A & B connector.

 

For a complete explanation please read previous post or:

http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=4071.0

 

Best, 

 

Roch

[elcorso]

8 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

What kind of gang are we, the kind that snaps their fingers to catchy tunes and dances around, or a more menacing kind?

 

 

 

? ? ?

 

Roch

[austinpop]

8 minutes ago, elcorso said:

 

Hi Rajiv,

 

A = USB connector to the computer

B = USB connector to the DAC

W, B, R, Y = White, Black, Red, Yellow external mini-pin connectors in each A & B connector.

 

For a complete explanation please read previous post or:

http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=4071.0

 

Best, 

 

Roch

 

Thanks, Roch, I had seen that, just wanted to get the shorthand straight!

 

And part of that is relating to the 2configs I’m familiar with - the original Lush, and the JSSG 360 mod.

 

so my question still stands: 

 

32 minutes ago, austinpop said:

So is original Lush simply A-W-B?

 

And is the JSSG 360 Lush as originally done by Larry and me then: A-W-B, R-Y?

 

 

[elcorso]

Hi Peter et al,

 

Please check if the photo corresponds to the last configuration suggested by Peter

A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R

 

 

I have astigmatism, osteoarthritis and I am a bit colorblind (in addition to a bad photographer) ?

 

Thanks,

 

Roch

 

PS/ Just beginning test with George music.

[PeterSt]

3 minutes ago, elcorso said:

PS/ Just beginning test with George music.

 

Haha

 

Best is to remember the colors like this :

 

Black, the most close to "ground" for its color, is the wire connected to the connector, A, or B.

A is the connector for the source ((towards) the computer side) and B is the connector for the target ((towards) the DAC side).

 

White is the first lightest color and it resembles the shield the most close to the core of the cable. It is also the same shield as in the original Lush. The Inner shield.

 

Yellow is the next more profound color. It is connected to the middle shield.

 

Red is the most profound color. It is connected to the Outer shield.

 

10 minutes ago, elcorso said:

A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R

 

 

Yes Roch, perfect. So the Middle shield (yellow) connects here to the connector (both A and B the same).

The Inner shield and Outer shield (white and R) connect to each other and not to the connector (both A and B the same).

 

Peter

[elcorso]

10 minutes ago, austinpop said:

 

Thanks, Roch, I had seen that, just wanted to get the shorthand straight!

 

And part of that is relating to the 2configs I’m familiar with - the original Lush, and the JSSG 360 mod.

 

so my question still stands: 

 

 

 

I'm sorry Rajiv,

 

I'm not as proficient in English as I'd like, so I leave the answer to Peter or another who wants to answer it.

 

The only thing I know is that it can be configured as the original Lush or yours (JSSG 360).

 

I also think that the composition of the shields is different (material and weight).

 

Best, 

 

Roch

[PeterSt]

This last suggestion (A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R) indeed has too much emphasis on the lower highs (maybe it is better to call that the higher mid). The sound is super clear because of that, but it overwhelms the bass too much, or the bass just lacks too much. E.g. snare drums do not show sufficient "kettle". Not enough umpf in general.

Generally it is a very lean sounding configuration.

 

What I also noticed is the minimalist stereo image. Depth the same.

 

[elcorso]

3 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Haha

 

Best is to remember the colors like this :

 

Black, the most close to "ground" for its color, is the wire connected to the connector, A, or B.

A is the connector for the source ((towards) the computer side) and B is the connector for the target ((towards) the DAC side).

 

White is the first lightest color and it resembles the shield the most close to the core of the cable. It is also the same shield as in the original Lush. The Inner shield.

 

Yellow is the next more profound color. It is connected to the middle shield.

 

Red is the most profound color. It is connected to the Outer shield.

 

 

Yes Roch, perfect. So the Middle shield (yellow) connects here to the connector (both A and B the same).

The Inner shield and Outer shield (white and R) connect to each other and not to the connector (both A and B the same).

 

Peter

 

Great,

 

First listening impressions? Great too ...!

 

Could I describe it as more bloom, in another pile of things?

 

Best,

 

Roch

[PeterSt]

Hi Rajiv, for confirmation :

 

1 hour ago, austinpop said:

A, B = corresponding grounds of the USB A and B connector?

 

Yes. Although it is not called "ground" as such, but the metal of the connectors, corresponding to the shield of the cable which normally is connected to that (metal).

 

Quote

W = original Lush shield?

 

Yes.

 

Quote

R, Y = 2 new shields in Lush^2?

 

Yes. I'd call that Y and R to talk from the inside to the outside and to remember that.

So W Y R from inside to outside.

 

Quote

So is original Lush simply A-W-B?

 

Correct. Here too, I'd call B first because it is more native. Again, it does not matter of course, put I tried to put it in a away we can easily remember it. B is the most important because it is the connector. And per my own agreement noted as this :

A: B-W, B: B-W.

