Benchmark LA4 vs. Anthem STR Preamps

Yes, you did. Thanks for the link to the STR review. I think that for most users, the STR will be the more rewarding product (vs. the LA4).

I should have added that the secret sauce that makes my ROON setup sound incredible is the fibre streaming. All that noise I have in my network is tamed (maybe all eliminated) by the fibre (at least in the office DACs).

Now that is not the case for my RJ45 streaming DACs, but I am getting rid of one DAC next week and the other RJ45 streaming is in a noisy room that does not need to be "audiophile". 

The EtherRegen was metioned previously by me as a potentially simple way to clean up the RJ45 streaming.

@mike_in_nc The Anthem STR is supposed to be amazing for setting up DSP and subs, There was a huge review of the DSP features of the STR on SoundStage Global by Diego.

SoundStage! Hi-Fi | SoundStageHiFi.com - Anthem STR Preamplifier -- "Extraordinary" . . . or Not?

See I brought my post back on topic.

@yyzsantabarbara - Interesting approach to audio. I'm sure it sounds great. For what it's worth, I've been using DSP for over 15 yrs and  examined Acourate several times. I was never a professional developer, but a scientist who spent quite a bit of time programming in several languages. Acourate looked far too complex for me, also. My fondest wish would be a superb room that doesn't need DSP. What I've got is one that cries out for it, and a DSP system that is easy to use, does a very good job of room EQ and integrating subs, and is *almost* as flexible as I'd like. It's a good compromise for me.

As an FYI to anyone interested in ROON Core | Convolution | PowerLine Network | ROON READY Zones.

My current setup is running a ROON Core with DSP Convolution filters on a cheap but powerful PC. It could have been the ROON appliance that ROONLabs sells or any other device that runs ROON. My ROON Core machine is located in my wife’s office, which has no audio equipment. It is connected to the home Ethernet network by a PowerLine network which uses the house’s copper wiring. I currently have 4 ROON READY Zones in 3 different rooms, the guest bedroom (soon to go away), my son’s playroom, and my home office (with 2 Zones).

In my office, I have 2 Sonore OpticalRendu’s connected to a Ubiquiti Networks switch with 2 Fibre cages. So I use direct Fibre from the switch to my 2 OpticalRendu’s and these 2 Rendu’s are connected to a Benchmark DAC3B and a Audio Mirror Tubadour III SE DAC. I have headphones and floorstanding speakers in the office. Whenever, I listen to the floorstander I select the ROON DSP option and then select from a drop down list the DSP option containing the Convolution DSP. When I listen to the headphones I use a DSP filter with everything disabled (I named this option NoDSP). So in my office I have 2 ROON READY DACs (via the Rendu’s) and 2 DSP options for a total of 4 listening options.

My other 2 ROON READY Zones have DAC’s with built-in ROON READY RJ45 streaming. My son’s playroom has a KRELL K-300i integrated with Ethernet coming from a PowerLine Adapter to the RJ45 input. The bedroom is has a Matrix Mini-i-3 Pro DAC connected by wired Ethernet to the RJ45 input. Neither of these use the Convolution DSP options though I could if I wanted to. In fact, yesterday the system sounded awful in my son’s playroom. That was because I had accidently select the Convolution DSP option for the ROON Zone connected to the KRELL. Not sure how I managed to do that screwup. That Convolution file is specifically designed for the home office, not other rooms.

The great thing with the KRELL system is that my babysitter and another person for my son both can connect to the KRELL and play music using their iPhones using the ROON Client. Including adjusting the volume with the ROON app. Only the KRELL supports this volume adjustment.

Anyways, just some info on my computer networking | audio streaming | software based DSP for anyone interested.

BTW - I will checkout the EtherRegen for the KRELL streaming on the 30 day home trial.

@mike_in_nc A little background on how I got to my current software setup.

I got into the Convolution stuff because I wanted to figure out how to use DSP for my small office with big floorstanders. At first I looked at the hardware based options that I listed previously. Then I did more research on A'gon and came cross posts about ACCURATE software from Germany. The comments on that software were all saying that this was the most powerful DSP software available and would provide the best DSP results.

As I looked into that software I realized I would not be able to use it properly, it was too complex. I am a software developer with close to 30 years of experience so I should have more ability at this software than most. However, I took a pass. I was happy to later find a professional engineer who wanted to fill-in to this niche market to remotely create DSP Convolution filters using the complex ACCURATE or AUDIOLENSE software.

@audiotroy - Something you said interests me but got garbled. It was this:

the wavelet offers an easy to use eq fub. Function that the anthem does not

Could you clarify, please?  Thanks!

