BACCH and other XTC

[chjan]

SOUNDPIMP XTC

To anyone interested in XTC type of software: I am the developer of Soundpimp.com which is compliant to Windows, Linux and Mac OS at a modest price level, compared to some alternatives, at least. Available as a standalone product, or as VST in all versions (VST only on Windows at the moment, but a MAC version may be back during 2024). SoundPimp was the first ever xtc software on the market some +ten years ago. A revised version is currently on the test bench. We have demos on the website.

 

[Keith_W]

SOUNDPIMP XTC

To anyone interested in XTC type of software: I am the developer of Soundpimp.com which is compliant to Windows, Linux and Mac OS at a modest price level, compared to some alternatives, at least. Available as a standalone product, or as VST in all versions (VST only on Windows at the moment, but a MAC version may be back during 2024). SoundPimp was the first ever xtc software on the market some +ten years ago. A revised version is currently on the test bench. We have demos on the website.

Great. I tried out the VST version some time ago (I think we chatted on email a bit). Keep us updated on the new version please.

 

[chjan]

I will announce the new version here, but we are not quite there yet, except that a 64bit vst version (vst2 or vst3) has become available lately, but so far only per email request to us (sales @ hdsoundlab.com)

 

[Keith_W]

Thanks Carl. I tried the 32 bit VST version of Soundpimp, which forced me to use a 32 bit version of JRiver to host it. I did not like losing the 64 bit volume control so I stopped using the Soundpimp VST.

 

[chjan]

Thanks Carl. I tried the 32 bit VST version of Soundpimp, which forced me to use a 32 bit version of JRiver to host it. I did not like losing the 64 bit volume control so I stopped using the Soundpimp VST.

send me an email if you like to test the 64bit version.

 

[maty]

Home Audio Fidelity's (HAF) X-talk Shaper DSP. And is crosstalk correction/cancellation (XTC) just an "effect"?

Home Audio Fidelity's (HAF) X-talk Shaper DSP. And is crosstalk correction/cancellation (XTC) just an "effect"?

A blog for audiophiles about more objective topics. Measurements of audio gear. Reasonable, realistic, no snakeoil assessment of sound, and equipment.

archimago.blogspot.com

PLUGINS

Digital room correction plugins

www.homeaudiofidelity.com

 

[STC]

Hoping someone can compare HAF, Soundpimp and BACCH.

 

[doorofnight]

Speakers - DALI Epicon 6 (slightly toed in)
Distance - between speakers 227 CM, Distance L-Speaker/R-Speaker to MLP: 245CM
RT - 0.343s*
XTC - uBacch for MAC

The effect of uBacch is clearly audible in almost all music.

*even though my room has a lot of acoustic treatments, 0.343 is still quiet "lively"

 

[jhenderson0107]

I have recently experimented with Xtalk shaper using my living room rig. This week, I installed MacroDeck onto the PC which runs Hang Loose Host and the Xtalk VST. Macrodeck is similar to Elgato StreamDeck, but uses of a phone/tablet instead of dedicated hardware to initiate custom actions. Below is a screenshot showing the custom actions I've created to support sound-field experimentation:

Pressing the 2.0 button activates simple 2.0 stereo via the VST flow below.

Pressing the 4.0 Atmos button activates Atmos 4.0 ambiphonic via this VST flow:

Finally, pressing the 2.0 Xtalk button activates 2 channel stereo, but with the Xtalk Shaper plug-in activated:

These configurations were tested using some chamber and instrumental music with which I'm familiar:
Xavier Diaz-Latorre playing De Visee on Theorbo
Nigel North, Les Voix humaines
Thibault Cauvin plays Leo Brouwer: 30 Estudios Sencillos

The Diaz-Latorre recording is extremely wet, with lots of ambience/reverb baked-in, whereas the Cauvin guitar set is dry, incorporating minimal ambience. The North set is nicely-recorded, not overly wet and exploits nice instrument spacing and depth.
I was surprised at how vastly different each of albums sound using the three surround presets. Unexpectedly, Xtalk Shaper creates the widest and deepest sound field - surpassing even the Atmos 4.0 configuration!

Now, it's all too easy to over-do any form of spatial enhancement; I typically dial back the volume of the rear surrounds or the effects knob of XTalk Shaper so that the effect is subtle, but noticeable. Anything more becomes fatiguing during extended listening.

In my opinion, crosstalk cancellation is an effect which reduces accuracy. But, the ability to dynamically change spatial rendering attributes on-the-fly can improve immersion and enjoyment. With most recordings, it seems to widen and deepen the sound field, but slightly diffuses the sound, reducing imaging clarity.