 

In the end we can not say that this is "the same" as the original Lush because of the different topology. It far from sounds the same as well (in this configuration). For that matter we can also not say that the Lush^2 is sounding better than the original Lush because it always includes "for [this] config". In other words, using the B-W config and judge the Lush^2 in comparison with the original Lush is not the best thing to do. Already not because that config does not sound right at all. And really, the only difference is those additional layers of shield and isolation.

 

Quote

And is the JSSG 360 Lush as done by Larry and me then: A-W-B, R-Y?

 

Yes. A: B-W & Y-R, B: B-W & Y-R.

So please note the difference in annotation because yours I couldn't make up, but I can see it is meant to the correct.

 

Regards,

Peter

 

 

[PeterSt]

6 hours ago, BigAlMc said:

 

Nope, not had a chance to try Peters latest suggestion.

 

Hi Alan - In that case I am interested in the configuration you used. So you have a verdict (together with your wife) of "better than", but without the configuration this does not exist. If all configs would sound better, then such a verdict could exist indeed, but this is far from the truth because of quite a few I ran into sound like a serious drag. OK, to me.

 

Peter

[PeterSt]

1 hour ago, elcorso said:

First listening impressions? Great too ...!

 

Could I describe it as more bloom, in another pile of things?

 

Yes. My wife said that too. Actually she is enthusiastic all over and I had to force here into "negatives". I must add that she hates the disco boom-boom and the A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R config is all but that. But too few of it, IMHHO. Possibly we enter the personal areas (even of boys and girls).

 

Last night we ended with ZZ-Top and I pointed out the lack of bass. Well, relative to what we were used to. She literally said "but I don't know whether they use these real basses ever". I didn't sort it out, but she could be right ...

 

Fun is (is it ?) that the different configs so easily point out to you that you don't know reality at all (of the song, the voice etc.). This is because the base nature (though deep down) of your DAC and further rig remains present, but the presentation in frequency (un)balance to-tal-ly changes the whole song, up to "did I ever play that ?".

If you have it, try ZZ-Top's Hummbucking (from Rythmeen), see how the voice of the lead singer is so squared that to me it seems my speakers (or whatever it is) just can't deal with it. I said "if this is right than something is wrong". This, while my speakers are the fastest, so I may wonder how - when representing the voice as is - this ever can be intentional. But I also can't see how to improve on it. Yes, put a thick (snake) oil over it to smooth it out. Or use an other Lush^2 config ...

 

That I also try to envision how on earth this all is electrically / digitally / etc. possible through a stupid USB-actually-same-cable is something else. If the differences were marginal ... but they are not at all.

[elcorso]

15 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Yes. My wife said that too. Actually see is enthusiastic all over and I had to force here into "negatives". I must add that she hates the disco boom-boom and the A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R config is all but that. But too few of it, IMHHO. Possibly we enter the personal areas (even of boys and girls).

 

Last night we ended with ZZ-Top and I pointed out the lack of bass. Well, relative to what we were used to. She literally said "but I don't know whether they use these real basses ever". I didn't sort it out, but she could be right ...

 

Fun is (is it ?) that the different configs so easily point out to you that you don't know reality at all (of the song, the voice etc.). This is because the base nature (though deep down) of your DAC and further rig remains present, but the presentation in frequency (un)balance to-tal-ly changes the whole song, up to "did I ever play that ?".

If you have it, try ZZ-Top's Hummbucking (from Rythmeen), see how the voice of the lead singer is so squared that to me it seems my speakers (or whatever it is) just can't deal with it. I said "if this is right than something is wrong". This, while my speakers are the fastest, so I may wonder how - when representing the voice as is - this ever can be intentional. But I also can't see how to improve on it. Yes, put a thick (snake) oil over it to smooth it out. Or use an other Lush^2 config ...

 

That I also try to envision how on earth this all is electrically / digitally / etc. possible through a stupid USB-actually-same-cable is something else. If the differences were marginal ... but they are not at all.

 

The problem can also be given is that when a USB cable, a DAC, speakers or whatever, is more revealing one finds artifacts in the recording that one did not notice before. For example, last night I listened to a music from an African jazz band, with a singer in the center who sounded 'normal' (before Lush ^ 2), and now I notice that he is artificially in the center thanks to the recording console and he even sounds a lot wrong, maybe because of a bad microphone choice?

 

That is the high resolution price in reproduction ...!

 

Roch

[PeterSt]

7 hours ago, mansr said:

Does changing the configuration require a new burn-in period?

 

I hope not.

But as I said earlier, it is best not to imply a change of theoretical current (electron flow) direction. This means : avoid all what is a serial connection (like from A to B, back to A and to B again). Or leave it like that (direction) always and that per shield.

[BigAlMc]

8 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Hi Alan - In that case I am interested in the configuration you used. So you have a verdict (together with your wife) of "better than", but without the configuration this does not exist. If all configs would sound better, then such a verdict could exist indeed, but this is far from the truth because of quite a few I ran into sound like a serious drag. OK, to me.

 

Peter

 

Hi Peter,

 

I'm still using the config that @yellowblue kindly shared here:

 

 

In terms of 'better' I was trying quite hard to avoid using that word. The Lush^2 vs the Sablon was very different but different people would prefer each sound type.

