Equalizer in a Hi Fi system

Yes. The over compressed loud rock records are also harder to make sound “right” even with the analog studio EQ I use. Back to DAW and true remaster better, but I’ll never do that. Miro forte there. Great discussion!

incidentally, for said rock albums described above, I STILL think they sound better than flat doing post production analog EQ. There’s just less headroom to play with. Potential for distortion with too much boost. 

I will report my impressions on skyline M3D vs my Charter Oak as soon as I can. M3D ships TODAY. I can hardly contain my excitement!

@scottwheel ,

https://www.theoretica.us/bacch-dsp/

Which route you go?

I use dedicated audio gear. Not computer savvy and exclusively stream Qobuz. Is the BACCH preamp as good as you approach?

Theoretica is the only company, right?  Yeah,hardware version sp horribly expensive 

There is a dealer 3 hours drive from me. Will try to hear it. 

Must be one helluva sophisticated DSP algorithm 

Still have concerns about that much digital processing of the original signal. There’s something elegant and simple about keeping signal pure followed by high end dac and augmenting with high end analog EQ. It’s simple and elegant. 

Have spoken with dealer. I will hear this system in the next few months or less. He said Elon Musk is putting BACCH in Tesla!

To me it’s hard to imagine that complex algorithms imposed upon an already digitized analog hearing world is PERFECT and immune to human psycho acoustic problems in perception. But I’m open minded and will listen to both DEQX and BACCH. @tattooedtrackman , I guess you, I , Miro, and McIntosh are all audiophool idiots. 

So Mike , consider the following:

instrument played in studio (psychoacoustics “right”, SQ perfect > recorded with conversation to digital code, an approximation/ representation of real world sine waves heard > complex human construct digital algorithms applied to radically change the code representation of the signal > digital to analog conversion back to real world waveform > amp to ears =… psychoacoustics and SQ “right” again?

logically, does this make any sense? Sounds like quite a trick to pull off!

Actually, the dealer at Theoretica said the BACCH SP WILL have room correction EQ capability come 2024 as well. 

“Analog is the enemy of signal purity. Again, most music is recorded digitally. Keeping it there until the final conversion to analog at the listeners DAC is the only best way to deal with it. A number can not be distorted. It can only be changed. ”

Again, best analog solutions are NOT any such enemy. Only help to restore rolled off textures and harmonics. Mike, please stop bashing analog EQ when you haven’t tried it in years. It’s come along as well as digital. Look at McIntosh with its new MQ112. Cmon…please stop.

Conversation above is conversion, obviously 

It seems absurd to argue that digital EQ as close to perfection as it gets while analog is “Stone Age,” way flawed, when we’re still arguing about whether digital playback has caught up to vinyl playback in SQ. The base digital file has ALWAYS been flawed compared to analog reel to reel or vinyl. It’s therefore preposterous to argue that altering that code with post production digital EQ is so obviously superior to post production analog EQ. 
Furthermore every other aspect of our revered chains is ANALOG. Amp, interconnects, speaker wire, speakers. 
the best system is ALL ANALOG. by the way, I have indeed done this with a quality tt and some 80’s records and my Bryston charter oak combo. It’s f@cking unbelievable!!  I don’t routinely leave the tt in that system though because 1. It lives upstairs and 2. It would freaking RUIN me forever streaming digital!

Having said all this it’s entirely possible the best digital systems are indeed as good as Mike says they are. I hope so!  Any advancements in our fold are welcome!  More good choices. I am entirely open minded to this and can’t wait to hear!  Both DEQX and BACCH. 

We are all perfectionists, or we wouldn’t be here. It is amazing to me that the digital algorithms have advanced so far that we can “trick” our brains, OUR brains, not the average casual listener brain, that well. One would expect we would hear SOME form of err or seeming misrepresentation, be it timbre related, or phase temporal blur, image specificity or what have you. Just the slightest SOMETHING. That we’ve come that far creating this enveloping 3-D with 2 channels is amazing. 

Yes, I understand that @mahgister   but when we hear envelopment or surround dispersal of the 3 D soundstage but it’s coming from 2 front speakers it’s still the brain being tricked. Simply because you don’t have all these performers surrounding you in the room. You have two front left and right speakers. but I get what you’re saying. Anyway for this software to do what it’s supposed to do but still meet the toughest audiophile standards for SQ is a tough challenge!  Can’t wait to hear.

Again, both analog and digital advancements have come along since 1981.  Referencing your past experiences years ago with analog is irrelevant 

No more bashing either. They both can play a role in augmenting the audiophile listening experience 

“

Hi Tim, I just had a conversation with the last purchaser of the M3D. He is having a mismatch issue as he is using Phono level into a +4 device that is causing distortion. He initially assured me he had a converter but in fact does not. 

