-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
DEQX Premate 8 digital active crossover / DSP
- Thread starter Keith_W
- Start date
Sined
Member
Today I received an Email from DEQX saying that there are still a beta units available until the final date in August.
As an happy HDP-4 owner, I'm still juggling with the decision " should I stay or should I go" with the Pre-8. I asked to DEQX if I can get a copy of the user's manual to get an idea of the new software general presentation and for sure, to have a better idea on how the current features of the HDP-4 are integrated in the new software (speaker measurement, room measurement, Xover configuration, etc.) and if there are new features. I may be a bit pessimistic..., but I have a feeling that they will deny my request since I have not bought the unit. My question to you guys: is there a user's manual (pdf) even if it's not final and if yes, any suggestion on how I could get a hand on it ?
And while at it, as beta testers, what are your thoughts and findings ?
Thanks!
I don't think there is an actual "users manual" for the PRE8. There's a FAQ and some online files which run through some procedures like how to measure for a correction profile and so on, but no actual "manual" - more of a "Guide" shall we say. For example the PRE8 came with a remote but there's no documentation I can find and many of the buttons seem to do nothing. ON/OFF, volume UP/DOWN all work fine but there are a few other buttons that I have not seen to do anything. It's very much still a work in progress I fear, in these regards.
ALL THAT SAID, I **LOVE** my PRE8. Sound is fantastic and it's been reliable. I have had some issues accessing it on my local LAN, but those are likely related to my networking setup and not the PRE8. Once or twice in the time I've owned it the unit seemed to "lock up" but power-cycling it fixed that at once.
What I like best is how well it integrated my open baffle subs with my tri-amped MG 3.6's. I tried doing that with a pair of PDC 2.6's and had limited success.
The PRE8 also has a phono stage, a little module inside built by Dynavector which is said to have been designed around the Dynavector 10X5 high output moving coil pickup. I have a 10X5 in a VPI Scout, as it turns out, and I have connected it to the PRE8 but I listen to vinyl so rarely that I have yet to try it. I'll say something about it when I give it a try.
Most of my listening is to FLAC files from my home server, but I also listen to Soma FM's 256k MP3 "Groove Salad" channel for background chill. I haven't used the built-in Volumio player, I have a Squeezebox / Squeeze server setup and feed the DEQX via SPDIF from a Squeezebox Touch. I don't really know quite how to use the Volumio player. Supposedly the DEQX PRE8 can act as a Roon endpoint - also supposed to work and a player endpoint for Jriver player too, and I fiddled with that for just 10 minutes one night and didn't really get anywhere. I use Jriver as a library and player for my headphone setup, but to configure it to output over the LAN to the DEQX has so far not been a priority. I'll eventually get around to it.
The 12V trigger output works, I use that to turn on my power amps. Very handy.
ALL THAT SAID, I **LOVE** my PRE8. Sound is fantastic and it's been reliable. I have had some issues accessing it on my local LAN, but those are likely related to my networking setup and not the PRE8. Once or twice in the time I've owned it the unit seemed to "lock up" but power-cycling it fixed that at once.
What I like best is how well it integrated my open baffle subs with my tri-amped MG 3.6's. I tried doing that with a pair of PDC 2.6's and had limited success.
The PRE8 also has a phono stage, a little module inside built by Dynavector which is said to have been designed around the Dynavector 10X5 high output moving coil pickup. I have a 10X5 in a VPI Scout, as it turns out, and I have connected it to the PRE8 but I listen to vinyl so rarely that I have yet to try it. I'll say something about it when I give it a try.
Most of my listening is to FLAC files from my home server, but I also listen to Soma FM's 256k MP3 "Groove Salad" channel for background chill. I haven't used the built-in Volumio player, I have a Squeezebox / Squeeze server setup and feed the DEQX via SPDIF from a Squeezebox Touch. I don't really know quite how to use the Volumio player. Supposedly the DEQX PRE8 can act as a Roon endpoint - also supposed to work and a player endpoint for Jriver player too, and I fiddled with that for just 10 minutes one night and didn't really get anywhere. I use Jriver as a library and player for my headphone setup, but to configure it to output over the LAN to the DEQX has so far not been a priority. I'll eventually get around to it.
The 12V trigger output works, I use that to turn on my power amps. Very handy.
Sined
Member
Thank you very much for the info, that's what I was afraid of ! The manual for the HDP-4/5 came several years after, so I bet it will be the same for the Pre-8!
Holmz
Major Contributor
Very timely that this popped up on the new posts field… even though it is only new to me.
I signed up, and got an email asking me to continue with the purchase that I initiated a few months ago.
However I am still sort of conflicted.
