Critique my system upgrade

[YouCanCallMeGeorge]

The only problem i see is the Schiit preamp has no output for subs and the balance problems of the volume control and i do not know if that would be audible though.Speakers and amps are very good.Be sure you have no problems with DC noice noise as i have problems with the same modules and have a listen to the speakers if you can.Measurements is an indication for a good speaker but i would have a listen before i buy.

If I do need subs, and if I need more channels, then I am prepared to lose the $100 I spent on the Schiit preamp. It's worth $100 to find out whether I can save maybe $1,000.

If I do hear hissing, how would I go about eliminating any cause on my side? That is, what should I do with the part of the system that I control, so as to isolate the source of the hiss to some purchased component?

As to listening to speakers before purchase, I do have that option, as proposed by Bear123.

 

[Chrise36]

If I do need subs, and if I need more channels, then I am prepared to lose the $100 I spent on the Schiit preamp. It's worth $100 to find out whether I can save maybe $1,000.

If I do hear hissing, how would I go about eliminating any cause on my side? That is, what should I do with the part of the system that I control, so as to isolate the source of the hiss to some purchased component?

As to listening to speakers before purchase, I do have that option, as proposed by Bear123.

If the preamp produces any hiss run the amps straight from the DAC.The noise from the mains is something else you need powerline filters. This cheap volume controls have channel imbalances look if you can afford something with a better volume controller and a pair of outputs more for future use.

 

[YouCanCallMeGeorge]

If the preamp produces any hiss run the amps straight from the DAC.The noise from the mains is something else you need powerline filters.

Do you have manufacturer name(s) for volume control and power line filter?
The Schiit Sys is the only simple volume controller I've seen. I don't think I'm looking in the right places.

This cheap volume controls have channel imbalances look if you can afford something with a better volume controller and a pair of outputs more for future use.

I don't mind spending money for quality equipment. I'm open to suggestions.

 

[Chrise36]

Do you have manufacturer name(s) for volume control and power line filter?
The Schiit Sys is the only simple volume controller I've seen. I don't think I'm looking in the right places.


I don't mind spending money for quality equipment. I'm open to suggestions.

Gustard H16 HPA, Topping A90, as for power line filters some people here in the forum have seen improvement with Brennenstuhl but it is not necessary from the beginning your house might not have the same problems.

 

[Bear123]

The Denon is $1200 at Crutchfield. Does your low limit of $800 mean that you know of a dealer who sells a new one at that price?
The two channel Buckeye Hypex NC252 is available for $500.
It's a great deal on the Hypex, really can't go wrong. I used a low range of $800 because you can usually get "last years" model at a nice discount. When I bought my X3300 new, the 3400 was coming out, so I got it for $599. Not sure if the 3600 or 3700 will show up discounted as supply seems to be an issue currently.
My room is only 11 x 11'. I may be wrong, but it doesn't seem like a center speaker will make much difference.

My seating area is probably a total of 8-10' across(one sofa, one recliner), which is smaller than the dimension of your room. When I sit off to one side, most sound seems to come directly out of the closest speaker. A center channel keeps sounds that should come from the center, centered, no matter where anyone sits. I wouldn't want a TV/movie setup without one. Unless you will only ever have one person sitting right in the center, I think it would be a big improvement. Even sitting centered, I think a center channel will provide a superior experience. I don't want an actors voice to only come from the correct place if I sit with my head in a vice directly centered on the TV.

If I do need a sub: The sub has its own low pass filter, 24 dB/octave. There is some difference of opinion as to whether it is necessary to add a high pass filter to the main speakers. I'm sure I don't have my own opinion now, but I am willing to experiment and take advice from others when the time comes. So, it may not be necessary to add upstream components to the system if I add sub(s).

If you want a high fidelity response below 100 Hz, I believe you will need proper bass management. Its possible Im wrong here; measurements will show you for sure though. Doesn't hurt to give it a try. Since your using a PC I think you will have options here but not really sure.

I'm not in a position to disagree about the numbers, nor do I have any reason to question them. I do know that the Hypex amp has measurably less distortion and a measurably lower price. So what's not to like? (Besides, I break out in hives when I see all that goop that won't be used. It's not goop if there is a need for it; definitely goop if no need.)

