Is DEQX a game changer?

Just read a bit and it sure sounds interesting. Does it sound like the best way to upgrade speakers?
Interesting. I need to read up more about this. Does anyone have experience with this ?
"Game changer" appears to be the latest marketing terminology. In 2014 alone, it now seems like dozens of audio components are "game changers". LOL!
If you haven't already seen it, take a look at the comments about DEQX on pages 3 and 4 of the recent "Sloped Baffle" thread. (Expand the contents of all of the posts on each page if necessary, by clicking on the date of the first response on each page, and use your browser's "find" function (usually under the "edit" menu) to search the page for "DEQX").

I've read through all of the the writeups at their website, and I certainly find it to be an intriguing product, especially given that it can in many cases serve as a preamp as well as providing sophisticated room and speaker correction. And I'll say that my BS meter never budged above zero while reading through those materials.

-- Al
Have not heard and do not know how well executed (always the key), but I agree that the theory seems sound and the approach practical, so definitely something that would be worth hearing for me and I would go in optimistic about hearing some good things.

Digital processing of sound that comes out of a speaker compared to what is fed into it sounds like a very practical approach and one that should be practically addressable with modern technology and signal processing algorithms.

So it passes the initial BS test and worth further investigation for me.

There may be other similar solutions out there as well but don't know so I could not compare this to any other options that might exist.
Post removed 
I've been trying to arrange a DEQX home audition. Came close to setting something up tomorrow, but vacation schedules got in the way. Hopefully, soon after Labor Day.

Bob, if you read through the Sloped Baffle thread, you might get a better sense of what the DEQX device can do. The beating heart in NOT room equalization ... it is time coherence correction.

Most speakers on the market are not time coherent. They may be phase coherent at the x-over points, but not time coherent. The DEQX measures actual time incoherence of one's speakers and makes corrections by delaying various slices of the sonic spectrum to align the output of the various drivers. Room EQ is just an added plus.

If you look at most of the Stereophile speaker reviews, one of John Atkinson's tests involves a time coherence analysis. What you see in most cases is the tweeter reacting first, then the mid driver, followed up by the woofer. Sometimes, one or more drivers are wired in reverse polarity to achieve phase coherence at the x-over points.

So in the more usual case, the DEQX will slice up the sonic output of the source signal into 4000 segments. Then, using a very sophisticated chip, the DEQX will delay (up to 10 micro seconds) the various segments in order to achieve time coherency. Since the tweeters generally respond before woofer, the sonic spectrum covered by the tweeter may be time delayed vis a vis the woofer. The same approach is applied with the mid driver.

Back to the Sloped Baffle thread -- Roy Johnson of Green Mountain Audio has posted some great articles that explain why most speakers are not time coherent, the impact on the summed wave form, and how he attempts to effect corrections. In most cases, the fix, or his fix, is to use 1st order x-overs and to recess the tweeter and mid driver vis a vis the woofer so that the voice coils of each driver are perfectly aligned in vertical space.

The DEQX does this electronically.

So, I'll report back as soon as I can arrange my home audition.
Post removed 
@Bob -- just wait until I home audition the DEQX. As seems to be the case with a great many audio issues, there is a divergence of opinion.

Yes ... on the hand, the time coherence opponents say that most people can't tell the difference between a time coherent speaker and one that is not time coherent. The naysayers may add that like all engineering problems, trade off are made. Perhaps there is greater flexibility in driver selection in the time incoherent space.

OTOH, folks like Bombaywalla, Roy Johnston, Rich Vandersteen, and the late Jim Thiel urge us fence sitters to drink the Kool-Aid. And as stated above, Roy has written some really good white papers that explain time coherence and why it so important.

At this point ... I am still sitting on the fence and will continue to do so until the US DEQX sale reps sets me up with a home demo.

So ... to my fellow fence sitters, hopefully sometime after Labor Day I will be able to post my reactions.


08-21-14: Bob_reynolds
Bruce, thanks for the additional insight. Is there a reason that most speakers on the market are not time coherent? I think so -- it's way down on the list for impacting sonics. Meadowlark claimed to be in the time coherent school and published a nice looking triangle graph. They didn't sound time coherent to me, i.e., I couldn't tell that they were or weren't. Things that have a large impact on frequency response like room correction will definitely be audible. So, time coherence may be DEQX's selling point, but that won't be reason enough for me to be interested.
Bob, you couldn't be more wrong about time-coherence & it's importance to music playback.
Most speaker designers simply do not understand the math & physics to make a speaker time-coherent so they skip this part totally.
For the Meadowlarks you might have known how to set-up the speaker &/or what to listen for to ensure that you were seated in the right location to hear the time-coherence. Plus, guidance could have been poor from the manuf.