I did get an Octo Pro (8 channel), which is still in the wrapper, and I have no idea on how one gets the taps in and out of the DEQX etc.
And I have enough amps to power things…
It looks good in theory, but…
I read the posts on page 1, and 17/18, so maybe I need to eat the middle of the sandwich as well?
I signed up, and got an email asking me to continue with the purchase that I initiated a few months ago.
However I am still sort of conflicted.
I did get an Octo Pro (8 channel), which is still in the wrapper, and I have no idea on how one gets the taps in and out of the DEQX etc.
And I have enough amps to power things…
It looks good in theory, but…
I read the posts on page 1, and 17/18, so maybe I need to eat the middle of the sandwich as well?
OP
Keith_W
Master Contributor
- Thread Starter
- #346
The show is on again and I met the DEQX guys yesterday and they showed me a few new products.
Note that I am repeating what they said to me verbatim. I am in no way a DEQX representative, nor do I necessarily agree with their strategy, or their pricing model, or anything else.
1. There is a new DEQX Dolby Atmos decoder. Connect a HDMI source (TV, DVD) to the box, and it can send output via Dante to other DEQX products - maybe a Premate 8, maybe another decoder, maybe one of their new amps (see below). You can have up to 64 channels of Atmos. The Dante outputs have PoE (Power over Ethernet). I was told there were significant challenges with noise rejection and jitter with the Dante connection, but given that both DEQX and Audinate (makers of Dante) are in Sydney, they worked together to improve Dante.
2. New DEQX amplifier. The intention of this amplifier is to power surround speakers, and it is TINY - about as large as a few mobile phones stacked on top of each other. There is no power supply! Instead, power is supplied through the PoE connection. This means maximum power output is 30W Class O (I have never heard of this class, so maybe I misheard?), with enough capacitors to give a peak 300W output for 300ms. The solution is really elegant - all you do is run a network cable to the amplifier with PoE, and connect the amps to the speakers. The problem is that it is proprietary and will not work with anything else apart from the DEQX Atmos decoder. They told me that the idea is that AVR's are loaded with redundant amplifiers which add to the purchase price but sit unused. This way, customers can specify how many amplifiers they need.
3. The DEQX Premate 8 will shortly be out of beta. Look at the start of this thread for an idea of how long DEQX has been in beta. Frankly it's a bit disappointing.
I also met Glenn Dickins who published the original paper on linear phase, and is one of the inventors of Dolby Atmos. He agreed to do a Q&A session with ASR. I suggested that I email him the questions and publish his replies.
In a few hours I will be back at the show. If any of you have any questions for the DEQX guys, I am happy to ask them on your behalf.
Note that I am repeating what they said to me verbatim. I am in no way a DEQX representative, nor do I necessarily agree with their strategy, or their pricing model, or anything else.
1. There is a new DEQX Dolby Atmos decoder. Connect a HDMI source (TV, DVD) to the box, and it can send output via Dante to other DEQX products - maybe a Premate 8, maybe another decoder, maybe one of their new amps (see below). You can have up to 64 channels of Atmos. The Dante outputs have PoE (Power over Ethernet). I was told there were significant challenges with noise rejection and jitter with the Dante connection, but given that both DEQX and Audinate (makers of Dante) are in Sydney, they worked together to improve Dante.
2. New DEQX amplifier. The intention of this amplifier is to power surround speakers, and it is TINY - about as large as a few mobile phones stacked on top of each other. There is no power supply! Instead, power is supplied through the PoE connection. This means maximum power output is 30W Class O (I have never heard of this class, so maybe I misheard?), with enough capacitors to give a peak 300W output for 300ms. The solution is really elegant - all you do is run a network cable to the amplifier with PoE, and connect the amps to the speakers. The problem is that it is proprietary and will not work with anything else apart from the DEQX Atmos decoder. They told me that the idea is that AVR's are loaded with redundant amplifiers which add to the purchase price but sit unused. This way, customers can specify how many amplifiers they need.
3. The DEQX Premate 8 will shortly be out of beta. Look at the start of this thread for an idea of how long DEQX has been in beta. Frankly it's a bit disappointing.
I also met Glenn Dickins who published the original paper on linear phase, and is one of the inventors of Dolby Atmos. He agreed to do a Q&A session with ASR. I suggested that I email him the questions and publish his replies.
In a few hours I will be back at the show. If any of you have any questions for the DEQX guys, I am happy to ask them on your behalf.
