Anyone HEARD the qol 'signal completion' device?

Douglas, in Europe we can't easily get an audition so I am sifting thru people's opinions to get a flavour of how this unit works. I can see where you are coming from in deciding against the unit if it improves presentation in some ways, but at the expense of overall detail/fidelity.
On a related theme, could you check a processor that also works in the analog domain called the NeutralAudio X-DREI which aims to reduce anomalies in ultra HF range reducing load on power amp/speakers and improving intelligibility. There is a review on 6moons, but no other info other than my thread elsewhere on the amps forum here.

Spiritofmusic, yes, it's frustrating to have limited access to components! There are many times I am frustrated by how many wonderful looking devices are across the pond, so to speak, with virtually no chance of my being able to use them.

But, do not despair, since there are many ways to build a great system. In fact, I learned that there are SO many ways to build rigs that I had to develop my own set of rules to do so for what I feel is maximum results.

Looking at the NeutralAudio X-DREI, it seems interesting, but I assure you, as I did with the QOL, it cannot be added to the system without some degradation of the signal. It's simply impossible to ADD components without more processing and the associated losses which result.

I think this X-DREI would have to be assessed just as the QOL; you would have to hear it in your own rig to know if it's benefit outweighed the loss of its insertion along with a set of cables into your rig.

There is no way of telling how the unit would sound/what it would do to the sound of the rig without hearing it, so I will not speculate on that. After glancing at the 6 Moons article it strikes me as a device I could live without.

One last thought to help prospective owners/readers; look at how many "add-ons" are used by the reviewer. You can tell a lot by the nature of the systems a reviewer builds. i.e. Does the reviewer use extensively tweaks? Do they use a lot of 'extras' for incessant fine tuning? Some do, some don't.

Personally, I have a very high threshold for what I spend my time on. I have eschewed the majority of what some may consider worthwhile tweaks. Half of them make no difference, and the other half make so little difference that they are a waste of time, imo.

Case in point, one of my good audio friends the other night surprised me by showing up with a CD Mat device. I had actually used it previously years ago with several cdp's and returned it to the manufacturer as I was uninterested in it. It was completely ineffectual on tray type cdps and marginally effective on top loaders. Weird; there was not complete consistency in that regard.

My friend thought it would be a surprise, but I told him it had already failed my Law of Efficacy. We tried it, and it took about one minute and two track selections for him to say, "Ok, that's enough," meaning it failed miserably.

He was right; it actually detracted from the sound quality. It has taken him years, but he now is finally beginning to trust his ears immediately in terms of what works and what doesn't. In other words, if it doesn't sound FAR better in the first few seconds it likely will not sound better no matter how much time you give. Break In will not matter, time will not matter - the device will not be sufficient to please long term.

A device had better sound fantastically better immediately, or else it likely will not impress me. I urge every audiophile to NEVER accept marginal improvements. ALWAYS demand in EVERY change a HUGE, mind-blowing upgrade. There are limitless improvements available and you only hurt yourself if you settle for less than shocking, perceptually huge improvements.

I would know very quickly if the X-DREI passed or failed my Law of Efficacy. I usually know it within a minute or two. If it passes, then I have to REALLY slow down and assess why, how, etc. it is having such a profound effect and how I can harness it's power.

But, again, don't worry if you can't get a particular device! There's a LOT of ways to make a killer rig! :)
Anything, source, cables, amp, pre, speakers - any of them can yield stupendous gains in sound quality. Don't worry over what you can't use; spend time putting together what you can use to get fantastic results.

I have been using monoblock integrateds for years now and have compared them to some extremely high end pre/amp combos, always favorably. Why? Because of the elimination of an entire component and set of cables. It's not that the mono integrateds are the world's best, or absolutely perfect. No, but it IS due to the elimination of the extra noise and signal loss which adding another component and set of cables would cause.

The shortest signal path has a VERY profound influence on system building, FAR more than most audiophiles know or want to believe.

Now, what if you had a flat sounding preamp? or a rather lifeless amp? Would QOL or X-DREI be appealing? Most likely. But if you have an extreme system the shortcomings of adding that extra component are evident, no matter what they call the technology. Then it is simply a question of, "Do I like this better," and the tradeoff will be usually definition for dimensionality.

Douglas_schroeder, I agree with you completely about not accepting marginal improvements. You can't get exceptional results if you accept mediocrity. Why waste time with inferior products? Unless you dismiss them quickly, it takes more time and effort to evaluate them that it does to evaluate superior products. I have tried so many cables, components, add-ons and tweaks -- as many of us have. Most are not worth more than a quick "hello good-bye". There is no reason to accept anything less than spectacular. It's like music. Why accept a mediocre recording when you can have a first-rate remaster?

Douglas, I completely concur with your principle that the more components you add (and, hence interconnects added) the more signal degradation must occur. Also I agree that there should be a wow factor reasonably immediately apparent, esp. if one is to be paying big bucks for a so-called improvement, although burn in can complicate matters since a lot of components do sound significantly better after 100-200 hours continuous use.
Douglas, and all others on this thread, how would you consider two components; firstly, the Spatial Computer Black Hole anti-wave generator (bass attenuator) . It does not sit in the amp chain, but at the back of the room, and generates ultrasonic frequencies into the room in response to what emerges from the loudspeakers, to cancel standing waves/bass nodes. The effect on my listening was subtle to start, but after a few days listening, I would now not do without it.
Second: changing to balanced power has removed a conditioner in the chain that components used to fit into, and has really improved power at source. Again, immediate improvement.

The Black Hole device gains due to not being in the signal path; it also loses due to not being in the signal path. In other words, it doesn't potentially add to the amount of processing and diminish the signal further, but it also cannot impose a change upon the signal to improve it. It is perhaps the opposite of the QOL or X-DREI in that it suffers none of the drawbacks of these other devices, but cannot confer the same potential benefit as these others.

We come down to the simple truth that the best way to alter the sound is with the signal path, but it's also the best way to screw it up. Hence, there are many good designers but fewer superb designers; many good system builders but fewer superb system builders.

I can't comment on the Black Hole device as I have not heard it, but the principle is surely worth consideration. The Legacy Whisper DSW (reviewed) which I use has a rear facing driver which operates out of phase for similar purposes, to physically treat the bass wave interaction with the head wall. There is an obvious benefit to be gained in the opinion of some speaker designers/users with such a system, and it does not impact the signal of the mains. However, for many devices which are out of the signal path I find their effectiveness is an order of magnitude less helpful. I would much rather spend my time trying devices like QOL or X-DREI than work with objects outside the signal path.

Regarding power; I have found that power supplies are critical when it comes to component design. However, many power filters/conditioners are also subtractive/additive, as they harm the signal as well by being in the signal path.

Obviously, it's not recommended that you go without a power protection device like a power bar. You do so at your own risk.