Lush^2 - Share your configuration experiences

[PeterSt]

37 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).

 

Haha. Lush^2 is technically exactly the same as the Lush-JSSG-360 with :

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

... but with different dielectric properties because we don't know each other's exact (isolation) materials. Read once again : that will do more than the shielding, while the shielding influences the dielectric properties ... and the shielding can be influenced with the Lush^2.

 

Regarding the bolded text : not 100% sure what you mean, but in the original Lush there is one shield only and it does not contain a JSSG bridge, so to speak. This opposed to the Clairixa, which *does* have that (just saying for additional confusing).

So original Lush : One shield and it is connected to both A and B connectors.

 

JSSG-360 : slide shield over it, add isolation, slide an other shield, add sleeve (or isolation first for some ?). Connect the two new sleeves which do NOT connect to the original shield or connectors for that matter. And in the repeat, here is that :

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

The "-" is a connection. The "&" is a separation between connections. Thus in B-W & Y-R, B and W are connected, and Y and R are connected to0, but not to B-W.

 

Easy !

 

 

[BigAlMc]

10 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

Easy !



 

Peter that last smiley says it all.

 

I'm torn between this being fascinating discovery or just too bloody hard! ?

[lmitche]

21 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

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

Got it! Many thanks Peter. It's all clear now. Larry

[PeterSt]

16 minutes ago, BigAlMc said:

I'm torn between this being fascinating discovery or just too bloody hard! ?

 

Nah Alan, not bloody hard. But we must adopt some "good behavior". Learn from others (at least from me) and what they say about it - test that if seems good and confirm (hey, or debunk). If this confirmation does not happen, there is not much to learn for others, or it goes too slow.

Then also : put up your own experiences, like I did yesterday. Thus including the failed ones. From that we may learn even more, or gain time.

 

The general procedure, if (!) you're done with e.g. copying my configs :

Try a next new one. Sounds poor ? you wil hear it in minutes. Try a next one. Poor ? same thing. Next one ... aha ! let that stay. Describe firstly to yourself what you perceive from it. Also the poor ones and the how. Now others are going to try yours and may debunk, or confirm.

 

For fun, here is my document (must learn myself how to deal with it too) :

 

-------

 

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.

 

A: B-W-Y-W, B: B-W
Marvelous sound which keeps on being strange. Listened to it for well over a week. After that week I decided it is time for something which doesn't carry doubts.

 

Up next (31-08-2018) :
A: B-W & Y-R, B: B-W-Y-R
Way to dry. Raspy highs. Strange. Black, but lower highs lacking ?

 

Up next (31-08-2018) :
A: A: B-R, B: B-R
Sounds quite similar to the Lush^1. Nothing spectacular and if anything, less than the Lush^1.

Up next (01-09-2018) :
A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R
Best so far ? Also see Phasure post on 02-09-2018.

 

Up next : (this is due)
A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: W-R

 

------

 

Thinking back on joyful moments, I lurk to the first one mentioned. So, I can also go back to that because I kept track. Plus, maybe by now my Lush^2 has been burned in better. Plus, I changed something in my PC. Plus ...

 

[rickca]

10 hours ago, austinpop said:

Kind of losing the plot here

I was going to rename this thread 'How to Confuse Rick'.  Then I realized there are as many ways to do that as there are Lush^2 connection configurations.

[lmitche]

FWIW, @Quadman found that no shield connections at the endpoints sounds best in DC power cabling. So it would be interesting to test A:B:

 

 

[BigAlMc]

Hi Peter,

 

With all due respect I'll be the judge of 'too bloody hard' ?

 

So next, should I try this:

 

8 minutes ago, 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.

 

Or this:

 

8 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

Up next (01-09-2018) :
A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R
Best so far ? Also see Phasure post on 02-09-2018.

 

Or the JSSG360 config?

 

See what I mean! 

 

Don't get me wrong. It's truly fascinating and I don't regret the purchase for even a millisecond. But it's pretty darn confusing with so many options to improve or worsen the sound!