@yyzsantabarbara - Regarding using a PC vs. hardware RCS. Devices like the Anthem and Wavelet use more powerful computers for generating filters, which is the computationally intensive part -- I suspect it involves numerical optimization. Convolution in playback is handled by specialized hardware (DSP chips) in the preamps. I have no way of comparing such DSP hardware to a PC (better, worse, more efficient, whatever), but by using the external computer to make the filters, it seems they have sidestepped many of the issues with dedicated hardware.

Of course, with time, correction techniques will develop and may need more powerful playback DSP; but in time, everything becomes obsolete, anyway. IMO the simplicity of the Anthem or Wavelet paradigm is a reasonable tradeoff for many people. (I don’t like having a PC in my music room, though I understand that many users use them with great pleasure and success.) More than one way to do things, it seems to me.

@mapman I agree that what I have done is not the easy way. There is no way I would attempt to create the files myself. I am computer literate and that makes me realize my limitations in using this complex audio software. 

Using a audio hardware approach is likely easier and good enough for most DIY'ers.

I agree in theory (have not tried applying DSP to my setup).  

IF you can create the needed correction model on a computer then use the results at playback time via the streamer or server, that sounds like a good way to go.

Of course the devil is always in the details.

The flip side is if done well, integrating DSP into an integrated amp or similar audio device would seem to be an easier approach, especially if it can be applied to all sources both analog and digital, not just certain digital ones.

@audiotroy When you say you have experience with ROON I have a feeling you are saying that you have made adjustments via the ParametricEQ settings.

What I am taking about is this.

https://audiophilestyle.com/ca/bits-and-bytes/what-is-accurate-sound-r923/

This is using very expensive software, in my case AudioLense, to first measure my room with a mic and then create Convolution files that are installed into my ROON Core. The person that did my Convolution DSP is the man who wrote the article linked above. He is a professional acoustic engineer. The results are incredible. 

I have considered hardware based DSP such as:

- ARC
- Space Optimization
- Room Perfect
- DecWare (sp? from Australia)

I would rather use the immense processing capability of my cheap computer versus the limited and fixed processing ability of an audio device.

Definitely two very interesting and different pre-amps to compare!

My next system could be all Benchmark or top notch full feature integrated amp to downsize a bit, like Anthem or NAD.

I feel like an all Benchmark stack is truly something special and worth the experience.

I would expect either would be a good match to my current preferred speakers (Ohm Walsh and kef ls50 meta).

Yz we have experience with roon and the str  they are two very different types of room correction the anthem is automated while roons ddp require you to understand a rta the roon dsp ismore like a room eq rhen the anthem which tries to flatten egregious problems 

Fot that reason we endorse either the anthem or legacy wavelet 

If someone is setting u a simpler system digital only no phono the wavelet offers an easy to use eq fub. Function that the anthem does not

Dave and troy 
Audio intellect nj
Anthem, legacy dealers

@jhajeski  If he is using the Parasound and likes it (I owned the A23 once) the Anthem STR will like be preferred by him. I own the HPA4 (same as the LA4) and I think it is the best component in my system. The Anthem will have a nice warm sound. The Benchmark will have no sound to it.

I also find that having an all Benchmark stack (DAC3B | LA4 | AHB2) is the way to go when using Benchmark. Otherwise, you are limiting the Benchmarks advantages by mixing with other brands.

BTW - I think hardware based DSP is not as good as the DSP I use with my Benchmark stack and ROON. However, that is a different conversation.

After reading up a bit on both units, I see what you mean...totally different characteristics & features, for two different types of use.   When I see him next, I'll try to find out exactly how he came to choose these two; what was his decision-making process, etc.?  
Regardless, thanks for taking the time to reply, much appreciated.
-- Jim

They are totally different units.

The LA4 aims for minimum circuitry and maximum transparency. Reports I’ve read say it succeeds at the latter. It has few features; it’s just a highly transparent line stage and attenuator.

The STR Preamp (as @erik_squires said) has digital room correction, digital tone controls, digital crossover for 1 or 2 subs, a built-in phono preamp, and a DAC. It does a LOT more than the LA4, and I think it sounds quite good while doing it. (I own one.)

Your nephew could hardly have chosen two more different units. Once he thinks about his priorities, his choice should be clear.

P.S. I’m afraid Erik was mistaken in saying the STR Preamp has digital streaming built in. It does not. An external stream renderer (such as those by Bluesound, Auralic, or others) is needed for that.

The STR includes streaming, DAC, extensive bass management and phonograph inputs, as well as room correction.

I would go with that or the integrated Anthem.

Best,

Erik