Lush^3 - Share your configuration experiences

[PeterSt]

Dear people,

 

If Chris permits, It seems inevitable to have a thread for the Lush^3, similar to the Lush^2's thread.

 

The Lush^3 has 1023 configuration possibilities and the past days I did my stinkin' best to find "a best" for the first dear customers who will receive their Lush^3 tomorrow and beyond. But I am only on my own, and it is sheer impossible do to this on one's own. And therefore I sincerely hope that as many people as possible will contribute again to find that one and only very best configuration and that again we will have one "with consensus". And the fun: we will all do this for ourselves !

 

 

My first contribution (knowing that G(reen) represents the additional 4th shield - not used in this first good sounding config):

A: B-R, B:

 

For this moment I like to leave out the commercial stories (can do that later if needed), although such stories would comprise of explaining in what ways the Lush^3 is inherently better sounding than the Lush^2 in whatever configuration (of either). One hint: ... No, I will let other people tell (probably from off tomorrow).

So relative to something you don't know yet, here is my description of the configuration (A: B-R, B:) today's cables shipped with:

 

Enormously spatial (up to the impossible), with probably not the best of this seen yet (because "spatial" is one of the general properties). It combines with

A robustness of the sound, mostly found in the upper bass. Robust also seems to be a general property. But the configs I tried prior to this one never had

Realistic cymbals. 

Most configs I tried also show an enormous dose of quietness. (blackness). This one does too.

The sound is way way natural. And voices are superb (this too seems to be in place for each config).

 

The description seems cryptic, but it won't be if you first listened to the cable. And when you experiment with it, you will also find that your own descriptions will go in the direction of the way I just did it. ALL are so much better than anything you know from the Lush^2, that it comes down to finding annoyances and denoting that as a reason not to choose the config of concern. It also seems a new kind of listening. Example: if you run into the super spatial behavior (as said, this is a general property), it is quite hard to reject it because of a slightly too hard S in a voice. But you should reject, because you know it can be without it (this first config is the proof of it).

 

Thank you all so much in advance !

Peter

 

[PeterSt]

So ... From A: B-R, B: I went to 

A:B-Y-R, B:

 

This seemed an electrically more balanced config to me. Now the two middle shields are connected at one side, but obviously surrounded by an other shield (W and G), both not connected. So do notice that with the Lush^3 there is no one middle shield any more and thus we need to work with two (Y and R).

 

Very first minute : Too quiet ? Not enough life ? … not sure yet …
Okay, if anything, this shows even more dynamic range than what already showed with the previous config(s). I suppose this is equivalent to “again more quiet”. I think that it could be so that because of this, the sound is even more natural than A:B-R, B: showed already.

 

 

After listening to the above for two days, I changed to 

A:B-Y-R, B:B-Y-R

My text about it:

Best so far !!
Or not. After the second day I was under the impression that this is too much of it for the low-end, but also that possibly there was a too large gap between nice silky highs and that rougher bottom part. Say inconsistent. I noticed that more quiet music is rendered beautifully with this (sub low is also profoundly there), but when it gets rougher, it may get too wild; too much to (brain) process.

 

 

 

[PeterSt]

FileMakerDev, thank you very much for this.

 

We don't have explored many configurations yet, and I'd hope that you can dig into the one MarkusBarkus pointed out, which would be 

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

(also see the picture in his post)

 

I would like to have consensus about the "slam" on the snare drum (with snare on !) staying behind somewhat in your currently used config (A: B-Y-R, B:), while in the one mentioned above this is restored.

 

Per my own explanation the inherently somewhat "lacking" would be caused by the distortion level now being so low, that the "noise-rambling" of the snare does not jump out any more. IOW, we are not used to this (?).

The sheer fact that I can play way louder and only stop cranking up the volume (at 6dB higher already) because otherwise no conversations are possible any more, speaks.

 

I am not seeking for a higher level of distortion again to let the snare jump out, but merely look for that "under punch" it could need extra now to let the snare come forward a bit more.

It seems nit-picking, but with I think 4 configs tried myself so far (in what, 11 days ?) it is clear that I never can do this alone, and that more hands and ears can speed up the process of finding the ultimate.

 

Thanks !!