I would strongly urge you, as Al already has, to read that "Sloped Baffle" thread he provided the link to & search for DEQX & read other things about time-coherence. I believe it will be educational to you.

BTW, there is atleast one member in that thread, lewinskih01, who is using DEQX & has found it to be transformational in his system - it made his speakers trend more towards the time-coherence paradigm than before & he is pleased with the results (so he wrote).
whatever makes your speakers more time-coherent will make your listening even better.

And, if your system pix are the latest, I see that you are doing atleast 1 aspect of the time-coherence thing: time-alignment of drivers. You have your tweeters pointed out on both channels. This makes the path length from the tweeter a bit longer compared to the woofer which has the effect of time-aligning the acoustical centers of those 2 drivers. That helps to intergrate the sound of the drivers at the listening position.
So, if this is any clue to me, you are going to like a time-coherent speaker even more.
That "sloped baffle" thread is a good one to read. I 3rd Almarg & Bifwynne on your reading that thread.....
Gotta tell ya. Getting the DEQX audition arranged up has been a frustrating PITA. I'll be generous and attribute it to the summer time and vacations. But if it's half as good as it's hyped, it is an important tweak that serious audiophiles should be thinking about.

As I said, hopefully, shortly after labor day and I'll have something to report.

If DEQX doesn't do a better job of getting a more responsive dealer network established, I fear crash and burn.

I'll have more to say after the audition.

@Bob ... time coherence is not just pure BS. Manufacturers make design decisions based on pluses and minuses. I don't enough about the engineering or the cost accounting math to weigh in. But I'm sure that if top companies like Focal, Revel and Magico could figure out a way to push the square peg into the round hole and solve every problem, they would do it.

It's all about trade offs. Poor Roy Johnson and GMA. I showed my exterminator a pic of Roy's top of the line speakers, and he was ready to pull DTT out of his truck. LOL!!

I'll be back.
Bifwynne, Even though such an experiment on the surface might appear to provide a correct time / incorrect time value check with everything else being relatively the same: and on the one hand I don't want to discourage your experiment(heck, I'm curious too), but, on the other hand I'm not sure the DEQX by by itself is the ideal way to determine how important wave fidelity is. I would be concerned that unless the speakers were designed from the start towards those aspirations they might not be hospitable to the demands made upon them by such manipulations. The DEQX might(?) actually be in conflict with the speakers designs intentions.
Perhaps, I'm mistaken, but don't think Bob is too far off course here with the idea that a speaker designed from the get go for wave fidelity combined with digital room correction might be the ideal way to go. I suspect that the future might yet provide for digital signal corrected for room considerations into digital cross-overs into class D amps into individual drivers that might provide the ultimate fidelity for listeners in real rooms.
Just to clarify: I participated in the "sloped baffle" thread and mentioned the DEQX, but I don't own it nor have heard it. I've been interested in time-aligned speakers and discussed this with a couple knowleadgeable people who have tried them, and in that context I discussed with an owner of a DEQX who uses it for DRC and as DAC (he doesn't do time alignment though). He has a very expensive system, spoke super highly about this unit, and said it replaced a $30k DAC.

Bifiwyne: how are you planning to set up your audition? I see you have Paradigm S8 and a sub (or two?). Since you have a turntable, I'm guessing you'll have it after the preamp and driving amps directly. It is my understanding such a setup would allow the unit to perform the room correction and set delays between subwoofer amp and S8 amp, but to time-align the drivers in the S8 you would need to disconnect the crossovers and drive each driver with one channel of an amp. I myself am very intrigued by this approach, but realize it's cumbersome and requires more amps to try out.

If I may, I'd like to make the OP's initial question broader: "is DSP as it stands today a game changer?" I'm VERY intrigued. Just as to some who never heard it this makes no sense, to me (never heard it either) makes a lot of theoretical sense. And the few I exchanged with who have tried it speak highly about it.