The Buckeye amp for sure measures well....but it cannot be compared to a Denon AVR in terms of price/value etc as they are two totally different products serving different functions. The Denon is not limited to only 2 channels, includes DAC for all channels, bass management, sub eq, speaker eq, wifi, remote control, surround decoding, etc etc etc etc etc. You would have to add the cost of your PC, DAC, pre-amp, etc, and still be limited to 2 channels. Having said that, I see the Buckeye as the same level of value for a 2 channel amp as the Denon is for an AVR. Both great products. If I were in your shoes and really wanted the higher SINAD of the Buckeye, I'd consider the Denon and use the pre-outs as I wouldn't be willing to downgrade to a 2 channel only setup. I lived with 3.2 for a long time and was really happy with it. I did upgrade to 5.2 as it was very inexpensive to do so(about $250 for in wall surround speakers), and I do often now listen to even music in full surround mode. I like having the option to switch back and forth as I want.


I'm inclined to agree with you on this. However, the room is so small that I thought it best to see how much the bass resonates without the subs.

Will be interested to see how things work if you decide to stick with 2 speakers only. I assume you will be measuring with REW? If you post results it will be interesting to see what you end up with. Good luck!

 

[YouCanCallMeGeorge]

Will be interested to see how things work if you decide to stick with 2 speakers only. I assume you will be measuring with REW? If you post results it will be interesting to see what you end up with. Good luck!

I hardly ever watch movies. When I do, it will be in the living room with the Chair of the Entertainment Committee. No TV in the listening room, either. I really only want stereo for music. As to the subs, I won't be surprised if I end up with a pair, essentially making four way speakers. The REW measurements will help with that decision. We'll see.

 

[Bear123]

I hardly ever watch movies. When I do, it will be in the living room with the Chair of the Entertainment Committee. No TV in the listening room, either. I really only want stereo for music. As to the subs, I won't be surprised if I end up with a pair, essentially making four way speakers. The REW measurements will help with that decision. We'll see.

Ah, in that case I see very little need for center channel or an AVR. Sorry, thought this was mixed usage. I do use my center channel sometimes for music, but not because I feel like it is hugely necessary, but just because I can and sometimes find it interesting to compare. So yea, I think your on track with your direction!

I still think it will be interesting if you decide to A/B the KEF against a traditional wide dispersion design. I'd be really interested in hearing the R3's or tower versions someday.

 

[YouCanCallMeGeorge]

Update:
After probably 100 hours of reading reviews and spec sheets for a wide variety of speakers, I decided to try the LS50 Meta first. The R3 is second choice, followed by the Ascend Sierra 2EX.

The deciding factors were:
— Better imaging.
I read three reviewers who gave detailed and explicit descriptions of the precise imaging produced by the Metas.
Other reviewers also commented on the imaging. One reviewer said the Meta imaging snapped into place better than the R3.
These comments on imaging were in the context of high praise for the tonal quality.
True, some preferred the tonal quality of the R3 in the mids, but the difference was slight.
Bass is not likely to be much of an issue, as I will cross the subs at 80 Hz, or 60 Hz if that sounds better. (The L12 subs have filters at 60 and 80 Hz.)
https://www.stereophile.com/content/kef-ls50-meta-loudspeaker
https://thenextweb.com/plugged/2020...grades-an-audiophile-fave-to-near-perfection/
http://www.audiodrom.net/en/stand-mount-monitors/detail/29-stand-mount-monitors/714-kef-ls50-meta

— Lower distortion.
From 300 Hz to 10 kHz, the LS50 Meta spec is 0.1%; 175 Hz to 20 kHz, 0.4%.
The R3 is 0.3%, 130 Hz to 20 kHz.
For most of the range of interest, the Meta is 5 dB better than the R3: -30 vs -25 dB, respectively. (Correct me if I did the calculation wrong.)
It seems strange to spend $1700 on the miniDSP SHD and Hypex amp to minimize distortion below the audible range, and then throw away a whopping 5 dB of distortion in the audible range in exchange for small and subjective differences in tonal quality.
(I'm guessing that the lower distortion contributes to the better imaging.)

— Overall, I felt the LS50 Metas would be best suited to my small room.
The speakers will be 6 feet apart on a 12 foot wall. Greater separation is not possible due to an inward swinging door. I'll only be 6 or 7 feet from the plane of the speakers. I won't need the power of the R3s. And, it may be that the LS50 sound will be better integrated at my ears without the vertically separated mid speaker of the R3. (I reverted to the larger room, having acquired sufficient WAF to swap some furniture between rooms.)

