Minidsp Flex Review (Audio DSP)

[Ultrasonic]

Dirac Live with Bass Control does do multi-sub integration for you but last I checked MiniDSP are not offering it (Would only really be relevant to stereo plus subwoofers use as all speakers need to processed by Dirac).

Yes - DLBC is not an option on any miniDSP product currently, which is why I wrote what I did .

 

[abdo123]

This is exactly what I need. Now, what do I do with my Gustard X16 and preamp?

you can get the digital version maybe?

 

[PeteL]

Why is this thing cathegorized as AV processor? It’s just a DAC+DSP.

Did you also test the second output? People seem to have meassured significantly worse performance.

Since it only brings 16 bit performance, I voted “fine”.

That's nitpicking. It's not a DAC+DSP, It's a ADC-DAC-Preamp with multi outs for Crossover, analog, BT and digital ins, with DSP that allow Room correction, PEQ and cross-over functionalities.

There is no categories for that, people here like comparisons... It would be alone in it's categorie, not really useful, but which other category of product does all that? AV processor is the only thing it can be compared to because it also does all that.

 

[TheBatsEar]

If it had MQA support then it'd be perfect.

Why should it support proprietary lossy formats that aren't industry standard or at least widely used? I do see the value of the BT codecs, but MQA has really no good usecase if you can simply play regular lossless formats.

There aren't many options for DSP + MQA sadly.

Good! MQA should not raise cost for devices like that, unless proven beneficial.

 

[PeteL]

While the performance is good in general, I'm disappointed by the multitone performance.

Also this doesn't compete with AV processors. Because well....it doesn't support the V part of that and for the A part it doesn't support the codecs.

But Amir doesn't review, measure or evaluate the V part, only audio.

 

[Eetu]

I use the Berhinger DEQ 2496 ultra-curve pro with a external DAC, and it's fabulous for a bit cheaper...

​

Isn't the Behringer 2-channel only? So not really comparable. No way to integrate subs properly or implement an active 2-way XO.

 

[abdo123]

Btw for people concerned about multi-tone distortion performance, I usually keep my master volume some where between -40 to -20 dBFS. With 0dBFS being 105dBSPL.

At this range like the graph shows you would be noise dominated, so the distortion would completely inaudible.

Sure not SOTA SOTA performance but the noise is already inaudible to me on 90+ dB sensitive speakers so ….

@voodooless all 4 channels measured the same btw with my Interface.

 

[Lambda]

Not to shabby!
realistically good enough for most applications.

If you want to spend more and get more you have to uses a Digital to Digital DSP and external DACs?

 

[Red@]

Guys,
From your understanfing the futur (mid-Q1) digital version, will it have 2 usb ports (1x input + 1x output) ?
And basically have the functionality to act as close-to-destination (close to the dac) processing(peq...) ?
It would be amazing to forgo eq on the sources( dap, phone desktop, friends phone....)

 

[Stephen]

Interesting. But can you really do a FIIR 2-way digital crossover in stereo LP and HP in that way ? Or are you just using the Behringer for roomcorrecfion ?

I use for room correction and calibration (double mono auto calibration fonction) then input some modifications to my taste. The result is superb.

 

[voodooless]

There is no categories for that, people here like comparisons... It would be alone in it's categorie, not really useful, but which other category of product does all that? AV processor is the only thing it can be compared to because it also does all that.

Like I said before, "DSP & active crossover" would cover it. It would not be the only device. We've tested several other miniDSP products that would fit the bill, like the SHD, as well as the cheap adau 1701 DSP board, and several others as well. I really don't see a problem. And no, they don't all have the same features, but it is a whole lot closer than what is now in the "Home Theatre" group.

 

[PeteL]

Why should it support proprietary lossy formats that aren't industry standard or at least widely used? I do see the value of the BT codecs, but MQA has really no good usecase if you can simply play regular lossless formats.


Good! MQA should not raise cost for devices like that, unless proven beneficial.

I think it's been demonstrated a lot that there is no benefit to MQA over High res pcm, even a degradation. It is natural, it's a lossy CODEC, there is no debate there, that's to be expected, but this comparison is useless to me.

In Canada we have no Qobuz, at the moment MQA is the only high res format that can be streamed trough online services, it being Tidal. Comparing it to High Res is not useful since it isn't available, what would be useful is to compare it to the 16/44 format because that's all there is available if you rely on subscription based services. I have not find blind test results on this. On Tidal, MQAs sound a bit different than the regular versions, the fact that they sound a bit better to me may be a Bias, it's possible, but not the fact that they sound different.
Personally I tend to forget about the politics, I do play MQA and enjoy them, understanding that the format itself as flaws but there is some really good sounding MQA, there is an audible difference, might be the mastering that is different and not a benefit of the format but this doesn't matter. I don't get into the whole conspiration, record labels allows these file to be out there, do you really feel that they wouldn't pull them out if they felt that there work is being corrupted and degraded and that MQA make their song worst compared to Redbook CD format? If we forget for a minute that it's lossy, the last letter in MQA stands for authenticated. Labels agree with these masters, I do not care much about how it's been manipulated, that's the end result that matter, and most sound very good.