For those of us with only computer sources, there are cheaper ways to try this. Acourate DSP software + Lynx Hilo is one option. Here are two articles on such use worth reading:
1) doing room correction
2) time-aligning drivers

To me, actively multi-amping always made a lot of theoretical sense, but the incremental cost of amps and cables and XO made it non-practical/economical. But with these software/multichannel DAC packages we could do without the preamp and XO and associated cables, plus we can do time-alignment. Is it worth vs my beloved Lamm preamp? Well...that is what intrigues me!
In full disclosure, this also would open a door for me to build my own speakers, an additional benefit to me. I'm a mechanical engineer and comfortable with the mechanics associated with speakers and drivers and room, and building stuff, but I'm not up to par for building crossovers. So if I can have a software tackle that piece, I could build my speakers - that would be fun!

Anyway, sorry I digressed. I guess I used this post as therapy! I couldn't talk to anybody about these things without them thinking I lost it...maybe I'm not alone here? :-)

08-24-14: Lewinskih01
Just to clarify: I participated in the "sloped baffle" thread and mentioned the DEQX, but I don't own it nor have heard it.
sorry Lewinskih01, I thought you were the fella who had DEQX.
In that case I must have mistaken it with the OP - Psag - of the "sloped baffle" thread who has DEQX.

yeah, Bruce has a few of us waiting with bated breath on 2 of his trials - over a month ago he was going to get some Home Depot thick gauge wire to try out as speaker cables & see if they bested his current audiophile speaker cables & the 2nd is his DEQX experiment (which seems to be delayed to after Labor Day).
Bruce, are you going to do that speaker cables A/B anytime soon? Or, is that just idle talk? Thanks.
@Bombaywalla, not idle talk re romex. Summer has been very busy time. Also, trying to get the DEQX guys to get their act together has been a major PITA. The US rep said after Labor Day. The reasons for the delays are not worth repeating ... too boring.

I haven't forgotten about the DEQX and will report back.

@Lew ... not sure that's the way it works re the self powered sub and my Ref 150/mains. But I'll report back.

@Unsound ... not sure I'm the guy who can respond to your concerns.

I'll copy and pass these Qs along to the US rep.

Near the end of the "best speaker you ever heard" thread I mention Overkill using DEQX as a "game changer" FOR ME not simply for what the speakers were doing but more importantly for what they were not doing. You start with a spectacular speaker design and take it to the next level of adaptation in the room with DEQX. As I recall the speaker had no internal crossover at all. Both drivers were directly connected to the DEQX as room correction and crossover combined. It would make a crappy speaker better but that's missing the point isn't it.

As a purity/ transparency nut I would have never believed running the signal through an active xover could sound so surreal and "pure" but that remains the most honest (you are there) rendering of seemingly limitless 3Dimensional 2-channel to date. Recently I listened at a friends house to the Fleetwood Mac reunion concert in full Revel Salon 2 surround that was sweet, clear, DIMENSIONAL and beyond powerful. Surround sound quality is outstanding, highly recommended, Lindsey B. leaves the planet. What I heard with a redbook cd in the Overkill room w/DEQX (optimized to the highest level) remains the absolute high bar. BTW The Salon 2 properly optimized can also completely vanish.
I am a DEQX user (HDP3 since mid 2012) and for me it has certainly been a game changer. It is not an easy product to set up and takes a great deal of research and learning to perfect. I now consider myself quite experienced. This was once I properly understood all the nuances of crossover slopes, phase, time alignment and room effects. What follows below is a simplified description of the procedure for using DEQX. The manual itself is lengthy and in many cases not easily comprehended (ie not difficult to get it wrong in several important aspects)

Originally I calibrated and used a pair of existing Shahinian Obelisks and the improvement compared to the sound I was familiar with was very dramatic. This was with the standard passive crossovers in place and blended to a pair of subs. By time-aligning these and with subtle room equalisation below 250hz, it was the first time that the crossover to the subs truly became seamless and all room effects disappeared (no exaggeration). I remember swearing out loud when I first got this, it has to be heard to believe it!