However, it's a lot of fun and given it's modest cost, I recommend experimenting with Xtalk Shaper.

 

[STC]

In my opinion, crosstalk cancellation is an effect which reduces accuracy. But, the ability to dynamically change spatial rendering attributes on-the-fly can improve immersion and enjoyment. With most recordings, it seems to widen and deepen the sound field, but slightly diffuses the sound, reducing imaging clarity.

I have not used the Xtalk shaper so I cannot comment about the accuracy and clarity because XTC supposed to enhanced them. IIRC, Xtalk is using IR for cancellation and that could affect clarity. BACCH is also using IR so basically when you add IR to a track it adds ambiance. I am speculating here because it is hard to come to a conclusion without knowing the actual setup.

XTC only deals with 2.0 stereo and if you have Quadrophonics recordings of 4.0 then the front and read XTc can give 360 degree sound. Any other format requires great attention to not mix the ambiance info into XTC. I hope you can resolve the clarity and accuracy part.

Cheers!

 

[jhenderson0107]

I have used only conventional stereo recordings throughout my tests. In fact, I own only a tiny number of true, multichannel recordings; The vast majority of music I play is Redbook CD standard.

The 4.0 preset I documented above uses the Penteo16+ upmixer to produce ambisonic signals for the rear surround speakers, driving the fronts with unmodified stereo signal. The other two presets utilize only the front speakers.

 

[STC]

I have used only conventional stereo recordings throughout my tests. In fact, I own only a tiny number of true, multichannel recordings; The vast majority of music I play is Redbook CD standard.

The 4.0 preset I documented above uses the Penteo16+ upmixer to produce ambisonic signals for the rear surround speakers, driving the fronts with unmodified stereo signal. The other two presets utilize only the front speakers.

I didn’t know that you can convert stereo format to 4.0 Ambisonics. Such upsamples probably extract the ambiance and render to the side or rear speakers. I thought you need a Ambisonics format to do just that. As far as I know, the developer of Ambisonics mentioned of incorporating Ambiophonics in the playback for the stereo component only in the playback.

Maybe, you can just use XTc for the front stereo speakers only to see if it makes a difference to the accuracy.

 

[AudioJester]

I am also using xtalk shaper with HL host/convolver. My setup is an active 3-way stereo system.
Completely agree it increases soundstage, "spaciousness" by "moving" certain instruments/sounds furher apart horizontally and vertically.

I posted in another thread about a waves plugin - PAZ stereo anlyser. It has a horizontal stereo position display where you can see the effects of xtc. Some of the effect seems to be phase related - maybe why you perceive a loss of detail?

 

[Tell]

Home Audio Fidelity's (HAF) X-talk Shaper DSP. And is crosstalk correction/cancellation (XTC) just an "effect"?

Home Audio Fidelity's (HAF) X-talk Shaper DSP. And is crosstalk correction/cancellation (XTC) just an "effect"?

A blog for audiophiles about more objective topics. Measurements of audio gear. Reasonable, realistic, no snakeoil assessment of sound, and equipment.

archimago.blogspot.com

View attachment 354018

PLUGINS

Digital room correction plugins

www.homeaudiofidelity.com

I tried this one the other day but couldn't hear a slightest bit of a difference

 

[Keith_W]

I tried this one the other day but couldn't hear a slightest bit of a difference

All XTC is speaker and room dependent. It is better to use narrow directivity speakers and place the speakers to avoid side wall reflections - i.e. the opposite to the usual recommendation of wide smooth directivity with side wall reflections. If you are getting a lot of early reflections, the crosstalk cancellation won't work properly.

 

[Tell]

All XTC is speaker and room dependent. It is better to use narrow directivity speakers and place the speakers to avoid side wall reflections - i.e. the opposite to the usual recommendation of wide smooth directivity with side wall reflections. If you are getting a lot of early reflections, the crosstalk cancellation won't work properly.

I'm not sure exactly of the directivity of my speakers but I guess they are pretty average, and I have absorption for the first reflection behind the speaker, and just a bit of early sidewall reflections, so generally average for a livingroom I guess?
But I'm going to have a go on my computer speakers later on, they're way more direct so might work better there

 

[jhenderson0107]

In my limited experience, the XTC effect seems highly-dependent on the ambience which has been baked into the recording. The recordings I listed above contain widely-varying amounts of ambience. The XTC effect is obvious on the wet Diaz-Latorre recording, but subtle on the dry Cauvin recording.