Keith_W
Master Contributor
If all that is true, it is far from an "ugly MiniDSP". For comparison, it's direct competitor would be the MiniDSP Flex Eight. Here is a blow by blow comparison (MiniDSP vs. Colinear):
- 4096 FIR input taps (meaning 2048 taps per stereo channel), vs. 50,000 taps. The Colinear control panel shows FIR inputs and FIR outputs, and the manual says that you can assign 8192 input taps per channel (x 2 channels) and 4096 output taps per channel (x 8 channels). Total = 49152 taps.
- Fixed 96kHz sample rate vs. selectable 96kHz/192kHz sample rate. I would much prefer a 48kHz sample rate rather than higher sample rates though, since lower sample rates increase FIR resolution.
- 160 IIR biquads in total vs. 288.
- 8 balanced jack outputs vs. 8 XLR and 8 RCA outputs
- Inputs: both have USB, TOSLink, and SPDIF. Neither have an ADC.
- MiniDSP has a remote control. Unsure if the Colinear has one or not.
- SINAD: -111dB vs. unknown. And stop worrying about SINAD, as long as it's good enough, i.e. less than -100dB, it's irrelevant! I would even wager that -90dB is good enough! (Not directed at you @DWPress, it's for other people in this thread commenting about DAC chips).
- Price: $549 vs. $1000
In terms of hardware DSP capability, IMO the Colinear is easily the superior product. The REAL question is the software - how do you program this thing.
MiniDSP has a Dirac option and it is directly supported by REW. As I have said elsewhere, biquad coefficients are not portable, meaning that the software has to be able to directly generate biquads for specific hardware. If it isn't directly supported, you will be stuck manually typing in f0, Q, and gains ... 288 times if you use up all available biquads! The Colinear control panel looks very similar to the MiniDSP control panel, effectively it's the same thing but with a different colour scheme. Don't know if REW will directly support them now or in the future.
The manual for MiniDSP is extensive, and they have a support forum. Right now the Colinear manual is absolutely paltry, and as far as I can see - no support forum. Fortunately, this product is so similar to MiniDSP that you can probably adapt MiniDSP procedures to program this thing if you know what you are doing. For the moment at least, it seems as if the Colinear will be more difficult to program for DSP beginners. But for an intermediate level DSP practitioner, especially someone with experience with MiniDSP, it should be quite easy to use.
IMO it sounds like a great product apart from some unknowns. The $1000 price does not bother me, I would happily pay that to get better DSP. The lack of Dirac, unknown REW support, and poor user manual would bother some people. All that is at time of writing, I hope it improves in the future.
Re: DEQX, it's not a question of "measures better" but whether the DSP capability is better. DEQX is capable of 32768 taps per channel, multiplied by 8 channels, with a selectable sample rate of 44.1kHz - 192kHz. I believe this information is correct because it came from the horse's mouth (Kim Ryrie). It also has excellent SINAD of -116dB (claimed), analog inputs, and XLR mic input. And you can chain multiple DEQX's together to obtain more than 8 channels if you want to.
DEQX is superior to either MiniDSP or Colinear in terms of FIR capability and flexibility. Unfortunately it's still in beta (after 2 years!), and it is stonkingly expensive. I can not recommend it in good conscience since software/PC/RPi solutions are cheaper and more powerful, if less elegant. You could buy Acourate or Audiolense, get a Raspberry Pi, a laptop, an interface, and some accessories like microphones and mic stands, and come in with more than $15k in change over a DEQX and get vastly superior DSP. You don't get the nice case, and convenience features like remote controls, etc. is a pain.
Last edited:
