Is DEQX a game changer?

Just to clarify: I participated in the "sloped baffle" thread and mentioned the DEQX, but I don't own it nor have heard it. I've been interested in time-aligned speakers and discussed this with a couple knowleadgeable people who have tried them, and in that context I discussed with an owner of a DEQX who uses it for DRC and as DAC (he doesn't do time alignment though). He has a very expensive system, spoke super highly about this unit, and said it replaced a $30k DAC.

Bifiwyne: how are you planning to set up your audition? I see you have Paradigm S8 and a sub (or two?). Since you have a turntable, I'm guessing you'll have it after the preamp and driving amps directly. It is my understanding such a setup would allow the unit to perform the room correction and set delays between subwoofer amp and S8 amp, but to time-align the drivers in the S8 you would need to disconnect the crossovers and drive each driver with one channel of an amp. I myself am very intrigued by this approach, but realize it's cumbersome and requires more amps to try out.

If I may, I'd like to make the OP's initial question broader: "is DSP as it stands today a game changer?" I'm VERY intrigued. Just as to some who never heard it this makes no sense, to me (never heard it either) makes a lot of theoretical sense. And the few I exchanged with who have tried it speak highly about it.

For those of us with only computer sources, there are cheaper ways to try this. Acourate DSP software + Lynx Hilo is one option. Here are two articles on such use worth reading:
1) doing room correction
2) time-aligning drivers

To me, actively multi-amping always made a lot of theoretical sense, but the incremental cost of amps and cables and XO made it non-practical/economical. But with these software/multichannel DAC packages we could do without the preamp and XO and associated cables, plus we can do time-alignment. Is it worth vs my beloved Lamm preamp? Well...that is what intrigues me!
In full disclosure, this also would open a door for me to build my own speakers, an additional benefit to me. I'm a mechanical engineer and comfortable with the mechanics associated with speakers and drivers and room, and building stuff, but I'm not up to par for building crossovers. So if I can have a software tackle that piece, I could build my speakers - that would be fun!

Anyway, sorry I digressed. I guess I used this post as therapy! I couldn't talk to anybody about these things without them thinking I lost it...maybe I'm not alone here? :-)

Cheers!

Drewan77,

I'm utterly interested. What you did is very, very close to what I intend to do: first room-correct with my existing system in 2 channels for L/R plus 2 channels for subs, then get more amps and use 6 channels for bass/mids/treble on L & R plus the 2 subs, and eventually experiment building my speakers. But since I need 8 channels the DEQX falls a little short and since I only use a server as source then I can do DSP there.

I would very much welcome the opportunity to contact you directly to learn from your experience. My mail is like my userID here ad yahoo dot com.

Cheers!

Not really dissenting, but just want to make the point DEQX is not the only option. I think what is to me a game changer is DSP, and the ability to room-correct plus time-align the drivers. This is my opinion and I still need to try it for myself.

DEQX is attractive in that it's a one box solution that performs very well, allows you to also correct non-computer sources, but sells for $5500 or so. So rather expensive.

BTW, the same DEQX owner who told me it replaced a $30k DAC with it and was very happy, now told me the exaSound e28 is a sonic equivalent of the DEQX HDP4. The e28 retails for $3800 or so and allows for 8 channels, but needs the DSP software on the server, and it doesn't have an analog input so taking measurements is a lot more complicated. This guy is not bypassing the passive XO on his YG speakers, so he is not doing time-alignment as far as I know.

Yet another option is a Lynx Hilo, that sells for $2300 and has six channels and analog inputs so measuring is easy, but it also needs DSP software on the server.

I basically just listed the three options I'm considering. It is not easy to abandon the beated path and ignore the shinny comments about new 2-channel DACs such as Chord Hugo and others. Decissions!!

Drewan77,

How are you using your DEQX? Is it between a stereo preamp and the amps? If so, have you compared the current setup to receiving the digital stream directly into the DEQX and using it as XO/DAC/volume control?

Unsound,

You are right: certain software packages can do that. I'm not sure Dirac can, though. I believe it is focused on digital room correction only.

Acourate (another software package) can do digital room correction, and digital crossovers and allows to time align the different channels, and also linearize the drivers. In fact it's in my plans to use Acourate in my server and feed a multichannel DAC to drive two powered subwoofers and three stereo amps driving tweeter/midrange/woofer, and no XO on the speakers.

My advantage in taking this path is I have disposed of other sources and now just use a very optimized PC (optimized in hardware and software). Clearly not the same as using a laptop either.

Like Bifwynne, I'm having a hard time of letting go of my beloved tube preamp - Lamm LL2 in my case.

For those interested I suggest reading a couple of articles over at computeraudiophile.com by member Mitchco, who's very knowledgeable:
An intro to Acourate
Time alignment walkthrough

I follow this thread with much interest as I see the DEQX as able to do the same things, in a simpler way albeit more expensive.

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.

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

12-04-14: Bifwynne
So far, I think the biggest bang for the buck lies with room EQ. That is what has the greatest impact on imaging and soundstage and tonal presentation.

I concede that time alignment makes for purer, more "honest" tonal reproduction, but nothing messes up what comes out of the speakers more than a screwed up FR, further twisted by room effect. IMHO.

Hey BIF.
And that nails the crux of crossroad I find myself facing. Bypass the passive XO in my 3-way speakers and go with digital XO into an 8-channel DAC to time align the speakers and the subs, plus room correction with Acourate? This means do without the beloved preamp and select from a handful mostly non-audiophile 8-channel DACs...
Or just use Acourate for room correction, keep the preamp in the chain and focus on upgrading my DAC...decisions, decisions!

I can't remember the scope of time alignment in your system. Is it subs-to-main speakers, or are you using the active XO in the DEqX and aligned your mains drivers and also the subs? This would help put your comment above into perspective.

Glad you are having such good results with the DEQX!