D90 III Discrete - Built-in PEQ not performing the same as Voicemeeter?

[Hyacin]

Went from a DX5->L70->DCA E3 setup, to D90 III Discrete->L70->DCA E3, very excited about the built in PEQ and not having to install Voicemeeter (or hunt down Android alternatives) on every device I wanted to use with it.

Played around with various PEQ filter exports from AutoEQ the first night, like a whole assortment, same settings and method I was using for DX5 + Banana, just different outputs, and I was NOT getting the same kind of bass. Shrugged and figured maybe it was somehow a D90 thing and left it alone for a couple weeks.

Today I took the opportunity though to do a little more testing. I disabled all the filters in Topping Tune, routed everything through Banana, and boom, my bass is back. Flip it all back to direct to the D90 with the onboard PEQ enabled - which I'd expect to maybe even be a little _better_ since it looks like it has more parameters than what Banana takes... and weak bass again?!?

The curves look damn near identical before exporting from AutoEQ -

So I'm at a loss. Is the PEQ implementation in the DAC just broken or something? Thoughts?

I do have a couple reference mics, so if I get bored maybe I'll run some sweeps and actually measure the response to prove it's not just me - but I'm going back and forth and back and forth and there is a difference, 100% for sure.

And yes, I know planar have weak bass to begin with - I'm not saying it's "wow my head is going to be caved in" bass, nor is that what I'm after - I'm just trying to get back to the slightly fuller bass I had before, without having to rely on Voicemeeter still :-/

 

[kemmler3D]

My first thought is to check whether the Topping EQ actually supports the low shelf filter type and/or confirm that the formatting of the file is correct for the DAC. I ran into the same thing recently moving EQ settings between REW, EQAPO and Soundsource on Mac, the latter does not have a LS filter.

 

[Hyacin]

I did the measurements and SPL aligned them at 125 Hz to make them a little easier to compare ... the only thing I'm gathering from this is that if the volume is pushed up on account of the treble being lower, the net effect is that the bass goes up too.

 

[Hyacin]

My first thought is to check whether the Topping EQ actually supports the low shelf filter type and/or confirm that the formatting of the file is correct for the DAC. I ran into the same thing recently moving EQ settings between REW, EQAPO and Soundsource on Mac, the latter does not have a LS filter.

Interesting thought! I assumed so because the software takes it, but good call, I'll double check!

 

[Hyacin]

Interesting thought! I assumed so because the software takes it, but good call, I'll double check!

I can't find anything in any of the specs or docs to confirm/deny it supports low shelf filters, other than the software documentation showing it an an option you can select in the software.

The format is correct for sure, I did an export first of one of the built-in ones to double check, also I've done multiple filters by hand, including this most recent one that is just a direct, hand-inputted copy of the filter AutoEQ is producing for Banana -

Undid the SPL align for this screenshot.

I guess the assumption then is that the hardware does _not_ support the low shelf filter despite the software implying it does and presumably setting one?

Anyone have enough experience with Topping support to know if it's even worth trying to ask them or bring this to their attention?

At the end of the day I still got a hell of a DAC upgrade, so I can't _really_ complain, but I was really hoping to be done with EQ software on all my various stuff and having to reinstall and configure it for every new device/wipe.

 

[Hyacin]

There some confusing and poorly translated business about "Local Config" vs "User Config", and an implication that you can change the PEQ on the fly when the device is "online" and push configs to it for "offline use" - I noted it had been on "PEQ Config 1" the entire time, yet the responses were changing, so I assume the flipping in the software was doing _something_. Regardless, I pulled in a new 10-band filter with high and low shelfs, and "pushed to device" to create a "PEQ Config 4" that did not exist on the device previously, and then set the device to that to see if it made any difference ... it did not. :-/

 

[YSDR]

It may be important to know what sampling frequency you calculated the PEQ parameters for with the Banana and what you send to the DAC without the Banana. If the sampling frequencies are different in the two cases, they may requires different EQ parameters for the same net frequency response.

 

[Hyacin]

It may be important to know what sampling frequency you calculated the PEQ parameters for with the Banana and what you send to the DAC without the Banana. If the sampling frequencies are different in the two cases, they may requires different EQ parameters for the same net frequency response.

Good call, went back through all my everything - my filters were generated for 96000, but using Tidal in direct/exclusive mode was I guess using the sample rate of the songs - largely 44100.

Sadly, generating a filter for 44100 and putting it in Topping Tune, I was still getting weak bass.

Further, turning off exclusive mode so the device connection did remain at 96000, the 96000 filters remained unimpressive :'(

May make more pretty graphs later, but for now just want to wind down and enjoy the setup for a bit

 

[Nezil]

Any update on this @Hyacin? I received my D90 III Discrete yesterday, and haven't tried PEQ on it yet, but was intending to at some point.

The conclusion at this point is that High and Low Shelves to not work, right? I wonder if the same is true for the DX5 II that I'm using at my desk...

