Is DEQX a game changer?

11-22-14: Lewinskih01
Al, since I'm posting I wanted to throw in a comment directed to an earlier post of yours. In Acourate, the treble, mids and bass need to be in different channels for the software to be able to time align them. I believe the setup you were planning with DEqX had just one channel for right and one one for left (from a digital processing point of view). I would double check DEQX would allow you to time align the drivers in such a setup.

Thanks, Lewinski. Your interpretation of my intended application is correct. And the very question you raise had in fact occurred to me some time ago. But the writeups at the DEQX site make very clear, as I interpret them, that in addition to being able to time align independently powered drivers, their present-generation processors can also restore time coherence (to a good approximation) within and throughout however much of the audible spectrum can be reproduced by whatever each of its output channels is providing a signal to. Otherwise, for one thing, that processing would be worthless with respect to correcting the coherence issues of in-speaker passive crossover networks that are higher than first order (6 db/octave).

Also, I don't doubt that were I all mixed up about that, Drewan, Psag, et al, would have pointed that out to me when I described my intended system configuration.

Best regards,
-- Al

Lewinskih01 is partially correct if Almarg is only using a pair of full range speakers. There will be no opportunity to manually adjust time alignment but DEQX will still take care of this

The processor will automatically phase & time align what it hears during the measurement and calibration processes but there can be no manual time alignment as there would be when using 6 channels or 2-way plus sub(s)

Bombaywalla,

You are right, we did have a lengthy discussion with Roy on the topic, and he did say that about processors...including DEQX. But my take was his answer was based on speculation on his part as to how these devices work. He didn't come through as if he had actually tried any of these. He is a believer on time-alignment and has developed analog XO to do that at all frequencies, and I think he believes measurements cannot deliver the same and the differences are significant enough. But from people's experiences here with DEQX and elsewhere with Acourate, users are very happy compared to their situation pre-digital device.

I've been in touch with a guy who has a very expensive system with YG speakers, etc, and used to own a TotalDAC D1, which he replaced with a DEQX HDP-4 and was super happy about the change and couldn't talk highly enough about it. He now replaced it with a Lynx Hilo and Acourate and now he can't talk highly enough about that setup. I am by no means suggesting the latter approach is better than the DEQX, but his experience shows good results can be achieved either way. And the multiple good reports also suggest measurement-based approaches indeed work, even if suboptimal vs Roy's approach.

BTW, I've been slow to implement any of these for several reasons. I was considering an exaSound e28 (8-channel DAC) and bought a used e22 (2-channel) to try out and concluded the e28 would not be a good path. Plus I live in a country where getting all of these things is super complicated - takes a lot of time.

Nevertheless been enjoying this thread and the good experiences shared here.

Cheers

Roscoeiii: Very curious to hear more about others' use of the analog input into the DEQX. As a vinyl guy, I worry about losing some of that analog magic....

I also prefer to listen to vinyl and can confirm that DEQX has only enhanced 'that analog magic'. The TT phono stage is connected directly into the RCA unbalanced analogue sockets. All my other devices are input from a preamp via the balanced analogue XLR connections and I also use the analogue volume control feature. There is certainly no digital glare

The benefits of removing room/speaker influences are astonishing. As an analogy, some years ago I took an eye test because I felt my night driving vision had deteriorated a little but I thought everything was OK the rest of the time. When I first tried the glasses, I was amazed how everything was suddenly pin-sharp even though I hadn't noticed it over the preceding years and didn't even realise

For me that's exactly what DEQX does - "spectacles for my ears"!

The Problems I have with the DEQX unit as I seem to understand.

1. I would prefer to use my PS Direct Stream Dac over the DEQX (24/96 limited) Dac. So, which Deqx unit would be best for that application?

2. I have 215lb speakers that I would prefer to keep in there present place. So, can I expect good results with the Deqx unit to calibrate my speakers as they sit?

3. Is this unit so complicated that I will need an "expert" to set it up?