The LS50s arrived yesterday. I hooked them up to the existing Onkyo integrated amp (100 watts per channel), and set them in the living room. That room is twice the area of my room, and is missing half a wall. I could definitely hear the difference (compared to the old Q15s) on all the CDs I played, but I wasn't thrilled. When I put John Williams' Romance of the Guitar on, I was struck by the presence. Really, really nice. Michael Murray playing Bach on the Methuen organ was very good, too. I'm hopeful that when the full system is set up in the room, and I play newer recordings (or maybe just better set up recordings) many of them will be as impressive as the Williams.

 

[Chrise36]

Congrats for your new speakers. I hope you enjoy them. Have you decided about the rest of the system?

 

[YouCanCallMeGeorge]

Congrats for your new speakers. I hope you enjoy them. Have you decided about the rest of the system?

Rythmik L12 subs, Hypex NC525MP amp, and miniDSP SHD.

 

[Chrise36]

Nice system i hope you enjoy it.

 

[Bear123]

Gonna be thrilled once you get those subs set up and everything eq'd. Nice!

 

[YouCanCallMeGeorge]

Gonna be thrilled once you get those subs set up and everything eq'd. Nice!

Well, I am thrilled. While sitting in the middle of the room, the sound is clear, and the imaging is so good that sometimes I open my eyes and wonder for just that split second how the singer's voice is passing through the computer monitor on the table against the wall.

But of course I'm wondering if I can make improvements...

I have the LS50 Metas sitting on the Rythmik L12 subs. Each LS50 with its sub behaves as a three-way speaker. The subs are Channels 3 and 4 on the SHD. Crossover in the SHD is set at 100 Hz, 24 dB per octave. The bypass knob on the subs is set at 120 Hz, to allow the signal at 100 Hz to be to be full strength. REW measurements of subs and speakers alone showed the crossover is working as expected.

I have the speakers at 73 inches of separation, angled inward four degrees. My ears are 80 inches from the plane of the speakers, and 46 inches from the wall behind me. (I tried the speakers at 78 inches spread, but that put the listening position too close the wall behind me. I could hear the quality of sound change as I varied the distance between my head and the wall.)

There is a really nasty standing wave at 70 Hz. In one test, I played a 70 Hz tone. The sound was loud at the plane of the speakers, very low in the middle of the room and at the listening position, and loud again at the far wall. In the Dirac Live measurement at the listening position, I could see downward spikes at 140 and 210 Hz.

Dirac Live does its best to compensate at 70 Hz, but as can be seen in this REW measurement (with Dirac active), the left channel is low between 60 and 70 Hz. (The room is essentially 12' square, with 9 foot ceiling.)

I'm also curious about the many spikes in the chart above 100 Hz. These are in the LS50 Metas. The speakers sound good. Does the SPL graph indicate a problem with the speakers?
(If it's relevant, THD in this REW measurement is 1.77%. There are spikes in the noise floor at exactly 1 kHz, 2 kHz, 3, 4, [not 5], 6, 7, 8, 9 kHz. The spikes are 20 dB at 1 and 2 kHz.)

 

[phoenixdogfan]

The LS50 Wireless II is an interesting alternative. It should have all of the connectivity you want and allow for addition of a sub. I'm not sure how the crossover or room correction would work though.

I have an SHD but I think Volumio sucks.

As an alternative to Volumio, why not Roon AND a Chromecast audio?

 

[racerxnet]

Put your subs at opposite ends of the room and do a sweep with REW. I'd bet the null will flatten out at 63 and 71hz. REW room sim will show this as well. Your overall measurement may flatten out from 20 to 300 hz.


MAK

 

[phoenixdogfan]

I agree that in the end the listening test is the only one that matters; and we listen to the speaker, not the data.

I haven't seen anyone who has actually listened to the speaker say that he doesn't like it. And I have seen a couple of reviews (one of those was a blind test) that chose the BMR over the Kef R3.

Room size is a potential problem for the BMRs. My listening room [sounds better than "place of exile", yes?] is only 11' by 11'. (I could use the 12 x 12 room, but the smaller one is better when other factors are considered.) In a 12 x 12 room, Steve Dallas found that the BMRs sounded best in a narrow range of head height. That would not be acceptable to me, long term.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...semi-objective-review-road-show-stop-1.18828/


In light of the above, your setup—LS50s with L12 subs—may be the best for my small room.