After a few months and fully appreciating what the DEQX could do, I decided to build a pair of Open Baffle speakers. Mid-sub crossovers are at 100hz (72db slopes), mid-treble at 3145hz (60db slopes). Extreme slopes allow individual amps and driver sets to operate within a narrow band and this creates very clean and dynamic transients

The beauty of DEQX is that you can calibrate these outdoors (raised ideally above grass, not a hard surface and no walls around so there are only very faint and unimportant reflections to corrupt the microphone reading) - the software creates a flat frequency response, which can be verified. Then when a mic is placed at the listening chair indoors, it compares with the original 'anecholic' result and time aligns all the drivers including phase at each frequency etc. All you then need to do is further manually time align the separately calibrated subs, if you use them. Very clever and effective - sitting in the sweet spot is holographic & 3D sounding. Performers 'hang' in space before you, realism way beyond anything I have heard in a hi-fi dealer demo, exhibition or, frankly anywhere else including some very expensive and otherwise impressive systems. My own speakers also manage to beat the Shahinians in every respect but I suspect this is more to do with 3 separate frequency bands being opimised for each driver set and very steep crossovers. The way this was described to me is like the latest military aircraft or Airbus. These are intrinsically unstable but sophisticated software allows them to fly. In the case of a fighter jet, often way beyond the realms of normal aerodynamics. I think that is what the DEQX algorithms do

Oh, and by the way...everything you do can be listened to using 4 presets to compare and changes made in real time whilst music is playing (including time alignment which I can only describe like turning the dial on a lens until suddenly everything falls into crystal clear focus, very useful)

DEQX is also an excellent preamp, completely neutral and very analogue sounding to my ears (I play a lot of vinyl) and also contains very good DACs (only bettered by a new Graham Slee product called the Majestic. I had previously used a Chord 64 and the DEQX DAC was much more musical, the Slee even more so)

I only caution someone borrowing and trying to set this up themselves in a short time. You may get 50-60% of what is possible but not appreciate what it can really do. When you do eventually dial everything in correctly, there really is no going back. I probably sound like I am preaching so sorry about that - I am 57 years old, have been fanatical about music all my adult life, am extremely fussy about realism and my loft is full of expensive but ultimately unrewarding hi-fi kit. If anything, after 2 years, I am more enthusiastic about DEQX that I was before
I agree with Drewan77 wholeheartedly. And congratulations on doing it yourself, sir! I've owned my DEXQ for three years, and even though I don't use the active crossovers, I would not venture to do the calibrations myself.

"Like turning the dial on a lens until suddenly everything falls into crystal clear focus." Yes, that is exactly my experience as well.

Another amazing aspect is that the preamp section is utterly transparent, to my ear, with an analog source.
time-coherence is the way to go........I'm tellin' ya!
Bifwynne, Lewinskih01: you guys have your work cut out for you should you choose the DEQX route... ;-)
(or buy a properly designed time-coherent speaker ;-))
but it looks like the rewards are worth it.

I'm utterly interested. What you did is very, very close to what I intend to do: first room-correct with my existing system in 2 channels for L/R plus 2 channels for subs, then get more amps and use 6 channels for bass/mids/treble on L & R plus the 2 subs, and eventually experiment building my speakers. But since I need 8 channels the DEQX falls a little short and since I only use a server as source then I can do DSP there.

I would very much welcome the opportunity to contact you directly to learn from your experience. My mail is like my userID here ad yahoo dot com.

Hi Lewinskih01
No problem, I will mail you. I am in the UK

Yes a single DEQX processor handles 6 channels/6 amps. You could add a second of course (I may one day add the latest HDP4, these things are very expensive but worth every penny)

My setup is:
Treble, 2 channels +3145hz
Mids, 2 channels 100-3145hz
Bass, 2 channels -100hz (2 separate subs, different placements)

I originally purchased the HDP3 because I could not integrate the sub (single M&K MX200 at that time) to the Obelisks without occasional audible crossover dips or humps which drove me crazy. The DEQX made the crossover seamless and I was happy for the first time. It's going to be a compromise for you: Because with only 6 channels you may need to either take the clarity and image realism using the DEQX for the main speakers and live with imperfect sub integration or maybe combine mid-bass or mid-treble on the main speakers so you achieve the cleanest bass. I would take this route personally. Whatever you do I am happy to assist as much as I can
Hi Lewinskih01
No problem, I will mail you. I am in the UK

Yes a single DEQX processor handles 6 channels/6 amps. You could add a second of course (I may one day add the latest HDP4, these things are very expensive but worth every penny)

