Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country


About ecwl

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    Winnipeg, MB, Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

12498 profile views
  1. I agree with everyone else’s general suggestion which is that moving from your current system to LS50 Wireless feels more like a parallel change in sound (with differences in ergonomics and size) rather than a true upgrade in sound. If I were you, and I already have a subwoofer, the first thing I would do is buy a MiniDSP UMIK-1 microphone and learn how to use it with the free Room EQ Wizard (REW) software to measure the frequency response of the speakers alone at my primary listening position and then re-integrate my subwoofer with the speakers for the sole purpose of just filling
  2. I have often wondered how much of the sonic improvement is due to a switch from SMPS to LPS thus reducing high impedance leakage current coming from the PC and how much of the sonic improvement is due to actual improvements to the power supply (noise in the DC current, impedance, etc.) Theoretically, one can test it out by feeding DAVE via Toslink using stock SMPS vs DC4 to compare. As someone who switched back to Toslink to avoid high impedance leakage current for DAVE, I have to admit it's a bit inconvenient. So at the end of the day, I think the system we want to have is the syste
  3. I agree with all the suggestions above. I also think it'll be interesting to get 1) John Swenson 2) Rob Watts from Chord Electronics 3) Alon Wolf from Magico 4) Bruno Putzeys
  4. Works for me in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. Using macOS Big Sur v11.1, Intel 2017 12" MacBook And I've listened to the podcast on my iPhone 12 Pro (iOS 14.3) so that works too. I don't know why it didn't work for @steve21
  5. I can’t believe I’ve gone back to tweaking my convolution filter. Been doing this intermittently since October 2020 as I can see from my own post. I was originally going to play around with a few target responses but ended up still preferring EBU3276. But to get an optimal frequency response curve, I have to embrace a -6.7dB drop in volume. So while playing around with the settings, I created a filter that only causes a -2.7dB drop in volume by using less aggressive correction (mostly in the midrange/treble which is just my luck). And I have to admit, i cannot hear the subtle changes due
  6. Oh. I finally understood what happened. It’s working already. Right, so @firedog is right. You probably had Roon do all the processing in DSD, so it was either applying the convolution filter in DSD? Or it was doing DSD to PCM then convolution then PCM back to DSD? Not sure. But bottom line, that was too much for Roon which you’ve now disabled. But as @Miska said, you can probably do that without any problems with HQPlayer because it’s software written directly to use all your CPUs & GPUs to compute.
  7. Ah... haha... Right. It’s high for Roon and not for HQPlayer... Definitely. HQPlayer best software for this kind of DSP.
  8. I don’t know what your HQP settings are. But for Roon, what is happening is that your 352kHz convolution filter is 880k taps which is insanely high. I think my convolution filter at 44.1kHz is only 66k taps. I suspect yours was 110k taps to begin with for 44.1kHz. But when I generated the convolution filters for higher sample rates in Acourate, they are still 66k taps. So my 352kHz convolution filter is still 66k taps which is why it won’t overwhelm my desktop to apply the convolution filter. I’m actually surprised if you’re to play 192kHz music, your system doesn’t grind
  9. So I usually listen mostly to classical music, frequently based on the recommended albums from Gramophone magazine. Occasionally, I listen to pop to keep up with the zeitgeist. But whenever I read an audiophile gear review, I would sometimes pull up the music that the reviewer listened to on Tidal and see how it sounds with my system or my headphones. I do find it’s a little annoying that sometimes, the music is not on Tidal or sometimes it takes a bit of work to find the track on Tidal. I wish reviewers would just have an online Tidal playlist that I can click on.
  10. I live in a 2-bedroom apartment and a single router works fine for me. The key for me were: 1) I no longer have any devices on the 2.4GHz wifi band 2) so I just set the 5GHz band to be strong enough to reach everywhere. 3) and to ensure that my neighbors are not on the same 5GHz band 4) and finally to reduce load, I run a wire from the router to a switch in my living room so the TV, nVidia Shield, Apple TV are all connected by Ethernet cables instead of running them on wifi. It’s probably overkill since the system was fine without.
  11. I think initially, I didn't appreciate that Parker Duo is actually a higher end line of Martens than Oscar Trio. First, I agree with @firedog that if you can't hear it, you really don't know what you'd prefer. In general, within the same speaker company's line of products, the higher end line would usually have better transparency and less distortion and hence better clarity but the price jump is generally quite significant (like luxury cars). But since I hang out at my dealer's store quite a bit, I would say that most people who don't know what they're looking for would choose mor
  12. In my mind, until the speakers are in the room, and you’re listening in the seat, you don’t know how the bass will sound as you don’t really know what bass frequencies are going to be accentuated and what would be troughs. But yeah, in general, I think the more deep bass the better. But more importantly, I think all high end systems should have a digital way to remove the bass peaks, at least parametric EQ, if not a full convolution filter. Marten Oscar Trio is a 5-figure pair of speakers. MiniDSP UMIK-1 microphone is $75. Room EQ Wizard is free. I guess playback software
  13. I don’t think that’s totally true. Obviously, the ASR measurements are presumably done on the same PC’s and the Hi Fi News measurements are don’t on a different PC that is used for all the measurements. But I don’t think introducing a high-end desktop PC with no noise injected into the DAC is going to suddenly make a DAC hardware with low poor low-level linearity into a DAC with great low-level linearity. By all means, anyone who is interested can send your favorite low-noise PC to ASR or Hi Fi News for them to use. I think a lot of this is fundamental to the DAC’s hardware architecture
  14. While this is somewhat true, but even if you’re to use HQPlayer to send excellently upsampled and noise-shaped DSD512 signals to your DAC, your DAC hardware still has to be able to produce that low level of linearity. A simple thought experiment is that if your DSD DAC has lots and lots of jitter, it doesn’t matter how great the noise-shaping is for the DSD512 signal, the actually analog output would still have poor low-level linearity.
  15. Forgive me for not having read all 18 pages here. But I did a quick search for some keywords and didn’t see them so I presume (and was surprised) this wasn’t discussed. Although I think @barrows sort of touched on this a little I have always thought that one of the reasons why digital volume can sometimes sound inferior to an analog preamp is because a lot of DACs don’t have great low-level linearity. This is measurable except I only see Hi Fi News and Audio Science Review measure this. Randomly I selected one DAC with good linearity and one with poor linearity from bot
  • Create New...