I wanted to give you a heads up that these are a +4 Professional level balanced device. Using Phono level into this will cause a huge impedance mismatch and level difference that will result in distortion so you will need to find something to convert it. 

Jason @ Revive Audio LLC”

For the scenario described above, you need to get the phono signal to line level with a phono stage preamp. Then if you’re still unbalanced, talk to me. I’ll get you to balanced properly without an additional box

Basically you have your custom pin wiring scheme with the XLR to rca that gets you to unity gain

Did that for my unbalanced Bryston tape loop. Cardas custom wired the pins (pseudo balanced) and works perfectly with no distortion and no need for an additional box. Once had a Aphex converter box in the beginning. The Cardas custom cable without the additional extra box obviously is the correct solution and sounds of course WAY better. 

Indeed comparing the XLR to XLR for my HP chain to the above mentioned custom wired XLR to RCA, sonically there is no difference. Perfect and absolutely lossless way to mate pro XLR only to unbalanced RCA only gear. 

Have picked up and am bringing home the Skyline M3D right now. Impressions soon!

“Avalon AD2055, Millennia nseq4, and my own Charter Oak all sound unbelievable in home playback “

But this Skyline isn’t working. Have informed Jason at Revive. The problem is half volume and distortion. Funny these cables work for all of the above pieces. Will put the Skyline in my all balanced HP chain and try there. To be continued…

I CAN report so far that Miro s description of the completely transparent hard bypass switch is correct though. More on how it is in my HP chain later. 

Ok. The Skyline is functioning BEAUTIFULLY in my HP chain. Initial impressions good. First minutes. Let me listen critically more tomorrow and report back on Skyline CO comparisons then. 

The unit is indeed more transparent, both in bypass and engaged with all dials flat, than the CO. Miro is correct there.  More on SQ of filters dialed in later. 

Got 30 minutes turning dials. CO bass bands more powerful with more slam. Bass weak records on HEKse can turn sub and 40hz dials almost all the way to get the same slam and tactility as CO with much less dialed in. Oh, also the treble and bass bands are better than Loki Max. Much more tomorrow. Gotta go to dinner with family now. 

“Oh, also the treble and bass bands are better than Loki Max.”

If it’s this part you’ve referred to, it is readily evident that those bands boosted sound better to me subjectively than Loki Max. Sorry. Miro said much the same a while ago.

Didn’t say they did. Just describing a difference. Not sure how a simple observation without qualifying it as good or bad is nonsense 

BuT…having more power and less dial change is generally a good thing. Much like proper amplification and having that “power reserve “ leads to better saturation and SQ. @wolf_garcia , you are just hell bent on insulting me because I don’t like your Schiit EQ. 

Nice!

That’s fine. You’re entitled to your opinion. I’d avoid words like “nonsense “.  There are nicer ways to disagree. We all have extensive listening experience, and some have extensive pro recording experience. Let’s respect each other. @wolf_garcia ive said this before.  Our experiences don’t necessarily diverge. It depends on your use case. If you are cutting at 6khz to avoid sibilant recordings the Schiit products are great. However, if you are using your EQ simply like a tone control bass and or treble boost without cuts, there are many pro hardware solutions that do this better than Schiit. 
I don’t like cuts in the middle of the frequency range. I prefer broad gentle bass shelf increase to fill in the frequencies below the sibilant area. I just think it sounds better. I have NEVER heard a sibilant or shrieky record that was well bassed if you will to the point that you couldn’t add more

@mirolab , can you explain why my custom grounded Cardas XLR to RCA cables work for CO, Millennia, and Avalon (all strictly pro +4dbu balanced) but not with the Skyline?  Is that not bizarre? Jason at Revive Audio said it’s “something about the topology of the circuitry in the Skyline.”  ??

Ok…impressions of Skyline vs Charter Oak in my HP chain, which is X Sabre 3 balanced streamer/ dac > EQ > Headamp GSX Mini > balanced out to Hifiman HE1000SE. 
 