My setup is:
Treble, 2 channels +3145hz
Mids, 2 channels 100-3145hz
Bass, 2 channels -100hz (2 separate subs, different placements)

I originally purchased the HDP3 because I could not integrate the sub (single M&K MX200 at that time) to the Obelisks without occasional audible crossover dips or humps which drove me crazy. The DEQX made the crossover seamless and I was happy for the first time. It's going to be a compromise for you: Because with only 6 channels you may need to either take the clarity and image realism using the DEQX for the main speakers and live with imperfect sub integration or maybe combine mid-bass or mid-treble on the main speakers so you achieve the cleanest bass. I would take this route personally. Whatever you do I am happy to assist as much as I can
That is a great peek into why more audiophiles aren't using DEQX. Perhaps DEQX's R&D will be able to make user interfaces/optimization much less cumbersome in the near future. From my encounter with DEQX (obviously dialed in) it clearly qualifies as the big dog in the final frontier of products in the quest for glorious 2 channel.

I have a question if you could answer...

Have you found that the sonic differences of amplifiers any less apparent when going through DEQX? Considering you've used different amps.

Answering After_hrs question, the difference in the quality of music after setting DEQX into the system is so astounding that it is impossible to compare the amps

An important aspect here is that when you measure & correct the speakers (ie outdoors) and then calibrate, re measure and correct in the listening position, this is with each amp/channel as you will use in the final setup. Source components (in my case Vinyl/CD/SACD/Streamed FLAC) only play a part during final time alignment tweaks or equalisation on-the-fly whilst listening to music. This is a really good feature so you can arrive at exactly the sound you want

DEQX corrects what the mic hears and therefore the impact (or otherwise) of each amp is taken into account. The end result just sounds lifelike and 'neutral', without colouration. Equally importantly, all the bass humps and dips have audibly disappeared and the room/speaker interface has no bearing on the sound. DEQX will also enable you to take bass to unbelievable levels if you so desire and if the drivers will allow it. At the same time it remains uncoloured - hard to believe it is possible until you hear it

Another example is that I have tried 3 different types of speaker in 2 different rooms with a different power amplifier controlling the midrange and if used correctly, the end result is remarkably similar. I have changed to different brands for mid and treble in my current setup and it has no discernable bearing (and I am someone who knows that system/room intimately). That is very impressive

If there is a downside, apart from the relative complexity in learning the process correctly, it is that I now spend all my spare time in that damned music room and my already vast music collection grows weekly :)
Not really dissenting, but just want to make the point DEQX is not the only option. I think what is to me a game changer is DSP, and the ability to room-correct plus time-align the drivers. This is my opinion and I still need to try it for myself.

DEQX is attractive in that it's a one box solution that performs very well, allows you to also correct non-computer sources, but sells for $5500 or so. So rather expensive.

BTW, the same DEQX owner who told me it replaced a $30k DAC with it and was very happy, now told me the exaSound e28 is a sonic equivalent of the DEQX HDP4. The e28 retails for $3800 or so and allows for 8 channels, but needs the DSP software on the server, and it doesn't have an analog input so taking measurements is a lot more complicated. This guy is not bypassing the passive XO on his YG speakers, so he is not doing time-alignment as far as I know.

Yet another option is a Lynx Hilo, that sells for $2300 and has six channels and analog inputs so measuring is easy, but it also needs DSP software on the server.

I basically just listed the three options I'm considering. It is not easy to abandon the beated path and ignore the shinny comments about new 2-channel DACs such as Chord Hugo and others. Decissions!!

How are you using your DEQX? Is it between a stereo preamp and the amps? If so, have you compared the current setup to receiving the digital stream directly into the DEQX and using it as XO/DAC/volume control?

I did not require my other preamp because the DEQX does this very well, reducing components in the signal path and it is transparent sounding

It has both digital and analogue inputs, balanced and unbalanced (HDP4 has USB as well but I don't need this)

The DEQX has analogue volume control outputting to the power amps (digital volume option included) and yes, I have used the onboard DAC which is very good, configured as below:

CD transport input to Balanced Digital XLR, onboard DAC, then onboard XO/speaker correction, output to external treble/mid/sub power amps, then to Speakers & subs (likewise for a Digital streamer to coax unbalanced Digital phono input etc)