 

And I have two of the Lush^2 so there's the risk of going down the rabbit hole of which two Lush^2 configs compliment each other best.

 

I think I need to go and lie down in a darkened room for a bit...... ?

 

Cheers,

Alan 

[RickyV]

18 hours ago, mansr said:

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

No

[PeterSt]

1 hour ago, PeterSt said:

Up next : (this is due)
A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: W-R

 

There's a typo in there (apart from the A: A: which sneaked into everything). Must be :

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

 

Playing with that right now, but I've got only 30 minutes and then need to go.

[yellowblue]

Alan, I tried both of Peter´s configuration for about 20 minutes

A: B-W & Y-R, B: B-W
"This showed a super sound."

For me: Sounds fresher and more natural than the odd configuration I have, but not as holographic. I found the highs for "edgy"

 

A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R
Best so far ? 

For me: Best so far?! Fresh, dynamic sound with large soundstage. Highs are more pronounced and very detailed, but less edgy than "super sound". Alan, you should begin with that, I think. You maybe won´t need the the Curious cable anymore. And I can use my beloved HE-1000 again

 

But even if I maybe won´t go back to the "odd", "strange" configuration A: B-W-Y-R, B: B-W (By the way Peter had a typo in his post 2 hours ago: it must be R instead for W) I always will remember it for its fantastic holographic soundstage and for the somewaht damped but sweet highs. So maybe when I long to the Q-sound...

 

[BigAlMc]

24 minutes ago, yellowblue said:

A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R
Best so far ? 

For me: Best so far?! Fresh, dynamic sound with large soundstage. Highs are more pronounced and very detailed, but less edgy than "super sound". Alan, you should begin with that, I think. You maybe won´t need the the Curious cable anymore. And I can use my beloved HE-1000 again

 

Thanks YellowBlue,

 

I'll give this one a whirl next.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[elcorso]

4 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

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:.

 

 

This !

 

Roch

[Cornan]

I must say that I love the genuis idea behind the Lush ^2 construction, but cannot wait to hear the impressions of all shields bypassed or 360 nor connected to the plugs!?

[PeterSt]

4 hours ago, PeterSt said:

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

 

People should really try this one. It is special and sooo normal at the same time. And the most important : it is also beautiful and for that reason a rarity in the bunch. Genesis never sounded so lovely over here (I always found Genesis more difficult to play).

Contrary to the previous one (see list) this is not flat and not "fairly mono" at all. Not lean either. And look what's actually changed to the config ...

[AudioDoctor]

16 hours ago, elcorso said:

 

 

 

? ? ?

 

Roch

 

Roch, look at the post above mine, the one you quoted.

[austinpop]

7 hours ago, lmitche said:

Got it! Many thanks Peter. It's all clear now. Larry

 

Yes, echo that @PeterSt.

 

I am now equipped to understand what new combinations people may find even more pleasing than JSSG 360 "classic."

[yellowblue]

1 hour ago, PeterSt said:

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

Listened with A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R ("Best so far") the whole evening and really really liked it.  Never found Lambchop, Is a woman so balanced (piano with great tonality). Fantastic bass as you said, Peter. Discernible better than all configurations I listened to before. This should be enough for today. 

[fas42]

9 hours ago, 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.

 

 

The right direction.

 

9 hours ago, PeterSt said:

A: B-W-Y-W, B: B-W
Marvelous sound which keeps on being strange. Listened to it for well over a week. After that week I decided it is time for something which doesn't carry doubts.

 

The wrong direction. If one has doubts, then it's wrong .. always.

 

9 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Up next (01-09-2018) :
A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R
Best so far ? Also see Phasure post on 02-09-2018.

 

 

It always can get better ...

[PeterSt]

5 hours ago, yellowblue said:

6 hours ago, PeterSt said:

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

Listened with A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R ("Best so far") the whole evening and really really liked it.  Never found Lambchop, Is a woman so balanced (piano with great tonality). Fantastic bass as you said, Peter. Discernible better than all configurations I listened to before. This should be enough for today. 