 

[Hyacin]

Any update on this @Hyacin? I received my D90 III Discrete yesterday, and haven't tried PEQ on it yet, but was intending to at some point.

The conclusion at this point is that High and Low Shelves to not work, right? I wonder if the same is true for the DX5 II that I'm using at my desk...

Sadly no real conclusions... just the assumptions and guesses that are in this thread. When I figured out it wasn't working and couldn't get to the bottom of it with a couple hours of messing around, I just gave up and went back to using Voicemeeter :-/ ... at least it _is_ still an upgrade over my old DX5, and I got it at a decent price with the open box, so, I can live with Voicemeeter

 

[Nezil]

That's frustrating. I'll try to find the time to take a look at my setup at some point.

I now basically have two parallel setups. The D90 III Discrete for 2ch listening, and a Denon AVR for surround sound that obviously adds other channels. Both go through a Topping Pre90 Preamplifier and on to Topping B200s. The AVR has Audyssey configured using A1 Evo, and my plan was to add PEQ with the D90 III Discrete based on REW measurements, but I've not had a chance to do that yet.

Another thing I could try, is to see if the DX5 II supports low and high shelf.

 

[Hyacin]

That's frustrating. I'll try to find the time to take a look at my setup at some point.

I now basically have two parallel setups. The D90 III Discrete for 2ch listening, and a Denon AVR for surround sound that obviously adds other channels. Both go through a Topping Pre90 Preamplifier and on to Topping B200s. The AVR has Audyssey configured using A1 Evo, and my plan was to add PEQ with the D90 III Discrete based on REW measurements, but I've not had a chance to do that yet.

Another thing I could try, is to see if the DX5 II supports low and high shelf.

I'd fully expect the DX5ii to have the same PEQ code in the firmware as the D90iiid :-(

Interesting setup!! I've got my surround and headphone stacks completely separate. I was going D90iiid -> L70, but now I'm adding a feed from my new Black Swan phono pre, so I'm switching to an A90d+EXT90. The other direction out of the Swan goes to my AV20->Buckeyes->9.2.4.

 

[Nezil]

I'd fully expect the DX5ii to have the same PEQ code in the firmware as the D90iiid :-(

Interesting setup!! I've got my surround and headphone stacks completely separate. I was going D90iiid -> L70, but now I'm adding a feed from my new Black Swan phono pre, so I'm switching to an A90d+EXT90. The other direction out of the Swan goes to my AV20->Buckeyes->9.2.4.

Wow... 9.2.4; mine is currently 7.1.4 and that alone was a challenge. My setup is in a living room though, so all aside from the front L & R + Sub are in wall / in ceiling / hidden in cabinets for Wife Acceptance Factor.

I wasn't expecting to keep the Pre90, but my DIY front speakers are pretty low sensitivity, using it allows me to add enough gain to compensate for that, along with boosting the lower single ended output from the AVR, and run the B200s in low gain mode.

Apparently there is a small theoretical benefit in using a preamp for volume attenuation rather than the DAC itself, but had I not gone this route, I was considering using a miniDSP Adept to digitise the AVR output before using the DAC effectively as the preamp to provide the necessary gain for the AVR.

It's all fun and games... my plan after this is to move the B200s close to the speakers, but that means running balanced cables and trigger wires through the walls to the appropriate locations, and I need to earn favour with the wife before cutting holes in the walls and removing baseboards in the living room again!

 

[Hyacin]

Wow... 9.2.4; mine is currently 7.1.4 and that alone was a challenge. My setup is in a living room though, so all aside from the front L & R + Sub are in wall / in ceiling / hidden in cabinets for Wife Acceptance Factor.

I wasn't expecting to keep the Pre90, but my DIY front speakers are pretty low sensitivity, using it allows me to add enough gain to compensate for that, along with boosting the lower single ended output from the AVR, and run the B200s in low gain mode.

Apparently there is a small theoretical benefit in using a preamp for volume attenuation rather than the DAC itself, but had I not gone this route, I was considering using a miniDSP Adept to digitise the AVR output before using the DAC effectively as the preamp to provide the necessary gain for the AVR.

It's all fun and games... my plan after this is to move the B200s close to the speakers, but that means running balanced cables and trigger wires through the walls to the appropriate locations, and I need to earn favour with the wife before cutting holes in the walls and removing baseboards in the living room again!

Yeah, living room here too, but thankfully the wife eventually just threw her hands up in the air, said "fine, whatever, I give up - I'll just consider this 'your room' and 'your mess' from now on"

Large rugs and creative placement of furniture and items hides a lot of the wires (and dampen reflections!) Hard for her to argue about their worth though when the lights turn off, the screen comes down, and we have an experience better than any movie theatre we've ever been to!

"all fun and games" is spot on. I'll enjoy this stuff while I'm here, and I know a lot of it (speakers, phono pre, etc.) will retain a lot of value, so my family can sell it all when I'm gone rofl.