 

[PeterSt]

20 minutes ago, MarkusBarkus said:

I do not find the more "submerged" cymbal/snare effect to apply to the highs on the vibraphone, which is also an index for me, so I can still use that critically.

 

Markus, thank you.

 

Try to think like this:

The distortion we talk about (read: we'd have to talk about because I can't see it differently at this moment), is all related to speed. This is how cymbals submerge somewhat and how the snare for sure submerges more. Both exhibit while interaction of many frequencies and are inherently messy (for the cymbal I talk about splashing it). Make the speed so high (better: extend the resolution so much) that frequencies run less into each other, and the distortion (an exhibit of bandlimiting) gets lower.

 

Compare with riding the cymbal. Or your vibraphone. Or a random bell. They only sing and sing and sing now, and they do that louder on top of it. Same with the now so crystal clear voices.

 

27 minutes ago, MarkusBarkus said:

what you are considering a high level of detail--if that is your reference/index feature. 

 

In this thread about "ambient" but merely "psybient" music I'm mentioning a lot of artist which exhibit my referenced high level of detail, in 100% of albums. This is because those artist work with that. This is harder to explain, but they use instruments which are not particularly used in Jazz, Rock, Classical, Folk or commercial types of music (Jackson). All of those have become totally unrecognizable, so much has the speed increased. Or so much music came in the place of "gray sound" (referring to synthesizers would be the best in this case).

 

Someone else (possibly this was you) mentioned "Acoustic Jazz week". This is true too because the acoustic instruments play so (sooo) much more refined now. This too is an exhibit of speed (it makes it all more aerial because it leaves "space" where otherwise exists smear). So you'd not appreciate this as more detail readily, but it still is (I'd say look for the vibration of wound strings, but don't forget to listen to the nylon ones as well - I make this up but I think I will be right).

 

The detail can also be heard in the attack and envelope of voices (a bit of a clear throat effect).

 

Anyway, I'll be d*mned if we'd have found the best configuration already. I mean, what I tried to sprout in this very post is not even related to a config, but is merely the general exhibit of this cable.

 

And oh, something I did not mention yet ... talking about vibraphones ...

Watch for flageolets. They now jump out from all angles (the technique can be used by many instruments). And from about day 1 with XXHighEnd this is a kind of measure for me (it is all about making the overtones hence harmonics profound). So that this exhibits now so profoundly, is also telling. Someone over at Phasure long ago mentioned the kettle drum with similar (overtone) behavior. These too pop out now (but play the music of concern, obviously).

Try to focus on these matters ...

[PeterSt]

31 minutes ago, lmitche said:

 

Is it correct to assume the black cable connects to the USB shell on both ends?

 

Hi Larry - Yes. Same as with the Lush^2.

[PeterSt]

On 10/8/2020 at 11:10 PM, MarkusBarkus said:

BTW: the image I pasted up was Peter's and I might have done better to have cited that fact to the community. Mea culpa.

 

But Markus, why would that be a problem ?

The only reason to mention the source is because your photo would probably be better. 😁

Anyway, I decided that with this little project I would post photos of a mentioned configuration. Over at Phasure, but over here at A/S just the same.

Posting a newly found good sounding config over here will be something I am cautious with, because it shouldn't be too ad-hoc (while over at Phasure I feel more "free" to maybe make a mistake here or there - haha).

In the mean time I'm hoping that people report as soon as they found something of value. But this can also be about wrong-sounding configurations, because others might skip those at first (the less to try, the better it is). So here is an example of that (in red, so it hopefully looks "wrong"):

 

Oct 9, 2020 A: Y-R, B: W-Y & R-G This emphasizes even more what the previous config attempted, because W and R are now floating, are thus not interconnected and will have their own life, still extended by R and G respectively. Loud in the Mid (not the highs). Highs have no color at all (but is special somehow). Not sufficiently “interesting”. ... With this I noticed a somewhat strange effect on three Genesis albums (tracks of them) I played; Genesis always showed a a more gray-ish effect on the highs (cymbals) and for the first time I now noticed that this was way more metal than I am used to. On Genesis it gives a more firm drumkit-feeling which I actually liked. But in the end (I listened no longer than an hour to this config) I felt I was wasting my time on this one. No foot tapping. No real specialties either. And the highs of Genesis where way white elsewhere.