 

[Stephen]

Isn't the Behringer 2-channel only? So not really comparable. No way to integrate subs properly or implement an active 2-way XO.

Right! but I manage at 86spL to get 20.8hz at -3db... So no need to have a sub. The mesure is made in room at 3.5m away.

 

[TheBatsEar]

the tested version costs 550 though (+75 for balanced)

Best prices in Europe for official resellers today, shipping free:

• 799€ (USD 911.73) for unbalanced (https://www.oaudio.de/nach-hersteller/minidsp/minidsp-flex-rca.html)
• 891,51€ (USD 1017.29) for balanced (https://www.audiophonics.fr/en/dsp-...e-sharc-adsp21489-xmos-bluetooth-p-15885.html).

We are looking at about 4x the price compared to the 2x4HD.

Bros, please hold me!

 

[Deleted member 22141]

It's a lovely little device. A slightly updated 2x4HD or DDRC24 if you get the Dirac License with a nice enclosure/screen/remote. The lack of all those things was the main reason it wasn't a good solution for some people.

As I already have a streamer I'm now thinking whether I should get one or go for the SHD? Fewer boxes is good, and is the performance here any y better - or do miniDSP update the internals of the SHD as they go along?

 

[Madjalapeno]

Don't tempt me - I promised my wife this would be Frugal February.

 

[Blew]

Why should it support proprietary lossy formats that aren't industry standard or at least widely used? I do see the value of the BT codecs, but MQA has really no good usecase if you can simply play regular lossless formats.


Good! MQA should not raise cost for devices like that, unless proven beneficial.

Because it's good to have as an option. DAC rendered MQA sounds better than CD at 44.1KHz, so it's very useful for many albums that haven't been remastered in hi-res. There are many "Master" quality MQA releases on Tidal that are not available in a format better than CD. So I'd rather have it than not, and the extra cost of it is negligible in context.

Would you say the same about support for lossy codecs MP3, AAC, Dolby Digital, DTS etc support in an AV receiver? I personally have no use for BT codecs either. Unfortunately we can't always pick and choose the exact components that we do or don't want to pay for.

 

[PeteL]

Like I said before, "DSP & active crossover" would cover it. It would not be the only device. We've tested several other miniDSP products that would fit the bill, like the SHD, as well as the cheap adau 1701 DSP board, and several others as well. I really don't see a problem. And no, they don't all have the same features, but it is a whole lot closer than what is now in the "Home Theatre" group.

If you want, you can compare yes with this very specifics, but I don't see how it would matter in this case, it comes first any way you want to circumscribe the category... It's also have been put in the pure DAC categorie and it comes first tiers... In the end, Amir said the category is " mix of DSP and AV receivers" OK you may want an other one, but we can all do a bit of browsing to see what interest us and discriminate... As I said, anyway you want to look at it it comes first...

 

[mdsimon2]

Let's see, how does this compare to Motu UL5?
Well, UL5 has more inputs/outputs + ADC. It has less distortions overall and higher output level for special amps. Flex has no ESS IMD hump and 3.5db higher sinad at 2v? It has a remote. Extra charge for balanced Flex + $25 shipping but no tax for me. Totals to $71.8 cheaper than UL5 but still on the hook for ADC. (Flex is in stock, UL5 still MIA.)

Flex has Bluetooth streaming still while UL5 does not. If you're buying DSP there's not much difference and Flex is just another dac. If not then there's another difference.

Hmm. At this point I'd be very hard pressed to hear a difference between this or UL5 even in pretty extreme circumstances but if I had to pick noise vs distortion I think I'm still going to go with less noise? That $72 cheaper price tag is really actually higher than Motu for me since I still need ADC (and extra devices in my room) but that remote is cool.

Potential customs fee at the door for minidsp?

Am I missing something?

The Flex has an ADC.

Michael

 

[abdo123]

Best prices in Europe for official resellers today, shipping free:

• 799€ (USD 911.73) for unbalanced (https://www.oaudio.de/nach-hersteller/minidsp/minidsp-flex-rca.html)
• 891,51€ (USD 1017.29) for balanced (https://www.audiophonics.fr/en/dsp-...e-sharc-adsp21489-xmos-bluetooth-p-15885.html).

We are looking at about 4x the price compared to the 2x4HD.

Bros, please hold me!

It’s 620 euro off the official website all included.