 

Hi @yellowblue, it is really nice of you to share your experiences. I hope that more people will sart doing this, or otherwise you and me will rule the world ! haha.

 

But allow me ... it looks a bit confusing as to what you actually report about here. I mean, you quote my last one, next mention the before last one and refer to a fantastic bass I must have mentioned, but ... did I ?

All right, assumed that you like a rather (overly ?) lean bass opposed to the more heavy and bloated, I could have - and then referring to ZZ-Top and the implied (or told by my wife) "but ZZ=Top don't even use such low (keyed) heavy basses ?" :

 

22 hours ago, PeterSt said:

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 ...

 

Reading about the reference to the bass from you I was even more confused because I thought I already wrote about the bass in the A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y config, but I now see I even didn't (I merely put out the word quickly, after listening to another unplanned 90 minutes, late last night). Anyway, the bass in that config is all good - not punchy, not too heavy and it gives back sufficient "kettle" to the snare drum which I found too much lacking in my previous config.

 

 

Warning for all : We don't know by any means yet whether the same configs work out the same or similar for all of us. But it would be sooo good if it did (for that reason alone people should share). Now :

My talk about the leanness of the basses in the previous config (A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R)  I am very hesitant about, because it is THE nature of the Phasure NOS1 USB DAC with the notice I leave out the "a/G3" extension. That (first incarnation of the NOS1 with USB interface) It is in a strange league because of this leanness, which is easily the most natural especially when one has speakers which do not distort the bass (sounds contradictionary - I know). It makes the basses more delineated (I now recall I mentioned that for that config) and ... I now also recall again that you, yellowblue, listen through headphones (am I right ?). Aha ...

Anyway, I myself got a kind of home sick sensation, listening to that "lean" version because it made my NOS1a/G3 USB sound like the original NOS1 USB. So all the punch I so carefully put into the G3 incarnation (by means of spades of more available current !) can apparently (virtually !) be taken out by the USB cable ? I am intrigued.

 

[fas42]

22 hours ago, PeterSt said:

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 ...

 

ZZ Top's Afterburner album is a goto for getting synth bass sound right - this has a quality which evokes a deeeep subterranean heft, has tremendous 'kick'; a recent system which I heard this on, with two monster, extremely heavy sealed subwoofers, and fully DSP equalised was miles from getting this right.

[yellowblue]

Sorry, Peter, I must have remenbered wrong what you wrote just about the bass in that configuration. Things are getting a bit complicated with so many configurations around now.

 

To be clear, I was refering to the A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R ("Best so far") - not your last one. "Best so far" has a perfectly balanced bass with my tx-USBultra, Dave (2 cables) to Utopia headphones. For me this the most important thing - to get the tonality right. But yes, if it helps I find the bass in that configuration even punchy, and I get more quantity and more well defined bass than with the "strange" configuration. Balanced, but not lean at all.

 

Why I quoted your last configuration was only because it´s always so ironic on CA that once you get wonderful results some other is reporting about better results in a new configuration. Reading the Lush^2 thread is a little as "Romaz on stereoids". New results within some hours and you always come too late. BigAIMc, I am soon joining you in the dark room. What did you get for results with the "Best so far" configuration by the way?

 

Peter, I am sure that I will test your newest configuration within some days (if it´s still relevant then). Just want to get more time with the "Best so far" configuration even if it maybe isn´t best so far anymore. 

 

You never can be sure if you get different results with different DACs.

[BigAlMc]

2 hours ago, yellowblue said:

To be clear, I was refering to the A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R ("Best so far")

 

On 9/3/2018 at 4:59 AM, elcorso said:

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

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

 

 

Hi Peter / All - I'm really not trying to be obtuse here and perhaps it's me being a dumbass but I'm still struggling to understand how to tie this nomenclature back to the config. Put simply I would not have arrived at the config that @elcorso kindly provided a photo of without the photo.