A Turntable and SACD player use the phono and balanced XLR inputs
One thing that takes getting used to is that the DEQX will make different speakers sound more similar, as in CORRECT. It does something similar for amplification, especially if bi- tri-amping is used. I use tube amps on the top end and class- D amps on the low end, which is something that couldn't easily be done without DSP.
I've been a DEQX owner since 2012 and I'm now on my second DEQX (HDP Express II) and I completely agree with Drewan77. The DEQX is truly a unique product. For me it was a total game changer coming from a very good analog electronic crossover, but you cannot just plug the DEQX in your system, power it up and start enjoying it. In fact, if you are doing it yourself, it takes quite a bit of time and with a complete understanding of the process with its pitfalls as well as the parameters that are to be adjusted in order to get a truly successful calibration. Making a DEQX calibration attempt with an "entry level" understanding may yield noticeably better results than without the DEQX, but almost assuredly you will have left a great bit of improvement on the table that you can try to recover bit more on your next attempt. I've probably done ten DEQX calibrations now on two different systems, and I still learn something new about the process each time.

For a better understanding of exactly what the DEQX does and how it does it, Kim Ryrie, the inventor of the DEQX, in interviewed in a series of YouTube videos you may find to be informative. In one of these videos Kim states that with the DEQX, speaker designers should focus on producing the lowest distortion driver possible and not to worry about phase and group delay issues since the DEQX is quite capable of successfully managing these issues on its own.

One thing that I should point out when you, or even if you are using the DEQX-Expert service to set-up your DEQX is that you really need to use the Earthworks M23 or M30 calibration mic with its associated proprietary DEQX calibration file loaded. The basic Behringer calibration mic and its generic calibration file will get you started, but really doesn’t yield the results that anyone here would probably be looking for.

I have my DEQX configured (currently) as follows:

Apogee Duetta Signature main speakers with GR Research/Rythmik subs
Bi-amp with stereo subwoofers
Apogee ribbons crossover: 920 Hz - 96 db/oct linear slope
Subs to Apogee bass: 80 Hz - 24 db/oct Linkwitz-Riley slope.
Subs time aligned to the Apogees.
Speaker correction above 500Hz.
Conservative amount of room correction below 110 Hz.

Thanks Forrestc ... still trying to drag the DEQX rep out to my house. Maybe he's using a strategy of sales foreplay. Dunno. Hopefully this week.

Btw, your point that "Kim states that with the DEQX, speaker designers should focus on producing the lowest distortion driver possible and not to worry about phase and group delay issues since the DEQX is quite capable of successfully managing these issues on its own" makes much sense.

My Paradigm S8s (v3) use well made drivers that produce very low distortion. My main gripe has been the crazy impedance and phase angle curves. Fortunately, my Ref 150 has the muscle and robust power supply to handle that roller coaster. I use the 4 ohm taps which "taps" (pun) down voltage output variations as a function of frequency response to a small amount.

I am optimistic that the DEQX will make a big difference ... if I can get the rep to engage.

Hopefully, will report back soon.
^Makes one wonder; if they're this lackadaisical about a potential sale, how are they going to be, should they be needed for assistance after the sale?
Bifwynne and Unsound. I'm absolutely amazed the DEQX rep even considers bringing a piece of stereo gear to anyone's house. If this is their sales model it's very expensive. I would have expected brick & mortar dealers and online. Am I out of touch with present day audio sales?
Unsound and Ptss ... the DEQX demo is scheduled for Monday the 15th. Holding judgment until then.

@Unsound ... you raise a fair comment and I will ask the rep on Monday about post sale service.

@Ptss ... what choice does he or I have. It's the same basic genre of question about the meaningfulness of B&M store auditions. At least I'll have a chance to see the DEQX perform on my system in my house with my speakers.

Yes, this is an expensive model. But because the device is NOT plug and play, there is no choice. The devise needs to be custom calibrated remotely by the tech who resides in Colorado.

Part of me says, waive bye-bye to my money when the rep leaves my house with my check. Another part says that I may be making a very important and worthwhile upgrade to my system.

I'll be back. It's been slow going, but I'm getting there.
Enjoy the demo Bif, lucky man. I just completed a 'dream system' in another post and included DEQX. I think it's a new essential; like high octane gas for a Ferrari. I hope it gives a great result in your system.
The DEQX does indeed result in a 'dream system'. I have had more than 2 years of pure pleasure since I installed mine and the realism and clarity never ceases to amaze. It makes a good system great and a great system simply unbelievable!