 

The Lush^2 vs the Lush original just seemed a bit more of a pronounced 'lush' effective. But that could be config or ongoing burn-in.

 

The final config is by no means settled and more experimentation is defo needed.

 

Question. Would the Lush^2 on the same config as the original Lush in theory have better SQ due to the additional shielding?

 

Also, I've yet to try the Lush^2 on the JSSG360 config and that seems an obvious contender to trial next.

 

Cheers,

Alan

 

 

[lmitche]

1 minute ago, BigAlMc said:

I've yet to try the Lush^2 on the JSSG360 config

The original jssg360(lush) config has the two outside shields connected at the ends with no connection to ground at either side. As we haven't dissected the Lush cable, we don't know if there is another inner shield and if so how it was connected. Therefore we need Peter to tell us what lush^2 config most closely resembles jssg360(lush).

[BigAlMc]

2 minutes ago, lmitche said:

The original jssg360(lush) config has the two outside shields connected at the ends with no connection to ground at either side. As we haven't dissected the Lush cable, we don't know if there is another inner shield and if so how it was connected. Therefore we need Peter to tell us what lush^2 config most closely resembles jssg360(lush).

 

Hey Larry,

 

The paper guide that comes with the Lush^2 includes on config that Peter describes as being the JSSG360 config. So it was that one I had in mind.

 

But still be great if Peter can elaborate on the potential shielding improvements.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[lmitche]

Just now, BigAlMc said:

 

Hey Larry,

 

The paper guide that comes with the Lush^2 includes on config that Peter describes as being the JSSG360 config. So it was that one I had in mind.

 

But still be great if Peter can elaborate on the potential shielding improvements.

 

Cheers,

Alan

 Hi Alan,

 

Thanks, having re-read Peter's response to Rajiv above it seems that  A: B-W & Y-R, B: B-W & Y-R is the closest to original jssg360(lush) config.

 

Maybe Peter can confirm?

 

Thanks,

 

Larry

[lmitche]

Peter,

 

I am a bit confused about notation here:

 

ROCH used  A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R

 

Later you used  A: B-W & Y-R, B: B-W & Y-R

 

While I appreciate that these are two different configurations, isn't Rochs use of A:A: in the first term a typo and that he meant A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R which would be equivalent and consistent with your notation?

 

I'm not trying to be a jerk about a typo, just trying to learn the notation and may have missed something.

 

Thanks,

 

Larry

[PeterSt]

2 minutes ago, BigAlMc said:

Question. Would the Lush^2 on the same config as the original Lush in theory have better SQ due to the additional shielding?

 

Hi Alan - No, I don't think so, just because I (audibly) don't perceive it like that.

 

I must state again : the shielding is one thing, but the dielectric is an other and this latter is more important;

I have created the Clairixa which couldn't be more close to perfection, with the notice that impedance as such is related to the frequency involved (and we don't talk audio frequency here, but "digital" frequency which is about the 0's and 1's).

Lush^1 is a derivative from the USB standard - it has properties that should make it a USB cable for audio. Say that this worked out.

Lush^2 us again a derivative from Lush^1 but by the same means you guys applied the JSSG (360) : just dunk a couple of shields with isolation in between, around it. Objective : a special shielding. Well, it does that, and its effectiveness is clear to many of you, and in the end to me maybe even more. But what is that ... effectiveness ?

Well, that we now also have a means to tweak the dielectric because that in itself is related to how the shields are active. And that in itself influences the impedance, which is not bad as long as the audio keeps on playing. So let's say that we have a fine-tuner for the original Lush, with no idea yet where the sweetspot of that really sits. But as I told yesterday, 

A: B-R, B: B-R seems mighty close to me (audibly) - only the Outer shield connected (both ends).

Moral : because of the changed dielectric and which is unavoidable, the nature of the Lush^2 is different, until we find a configuration which coincidentally sounds the same as the original Lush. But are we seeking for that ?

I don't, but I may run into it and will tell about it (like I just did).

It is clear that the potential is huge, no matter that we don't understand the mechanisms at play. And this part now is about the shielding as "shield" and not as contributing to the dielectric.

It changes sound (this was already so per JSSG appliance) but we can also control sound - or better put - the frequency balance.

 

[PeterSt]

6 minutes ago, lmitche said:

isn't Rochs use of A:A: in the first term a typo and

 

Yes, that was a typo. But it was my own typo and Roch copy-pasted it. I just did the same and ran into it ...

The double A:A: must be A:.

 

[PeterSt]

16 minutes ago, lmitche said:

Thanks, having re-read Peter's response to Rajiv above it seems that  A: B-W & Y-R, B: B-W & Y-R is the closest to original jssg360(lush) config.

 

Hi Larry - I don't recall saying that (but maybe I did ?). I just put that in my one but previous post though :

A: B-R, B: B-R

 

But please remember, in my system. And with my state of Lush^2 burn-in.