 

[PeterSt]

Hi Colin - Thank you for this.

 

To get it straight, you did NOT like the config Matthias referred to for for the better, correct ?

I'm asking, because your post quotes Matthias, and starts with "This".

 

1 hour ago, frederick184 said:

This is the best I’ve heard in my system so far.  All the things Peter said about A:B-Y-R B:W-Y & R-G I’m hearing here.

 

Thus, the A: W-Y & R-G, B: B-Y-R would NOT be the better one over A: B-Y-R B: W-Y & R-G.

If so, I tend to agree with you;

I too don't come further than "with A: W-Y & R-G, B: B-Y-R something is not right". All what I could just recollect from last night's session is that the highs are too extreme for "SPL". So they are overly loud and too close to distortion because of that. It's only that individually playing instruments meant to jump out, do exactly that but in a fashion which is "too much" again ? And the danger (of wrong judgment): How can this be "too much" when it is about an instrument as a whole ? So it should be an explicitly goof feature ??

All 'n all I have not written off A: W-Y & R-G, B: B-Y-R yet. But "something is not right".

 

 

[PeterSt]

For two days (from of Oct 11) I have  been listening to 

A: B-W-G, B: B-W-G

 

I liked this config, maybe better than the ones listed prior to Oct. 9 because nothing was annoying me. But spoiled as I am by now, I also did not find it really special (compared to Lush^2 sure Yes).

 

Then :

 

 

Oct 13, 2020

A: W-Y-R-G, B: W-Y-R
Please notice that this config was handed to me off-line by someone who apparently knows what he is doing. Let the man step forward so he can receive the credits. 🙂
 

 

This configuration shows an unsurpassed clarity in the highs. It is almost unbelievable that it can happen. Together with it, all the color is there (cymbals).
 

My initial description as written in the document I maintain for this:

----

I think it is a WOW. Highs (cymbals) are the best with colors. Also a mighty interesting sound. So realistic.
Skins of drums … also a WOW. So soft, so nicely developed. So colorful.

----

Yesterday I was intrigued by those "firm" highs; Earlier on, I think I told about the 6dB louder I play since the Lush^3, but this is "technically" by observing the digital attenuation I use. Yesterday I also measured and was shocked to read 95dBSPL on the meter, especially on the splashing of cymbals (A Weighed, Fast Response).

Regarding this, notice that my normal "loud level" is 90dBSPL, which is on peaks, but which is not on the sound of cymbals, that I recall. So this is really something.

Real cymbals, show 110dBSPL (measured as always at 1m / ~3ft distance). This, while a grand plays at 90dBSPL; I don't know where the limits are these days, but I start to feel lucky that the cymbals now seem to play at 95dBSPL only, because 110dBSPL would really be too loud (combined with a realistic level of piano).

 

Outside of the above, the bass is also I-don't-know how many steps forward. Here it is clear that this is all about less distortion again, referring to my earlier remark (possibly this was over at Phasure) that I had to tweak playback (XXHE) settings somewhat in order to tame somewhat higher frequency (like low mid-bass) buzzing; It is immediately clear that this now has all gone.

Looking forward to tonight's session and the 4th day into this config ...

 

Shipments from of Monday (Oct 19) will go with this configuration.

 

Peter

 

 

 

 

 

[PeterSt]

7 hours ago, frederick184 said:

So, @PeterSt, who gave you this configuration?  My guess is @lmitche 😊

 

I guess your guess is right. 🙂

[PeterSt]

On 10/16/2020 at 5:55 PM, PeterSt said:

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

 

So for 9 days I have been playing with this configuration, and yesterday I finally decided to take notes during the listening session. The goal of this is, to see whether there's consensus about this configuration indeed. So please respond either way.

Anyway, I have no feedback of the contrary yet, from over here or over at Phasure, with actually more offline response than I'd like (it's better to have it public).

 

Note that the below is always relative to the Lush^2 I have been used to for so long. So for those not owning the Lush^2 it may not really tell much.

 

One thing always recurring is how you can easily envision the drummer sweeping a single drumstick from one cymbal to the other. Mind you, with "sweeping" I mean that it's from forehand to backhand and the other way around (the stick hits the cymbal differently for either situation).