 

If we assume that ALL configs start at the red dot then the underlined parts makes sense:  A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R

 

So from the red dot I start at A with Black and then Yellow. Got it. And on the B side from the red dot I also start with Black & Yellow. Yup. So far so good.

 

But continuing the A side I now have to implement "& W-R" but I would assume that White & Red come next. Instead it seems I need to jump all the way to the far side and then reverse direction and start working back in. Or does the location not matter and all that matters is which colours are connected to each other?

 

Many Thanks,

Alan

 

[BigAlMc]

Anyhoo - the unwitting advantage of having two Lush^2 at hand (and only using one currently due to the previously commented synergy with my Curious cable) is that I can take the one that's not in use and convert it to the next config. And then do a relatively hot-swap to compare. Ok there's still a minute of silence but in terms of audio memory it's a lot quicker than the 10 minutes it was taking beforehand.

 

Have implemented the config that Peter and YellowBlue are talking about:  A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R

 

Initial thoughts are positive. Smoother than the previous "odd config" I was using. Slightly less bass. Will give it a whirl for a while and then might play around later if I can find some time.

 

Cheers,

Alan

[tims]

3 hours ago, BigAlMc said:

 

 

Hi Peter / All - I'm really not trying to be obtuse here and perhaps it's me being a dumbass but I'm still struggling to understand how to tie this nomenclature back to the config. Put simply I would not have arrived at the config that @elcorso kindly provided a photo of without the photo.

 

If we assume that ALL configs start at the red dot then the underlined parts makes sense:  A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R

 

So from the red dot I start at A with Black and then Yellow. Got it. And on the B side from the red dot I also start with Black & Yellow. Yup. So far so good.

 

But continuing the A side I now have to implement "& W-R" but I would assume that White & Red come next. Instead it seems I need to jump all the way to the far side and then reverse direction and start working back in. Or does the location not matter and all that matters is which colours are connected to each other?

 

Many Thanks,

Alan

 

What helped me figure it out is referring to this diagram:

How the pins are connected are at the bottom left of the diagram above: 4 pins (positions 1,2,3,4) are connected together; with the other 2 pins (5 & 6) also connected together (but not to 1,2,3,4). 

Then its just a matter of figuring out what wires need to be joined together by using the above connector.

For A: B-Y & W-R; B: B-Y & W-R is:

A: pins 1-2 (for B-Y) & 5-6 (for W-R)

B: pins 1-2 (for B-Y) & 5-6 (for W-R)

 

For another configuration say;

A: B-Y & W-R; B: B-Y 

A: pins 1-2 (for B-Y) & 5-6 (for W-R)

B: pins 1-2 (for B-Y) with wires W&R are left hanging; not connected to anything.

 

[BigAlMc]

21 minutes ago, tims said:

What helped me figure it out is referring to this diagram:

How the pins are connected are at the bottom left of the diagram above: 4 pins (positions 1,2,3,4) are connected together; with the other 2 pins (5 & 6) also connected together (but not to 1,2,3,4). 

Then its just a matter of figuring out what wires need to be joined together by using the above connector.

For A: B-Y & W-R; B: B-Y & W-R is:

A: 1-2 (for B-Y) & 5-6 (for W-R)

B: 1-2 (for B-Y) & 5-6 (for W-R)

 

For another configuration say;

A: B-Y & W-R; B: B-Y 

A: 1-2 (for B-Y) & 5-6 (for W-R)

B: 1-2 (for B-Y) with wires W&R are left hanging; not connected to anything.

 

 

Thanks Tims,

 

Maybe it's just me but still too complicated.

 

If we assume it always starts from the red dots then would the following not be simpler:

 

A: B Y - - R W

 

Just put the colours in order and indicate which are left empty with dashes. Even a slow type like me could follow that without needing to ask for photos ?

 

Cheers,

Alan