On the other hand, the Activities Committee Chair is amenable wearing noise cancelling headphones in the living room while she watches TV and I play the stereo. (Headphones—not noise cancelling—are often in use now, as I do not watch much TV.) In that case, the BMRs are a possibility.

I also have LS 50's (originals) set up in a 12 x 12 room with a single SVS SB2000 connected to a miniDSP 2 x 4HD. They sound very good indeed. One advantage of the LS 50's is that a lot of members have devoted more than a fair amount of research into which eq's work best to maximize their performance. Both the Metas (powered and unpowered) and the OG LS 50's (again powered and unpowered) have really excellent published EQ setting from Thewas and Maiky76 which do a great deal to ameliorate any FR anomalies.

Personally, in a 1200 CF space, the LS 50's crossed over with even a single sub at 100hz should be able to play about as loud (95 db) as any non hearing impaired person would want, or at least I think so. I also have Dirac Live 3 on my PC, and even in doing those measurements, it did not detect a major flaw in the system's lower mid/ upper bass in my room, so I don't think that the LS 50s will have a significant deficiency in that area in smaller spaces either.

You might also want to check out Napilopez's review of the Metas. He really liked them.

 

[YouCanCallMeGeorge]

Put your subs at opposite ends of the room and do a sweep with REW. I'd bet the null will flatten out at 63 and 71hz. REW room sim will show this as well. Your overall measurement may flatten out from 20 to 300 hz.

That's worth a try, if only for the education. Still, the reason for putting the LS50s on top of the subs is to have each sub work in cooperation with its main. The sub under the left speaker plays the left channel; same for the sub on the right. I can see on the SHD output display that power on the two sub channels varies; they are not the same at any given time. And I can hear the difference. So I would rather find some other way to correct the low frequency nulls.

 

[YouCanCallMeGeorge]

I also have LS 50's (originals) set up in a 12 x 12 room with a single SVS SB2000 connected to a miniDSP 2 x 4HD. They sound very good indeed. One advantage of the LS 50's is that a lot of members have devoted more than a fair amount of research into which eq's work best to maximize their performance. Both the Metas (powered and unpowered) and the OG LS 50's (again powered and unpowered) have really excellent published EQ setting from Thewas and Maiky76 which do a great deal to ameliorate any FR anomalies.

Do you have a link to the post in which the EQ setting is published? I spent ~20 minutes searching and reading posts, didn't find it.

Personally, in a 1200 CF space, the LS 50's crossed over with even a single sub at 100hz should be able to play about as loud (95 db) as any non hearing impaired person would want, or at least I think so. I also have Dirac Live 3 on my PC, and even in doing those measurements, it did not detect a major flaw in the system's lower mid/ upper bass in my room, so I don't think that the LS 50s will have a significant deficiency in that area in smaller spaces either.

The reason for the subs is not loudness, but low bass performance.

You might also want to check out Napilopez's review of the Metas. He really liked them.

I read that review before buying. It was one of many positive reviews that put the LS50 Metas at the top of the list.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Do you have a link to the post in which the EQ setting is published? I spent ~20 minutes searching and reading posts, didn't find it.


The reason for the subs is not loudness, but low bass performance.


I read that review before buying. It was one of many positive reviews that put the LS50 Metas at the top of the list.

"The reason for the subs is not loudness, but low bass performance." Either the Rhythmik L12 or the Sb-2000 should be able to give you 20hz. It's the midbass that might be problematic. The Sb-2000 plays flat to 140hz.

Here is the key post for the LS 50 Metas.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ama-and-measurements.18353/page-3#post-603589

And this is his EQ for the OG LS 50s.

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...helf-speaker-review.11144/page-22#post-521244

 

[Chrise36]

That's worth a try, if only for the education. Still, the reason for putting the LS50s on top of the subs is to have each sub work in cooperation with its main. The sub under the left speaker plays the left channel; same for the sub on the right. I can see on the SHD output display that power on the two sub channels varies; they are not the same at any given time. And I can hear the difference. So I would rather find some other way to correct the low frequency nulls.

Try to change the phase of the subs individually a bit or the crossover frequency. Eventually you might need room treatment.