The Skyline sounds great. The mids are resolute and fully saturated and accurate. Well recorded music is an absolute joy with this piece. With well recorded music and gentle EQ you might get a better experience than CO, although I’d be razor thin. Now with loudness wars over compressed rock music I tend to EQ in more bass and treble. In this scenario I would describe the Skyline as quite capable delivering the goods. The SUB and 40HZ dials do their job well. Quality and quantity of bass added is very satisfying without sacrificing the mids. And the attenuation dial on far left and clipping meter leds work great. There is a broad range on that dial that sounds good, so it’s very useful in a master trim situation when boosts have been applied and it’s needed. Kudos. The Atmosphere shelves are wonderful and all sound great with even vigorous boost without adversely affecting the mids. This unit has TONS of headroom for clean boost. Now, in comparing this unit to CO with more aggressive use of bass and treble dials, I find that the CO treble bands are absolutely gorgeous, and to me just sound more textured and shimmery and sweet. But not by a lot. But yes by a lot compared to Loki Max. Schiit users, again, don’t go for any kind of sizable treble boost. And y’all probably don’t. Skyline and CO hands down beat Loki in that limited use case. In comparing bass dials on Skyline to CO, I’d double down on yesterday’s comments. Bass articulate and very good, but not as textured, layered, nuanced as CO and not as much sub bass kick or mid bass slam. The CO does this better.

In conclusion, I like the Skyline very well for very well recorded modern recordings where you wouldn’t need to boost bass or treble much or at all. But as I type and listen to Red book version of Rush album Moving Pictures, through the Skyline it’s excellent sonically but I am left wanting to put the CO back in the chain. It’s not more resolute in the mids, but really no less either, to be honest. but the kick, slam in lower range and shimmer and sheen in the top octave I can get out of the CO leaves me more pleased for your average older rock recording. My original Mike Deming CO remains on top of the hill for me, Skyline is a wonderful piece. It’s beautifully finished and built like a tank too. 

Agreed, but there is not a single thing the Max does BETTER. except for the remote, which can be huge for some 

Not considering remote, Skyline is just as easy to use, sounds completely transparent, and honestly gives a more hi fi take on bass and treble with more flexibility there. I’d say with 2 db cuts here and there and not much boost elsewhere the two units sound very similar. They are set up similarly as well. Both simple to use. But if you wanna add fun factor V shape for average older and newer rock recordings then Skyline wins. 

It basically comes down to remote vs better V or U shaped sound signature versatility 

I don’t hear any audible hiss at all when listening to music at normal AND loud levels on ANY of the gear we’ve discussed. Good chain through and through and is a non issue. Cannot however speak to Lokius or other non Loki Max Schiit products. Of their line, I’ve only heard the Loki Max. 

I’ve plugged back in the CO and listening to Moving Pictures again. Now I’m totally engaged and toes a tappin’ !  CO beats Skyline at more significant V shape sound signature for sure. I cannot live without my CO. I love this unit. It’s such a shame you cannot buy one like it nowadays, since Mike quit producing them. You’d have to go 4 grand and up to get anything with both the SQ and the powerful bands. I’ve heard 2 with the Millennia and the Avalon that do this. But you need ganged left and right stereo for home on the fly ease and convenience. I’d defer to @mirolab for options there. I don’t know of any. 

“…the excellently designed Max...a great item that's I've used for far more than 20 minutes (a few months actually)”

To this other snide comment from @wolf_garcia , I’ve got ONE DECADE of familiarity with the CO PEQ-1, and nothing I’ve heard sounds better. 

Thanks @wolf_garcia   I appreciate the words. I may have touch of fragile ego. It’s possible. But I am passionate about listening and love to share my thoughts, for what they’re worth, about EQ in high end home audio. And yes, I know I talk too much. My wife tells me all the time!🤣

“I have a very fragile ego. I'm going to go cry in a glass of Tequila.”

😂 hilarious, Mike

“As for your assessment of Skyline vs. PEQ1... I very much agree about the superior flexibility of the PEQ1's design... I just wish my unit had sounded better”

based on your earlier description of your PEQ-1 experience, I am fairly sure you got a bad unit, @mirolab 

“Do your 'custom' cables have the ground connected from end to end?”

Cardas did 4 of them for 1000 dollars. I sure hope they grounded them properly. They are completely sonically transparent. I now know this because when I had the Skyline in the Bryston tape loop on ‘bypass,’ which you’ve stated is a true hardwire bypass, I could not hear any difference at all A-B ing with tape loop in and out. They are great cables

I know many have tried this. I myself have not. Generally hear mixed to favorable through the grapevine. Not having heard the MQ112 either, I’d bet good money the MQ112 sounds alot more musical and natural than the RME EQ suite

Hate to disagree. I’ve commented extensively on this pages ago. My Charter Oak PEQ1 I’ve directly compared against Roon DSP using some digital shelf or bells in bass and treble regions. It DIDNT COME CLOSE to the SQ of the 2700 dollar analog piece. I have done this already previously in the thread. Am not going to repeat again here. Notch filtering and room correction digital better. Tone shaping analog better. I intend to try @mijostyn DEQX though, to be sure. That’s a summary. There are PAGES of debate previously