DSPeaker Anti Mode 2.0 evaluation


I have read all of the glowing reviews of this product and I just don't understand why I am not impressed. I have been lucky to find a very kind dealer to allow me to try one the DSPeaker Anti Mode 2.0 units.
I have 2 JL Audio F113 subwoofers that I have set up in stereo and are based on their own microphones measurement calibration.

So, with those sub settings and then switching out the LF Filter, I then used the DSPeaker unit to eq just my JL subs. That is, I tested the unit by playing my Andra 2 speakers full range via my Pass Labs Preamp and Amp and with the other Preamp outputs I plugged in the DSPeaker in and then the JL subs are plugged into the DSPeaker.

I ran the DSPeaker calibration. I used the DSPeaker in and out of the flow by using its bypass button and I really couldn’t tell much of any improvement. In fact I believe I like the bypass sound better.

Why is this? All of the glowing reviews and it is only marginal different if at all.

Now, there is an update for the DSPeaker in June 2013 but my Norton Virus control will not allow the download. Perhaps, if I was able to download that update it would be better, but I doubt it.

So, before I end my trial of the unit, is my configuration flawed , what do you guys think?
ozzy

Showing 11 responses by kr4

One issue to be aware of is that the AM2, like other DSPs, introduces a significant delay (even in bypass) which will upset sub/main timing and integration unless you compensate for it.

Kal
Ozzy-

I have never used the QOL but I should point out that, hooked up as you have it, the AM 2.0 will introduce a latency (delay)into the subs and that is likely to screw up some of the vaunted phase corrections of the QOL.
In theory, of course, the insertion of any unnecessary additional device, even an interconnect can only diminish the accuracy of the signal. However, the issue is whether that insertion is truly unnecessary or if the price of its insertion buys an improvement in the perceived signal in some other way. To address this case, is the insertion loss due to the A/D/A and DSP of the subwoofer EQ more or less pernicious than that due to the imposition of modal room effects without it?
I have no doubt that both outputs are OK. However, the sub output will be delayed by about 10-20msecs which represents a phase shift between the subs and the main speakers. In the frequency range where they overlap, the phase shift might be a problem. It can be detected and/or corrected with ancillary equipment...........if you care.
Necessary, useful, whatever. If you have a problem which needs a cure, you have to decide if the cure is worth the cost.
1. Overlap has nothing to do with time delay; it is the inevitable concomitant of using a sub with main speakers.
2. Calibrating the sub with AM 2.0 is what inserts the delay in the sub because the processing takes time. It cannot reduce/change it.
3. Since the QOL output bypasses the AM2.0, it is not subject to the delay.
Let me amend my statement but saying that I am skeptical of the 2.7ms latency holding for all uses.

Kal
My only issue was that you posted so soon that I was unable to amend my post and had to make an additional one.

No problem.
Ozzy, DSpeaker says the time delay to process is equal to about 3 feet of sound travel, so placing your subs 3 feet closer to you than your main speakers will cancel that problem. They also state that it is very minimal and not to worry about that anyway.

I only have one sub (Velodyne DD15) so I think my interest still lies in the 8033s. I'm curious if you think the 8033s along with the DSP built into my Velodyne is too much, or do they compliment each other in different ways?