Quite similar will be the running down the different toms the drummer possesses. This in itself will be related to the so much more colorful sound of the (tension of ! the) skins. I told about this before - this is now the most life-like when compared to the drum kit we have over here (for the purpose of comparing - believe it or not).

 

An also ever and ever recurring notice is how much variation there is in an originally perceived straight tone. There's now an unbelievable nuance-difference in about everything.

I can't explain what I am talking about, except for that it makes the longest "tracks" interesting, because of these variations. Maybe when I refer to Klaus Schulze, people can imagine how dull a 20+ minute track can be (can come across), but with my now promise that this just as well can be 20+ minutes of sheer interest. And oh, I already knew about this difference (when a long track loses my interest within a few minutes, something has to be amiss), but with the Lush^3 this has become "crazy". Anyway, take Bill Frisell and albums like Gone, just like a Train

 

and there you'd hear the effect I am talking about, although very extreme (it's just his way of doing things).

It is not vibrato as such, but the very deep and long sweeping effect of changing pitch. For effects there can even be noise-like tones, which may change an octave or two over the period of maybe 15 seconds, which "noise" just wasn't there before. Thus, via this means I try to explain how a 20+ minute track can become interesting, just because of these things may be in there too.

 

For flanger I have the very same remark, but yesterday I couldn't find an example quickly. I thought about a Rhodes (keyboard), tried a few quick Doors tracks, but the Rhodes would be too much of it. So here too, what I am talking about is the most slight nuance difference which comes forward. If I run into an example I will post it (with the idea that you can't hear it, but with the Lush^3 you will - so think of a teaser).

 

In my internal notes I added that the slight frequency changes as well as the flanger just described, must be related (or very similar) to the exponential dynamic range the Lush^3 seems to "provide". And really, I hope that someone can at least confirm this aspect (because it really seems odd to me that/how it can happen).

 

At times (depending on the track) the spaciousness regarding left/right interaction, is huge (yes, why all these superlatives ?). Elsewhere I already talked about a vastly improved stereo phase response (all comes really together when listening in the middle of the speakers, and this was not so (much) so). ... But now this also seems to imply additional stereo separation.

 

What also keeps occurring is the sheer analogues sound. I think I am referring to the drum kit's behavior(s) again, but mind you, my very very first initial response to the Lush^3 (now a month or so ago) was about the snare drum and how it was *not* profound any more (by now I would call the profoundness annoying ?). Just try to hear the color of a snare drum with snare on. This now works; previously it did not at all.

My last line in my internal comment's document refers to again Klaus Schulze, but me referring to his Synthesizer being analog. Don't ask me whether this can bring extra beauty, but somehow I made the association after playing Global Midication on this one (Wahnfried Trance 4 Motion) :

 

What I noticed before and yesterday again, is the richness of chords of an electric guitar. Of course this requires the right tracks or artist, but yesterday it was Bugs Henderson doing this so nicely. As if the stroke strings now play separately, while previously they blended (too much).

Btw, I think it was John A who talked about the same on a Lyle Lovett track.

 

[PeterSt]

John, see my post a bit up, from Oct 16, 2020. The config is labeled "Oct 13, 2020" (same green text).

[PeterSt]

17 hours ago, lmitche said:

Anyway, I am open to improved configurations. Hmmm, perhaps I should try a fifth layer?

 

Haha, Larry, please no. In itself easy to do for us of course, but we must see through the coincidence of you finding this now "with consensus" configuration, while not ore than 10 configurations passed our hands in the first place (or people keep them a secret ?). So 1013 more to go ... but I myself am reluctant because it is too G-D good to waste even an hour of listening joy. I more and more am impressed by the robustness of the cymbals and I should try to play more known music expressing that.

 

17 hours ago, lmitche said:

 

The mechanism at work here is a mystery to me. Is it: RFI/EMI elimination?, greater capacitance?, lower impedance?

 

From the analog point of view (and in the end all is "analog signal" as such) it will be all of it. But what I hear - and this was in my very first post about the Lush^3 (somewhere) - is that there's more signal preserved. This is how the "Eco" designation came into play. Same power, way more output. The Eco thing is a gag of course, but this is literally how all music "feels". And because of the law of energy can not be created or destroyed, something seems to be in order like:

what was first emitted into the air (and illegally captured elsewhere on top of it) now is preserved in the signal itself, which makes the signal way more robust and this is exactly hat we hear all over.