- I hope that Bifwynnes' dealer is up to the task and can achieve all that it can do (ideally measure the speakers first outdoors, it makes a big difference to doing it in the listening room. I have tried both)
Measuring speakers outdoors is a big task. I hope they come up with a comparable way - in place.
Its great that they offered a demo, but it takes a fair amount of time to understand and appreciate the changes that the DEQX makes. I periodically remove mine from my system, to make sure that it continues to make a positive contribution. I've never been disappointed.
I dunno Psag. To me the difference should be in the music heard. No understanding--just hearing. If it took me more than a few bars to hear the change interest would be losstttzzz.
From the first evening I started to set up DEQX, I appreciated the dramatic change made to my system. No need to ever remove it - its effects are immediate and noticeable

At first, all I wanted was a means of integrating two subwoofers properly and the HDP3 took care of that very quickly

What floored me was the unexpected clarity that I had no idea my system was capable of. I was trying to listen to the bass but it was as if everything coming from my speakers was now in a different league

Although it took me about 6 months to fully understand and perfect everything, I will never surpass the amazement of that first night. An 'audiophile' friend visited the following week and asked 'OK what's the trick, you have added some sort of surround sound?', another simply said 'where do you go from here' and basically, more than two years later the answer is 'nowhere' (after changing to DEQX crossed-over Open Baffles)

It's that good

So, Psag and Ptss, here is no need to remove DEQX from the system - nothing else I have heard comes close to this and the realism of the music is often breathtaking. If and when my HDP3 processor stops working, I will buy an HDP4 (or better if they ever produce something) immediately and without hesitation
I don't understand why the owner can't set the DEQX himself.
Having to arrange someone to set it up for me is a game changer... I'll pass until they improve the design where it becomes easier to calibrate.
Yes you can set the DEQX yourself, Bifwynne is just arranging a demo by the dealer

Calibrating is relatively easy once you follow the (enormous!) manual and most aspects have automated settings to get you a long way down the track. Achieving the final 20-30% to 'perfection' takes more time and many don't bother. I did and it is worth it

There is also a chargeable service called DEQXpert where you can dial in and be guided through setup if need be
Ozzy ... the DEQX rep is coming to my house on Monday to do a home audition. Let's hold judgment until I report back. I am on the fence right now.

As to self-calibration ... from what little I understand about the device, I think it is a near impossibility for a non-techie to do the calibration. But again, I'll have more to report after the audition.

I suspect Al (Almarg) may find my anecdotal report to be of interest.
It is not that difficult to calibrate DEQX using the manual and most processes are automated. This achieves a lot of what it can do without specialist skills. It is only the last part, interpreting the graphs to achieve precise time alignment to subs that takes understanding

The best aspect is doing this whilst listening to music so you can instantly hear when it is dialled in correctly

A novice can still hear a significant difference and for most this will be a long way beyond the sound they had before (speakers corrected for phase & timing at all frequencies and room effects removed)
Fyi folks ... the DEQX rep scheduled the DEQX tech guy in Colorado (Larry) to be on call to take the calibrations to the final step. The rep is bringing a mic and all of the other paraphernalia that will be needed to calibrate my system for time coherence and FR EQ.

Optimally, the time coherence measurements are best made in a sonically "dead" environment. Short of an anechoic chamber, I think the next best place is outside. The anechoic chamber is not an option and I doubt schlepping the speakers and amp outside is an option either.

So, maybe I'll get a 90-plus percent result??? Again, I'll know more after the Monday audition.

Drewan77 ... your experience and reactions are encouraging.

Btw, the rep is using a DEQX Pre Mate. I was more interested in the DEQX Mate, but the Pre Mate has DAC capability. So maybe, I'll be able to finally dip my toe into other digital formats, like SACD and Hi Rez downloads.

My interest is technically piqued.
Measuring outside gives plots on the software where the first reflection is quite distant and easily identified - this helps greatly with the accuracy of the calibration

Measuring inside does colour the result and when I compare by listening, an inside measurement/calibration sounds more hollow and artificial whereas an outside measurement results in very pure and neutral sounding music

If your dealer is willing and the weather permits, I strongly recommend you take this option. It will really show how special this processor is
Sounds like you are very lucky to be getting a very thorough demo.
Might be hard to remove once you hear it's magic?