Weren't it that ...

 

Weren't it that this is a protocol signal and I see no way of how my description above can apply.

It really is about time that I start measuring a few things, knowing that I still have that analyzer for this sitting new in an unopened box (I know, crazy, but time time time ...).

 

Great thanks, Larry !

Peter

 

 

 

 

[PeterSt]

15 minutes ago, frederick184 said:

As we know, that Lush is infinitely configurable so that may change.  

 

Thank you Colin.

And since you were of of the early birds, you were also sent one of the early configurations. The currently official "best one" is much better already, but since 3 days I have found a way better one myself again (this is still an official secret - haha).

After a final judgment tonight and carefully observing the properties, I will put up this config and and properties.

 

Regards,

Peter

[PeterSt]

Meanwhile I have some other kind of "sad" news ...

 

From how the Lush^2's number of configurations was calculated, I extrapolated to 1023 possibilities for the Lush^3. But I'm afraid that the number of the Lush^2 ad 255 was wrong to begin with, as it did not take into account the "&" situations, like

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

 

So the past week I have been working on a program that can enumerate all the unique possibilities and this comes to 2304 different configurations. Here's an example of the last part of the output:

 

 

To me it is obvious that this is too hard to deal with, especially because we have no real logic to apply. This, while each other configuration I try myself, sounds different than the previous one (and in general discernibly different from all of the others tried to far).

 

I am now working on some kind of (web based ?) document/spreadsheet in which we can all contribute and share our attempts and findings.

I will also try to work on some automated graphical representation of what we are shield-wise actually applying. From there I hope to see "lines" of what next to attempt and what apparently never works out well (I already have a few ideas about the latter). From there we should be able to "filter" to the better solutions sooner.

 

 

Meanwhile I had made this for myself:

 

 

Which is an in itself shielded extension of the Lush^3 wires, at a length which is sufficient to reach from the back of my DAC to where I can control those switches.

 

(A: W-Y-R)

 

I have the same extension on the PC side, so I can flip the dip switches without disconnecting the cable. The connection will also stay stable, from what I have noticed so far.

The sound seems not to be influenced by these extensions, so what I do should still be representative for you out there.

 

Peter

 

[PeterSt]

1 hour ago, matthias said:

not stirring the pot,

 

Matt, please respect people's decision to answer (or not) in their own way and by their own decision. Behind the scenes more could be going on (really).

Danke !

 

Peter

[PeterSt]

6 hours ago, FileMakerDev said:

On 11/11/2020 at 4:01 PM, PeterSt said:

 

The currently official "best one" is much better already, but since 3 days I have found a way better one myself again (this is still an official secret - haha).

After a final judgment tonight and carefully observing the properties, I will put up this config and and properties.

 

Looking forward to trying this out when you're ready to reveal it.

 

 

The past days I went an other route; I mean, since too few people seem to experiment (which is their good right), I need another way of approaching this. Start at the beginning, like 

A:, B:

 

That's right. Nothing connected whatsoever. And with Green color. :-)

So I started with this one 3 days ago, and I am still very happy with it. The sound is totally different again, with IMO these features:

- Very very normal but with still enormous detail;

- Sounding like the Blumenhofer Concert X speaker.

 

The latter is something not everybody will know, but that speaker sounds very special in the highs. Its main character is that a hit closed hi-hat really sounds like that, and that highs generally are rendered like that sound. It is hard to explain. But if I had to buy a new speaker for some reason, I definitely would go for the Blumenhofer. And now my own speakers sound like that. Ha !

Maybe @matthias knows it(s sound) and if so, he may be able to explain better what's special about its sound.

 

Anyway, this config is the most analog sounding so far, and this expresses mainly in the differentiation of the drums (the various toms) and cymbals. This is so much so (and I like it that much) that I did not have the lust yet to change this config.

Obviously the logic is that nothing is connected, so also nothing can be passed on for electrical noise in the shield from device to device, or from device to the cable itself (the latter as in A: connected and B: open ended). My next attempts will be based upon this principle (nothing connected).

 

Peter

 

 

 

[PeterSt]

3 hours ago, FileMakerDev said:

Okay, here's some feedback.

 

Great thanks for this !

[PeterSt]

21 hours ago, MarkusBarkus said:

albeit perhaps not quite as emphasized in the highs.

 

Emphasized is not the best descriptor, perhaps, as I do not mean the other config is "over bright." 

 

Hi Markus - I can easily see that you're having a same dilemma as I have. I mean, I wanted to express quite the same, but did not know how to do that in well fashion. Anyway, what I wanted to say is:

 

This A:, B: configuration is somewhat less tiring for the brain, because it doesn't bring to attention all the extreme details all the time; these extreme details seem to have vanished, BUT they are still there at close listening. So A:, B: is more easy to listen to, and not bad at the same time.

 

Over at Phasure I just described that A:, B: to me has a quite clear character, which generally is not the best thing (for me, but this one I am able to like).

 

By sheer coincidence I too listened to a full album with trumpet and I noticed how warm it sounded (say the opposite of how copper should sound, which is very "square" and for which undoubtedly A: W-Y-R-G, B: W-Y-R will be a best).

 

 

Thank you for your great comment !

Peter

 

[PeterSt]

16 hours ago, robocop said:

Interesting many years ago(more than 20) it was a tweak to disconnect the screens on interconnects to get better sound. This did spur cables without screens we are talking analogue before digital was up and running.  

 

 

Hey Robert,

 

Yes, I was in the league too. But mind you, not knowing better, I could disconnect the ground of one side just the same (not towards speakers).

 

On a not unimportant note (and FWIW), it is my personal opinion that the not connecting anything for shields is hardly an electrical matter. Instead it is just how shielding works out and this does not related to an electrical connection per sé.

Example :

 

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

 

This inter connects the shields of W and Y and separately the shields of R and G. This is done on one side only, so looking from of the B: side, it actually extends the W shield via the A: connector and Y shield. And this occurs "counter flow" directions (from B to A and back from A to B. Try to envision what kind of things will be going on in those shields (assumed "any" in the first place).

This config sounds much better to my ears than :

 

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

which will not allow for "counter flow" at all. Just two pairs of close-by shields connected in parallel and again not connected to the outside at both ends.

This sounds different and my description of it is "nasty sounding".

 

So this is way way beyond what we both thought of it 20+ years ago, and although we clearly know that it does more than "something" we do not know yet what it is exactly.

 

Regards,

Peter

[PeterSt]

Meanwhile I am definitely back on it makes all so enormously interesting.

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

it makes all so enormously interesting. And pure. And new.

 

[PeterSt]

Thank you @MarkusBarkus - I will try that tonight !

[PeterSt]

18 hours ago, MarkusBarkus said:

How about I meet you half-way, Peter? 
A: W-Y-R-G, B:

 

Is that supposed to sound good?

 

Markus, for me this does not work;

The stereo image seems too narrow and over here there seems to be quite a hole in the frequency spectrum (I'd say in mid bass, which could be why the bass seems to excel (that is so indeed here too)).

 

There's also insufficient fun from the speed the Lush^3 can express. But this will be (could be ?) related to my overly-fast system.

 

[PeterSt]

15 hours ago, elcorso said:

And the Antolini a real "Knock Out"

 

Wait ... I did not talk to anyone about Knock Out, was I ?

Only three days ago I played it myself with a changed config on my Blaxius^2 and in combination with the Lush^3 it indeed was a Knock Out. Wow. I never heard it like that before.

Anyway, pure coincidence I guess.

 

...

 

Nah ... I was talking about Antolini somewhere. But I forgot where it was ...

 

Thank you Roch !!

Peter

[PeterSt]

On 12/17/2020 at 11:54 AM, tore said:

Peter, can you share the Blaxius^2 config with us ?  😉

 

Hi tore,

 

This story is longer (I should write in in the Phasure forum) but for now this will do:

A:B-W, B:B-W

 

Regards,

Peter

 

[PeterSt]

@tore, Please notice that this really requires breaking in, as you will be changing the signal "wire" per this change compared to the config the Blaxius^2 is shipped with. Or better: The current flowed over 3 shields, while as per this change it will flow over one shield only (the White).
I really can hear it improving day by day so far.