I got my pre-8 about 3 weeks or so ago. This was the most recent adventure with DEQX equipment starting in 2004 with its PDP2.6 when I found a fellow Australian manufacturer of equipment that promised the improvement in loudspeakers along the lines I had heard when visiting in 1990 Prof Malcom Omar Hawksford's group at the University of Sussex into using DSP to linearise loudspeakers' frequency response. We took down from Glasgow a pair of Linn Kaber loudspeakers that I had designed and I was very impressed by the DSP results. My DEQX PDP2.6 was even better as it allowed more Xover changes in addition to linearising phase response and room correction. My PDP2.6 was eventually upgraded to an HDP3 and finally to PDP4 that Alan most recently improved its output amps so I thought my system could not get any better with its great resolution and naturalness. Until I got the pre-8!
However the first week with the pre-8 was spent frustratingly sorting out network communication problems now that DEQX is doing much of the computing for their new range 'in the cloud'. Part of the problem was that my TP-link modem/router recently intalled by my ISP when I upgraded to optical fibre to the premises would not talk to a TP-link extender that I needed for the pre-8 to talk to my network given I did not have hard-wired LAN link in my work listening area. Previous DEQX units connected directly to my PC via USB cable, a much easier process. But others with better LAn connections may not have my problems.
The next week was equalling frustrating as I tried to follow the recipe for measurements in DEQX's online preliminary user manual. This manual provides good detail of how to take individual driver measurements using an internally-generated chirp, then convert them into frequency and phase results and finally to make up Xovers of variable frequency and slopes to build an overall loudspeaker, for both left and right sides independently. Then 'create a system' of both L&R speakers and measure their response at the listening position, enabling a room correction using multiple PEQ band-width filters of variable widths and frequencies.
Because I am not a detail person but rather likes to do things through understanding what is happening I personally found the user manual a bit frustrating. For me this was also acerbated by much of the work just disappearing into 'the cloud' through the wifi/Internet whereas in the previous versions where my PC and HDP4 were directly connected through a USB cable one could see & readily contro what was happening on each - and correct any problems.
However all the above frustration was more than melted away through the improved sound quality when I eventually got to playing some music. Probably the most striking sound quality was the extraordinary speed and resolution - the pre-8 was more like an electron microscope (that I did most of my DPhil in Oxford on) rather a very good optical one (that I used in my undergrad at UniMelb) of the HDP4. A classical musician friend says that where hifi systems often do not sound like a live event is their lack of 'speed' but my system with the pre-8 now sounds much more like the real thing. The other audiophile criteria like tonality, imaging etc were also exceeded.
Of course for this the rest of the system is also important. It is shown in the attached photo. It starts with a recently bought mini PC with Jriver MC34 whose USB3 output feeds a Topping D10s to convert it to S/Pdif to go into the digital cox input of the pre-8. As with Berkley Audio DACs this reduces jitter. The midrange output goes to a recent SMSL PA200 GaN amp, that I found gives superior sound to anything I have used before, and then the modified SB Acoustics ceramic-coated midrange driver of my Legend Tikandi mk4 loudspeakers. The high output of the pre-8 goes to a 25mm Be tweeter from China through a 3eaudio class D amp; and the bass output goes through another pair of 3eaudio class D modules to a Peerless 10" XLS subwoofer coupled to a Scan-Speak 10" passive radiator. All cables have been carefully selected to try to minimise loss/distortion but without spending silly money.
The most 'natural' sounding results seem to occur when I measure the drivers slightly off axis (to reduce baffle diffraction effects) at 300 mm from the drivers - even though closer microphone positions of 100 and 200 mm give less room interference on the driver measurements. However I have yet to master the pre-8's method of truncating the measured impulse to reduce/remove room reflections, a process that was much easier on the previous DEQXcal of the HDP4 and can have a significant impact on SQ. But no doubt some of the problems I experienced are just me - and others will be improved as DEQX fine tunes it new programs. It took 9 man years for previous models from DEQX to be perfected.
Apologies if the above seems rather long and convoluted but hopefully some of it may be useful to someone!
However the first week with the pre-8 was spent frustratingly sorting out network communication problems now that DEQX is doing much of the computing for their new range 'in the cloud'. Part of the problem was that my TP-link modem/router recently intalled by my ISP when I upgraded to optical fibre to the premises would not talk to a TP-link extender that I needed for the pre-8 to talk to my network given I did not have hard-wired LAN link in my work listening area. Previous DEQX units connected directly to my PC via USB cable, a much easier process. But others with better LAn connections may not have my problems.
The next week was equalling frustrating as I tried to follow the recipe for measurements in DEQX's online preliminary user manual. This manual provides good detail of how to take individual driver measurements using an internally-generated chirp, then convert them into frequency and phase results and finally to make up Xovers of variable frequency and slopes to build an overall loudspeaker, for both left and right sides independently. Then 'create a system' of both L&R speakers and measure their response at the listening position, enabling a room correction using multiple PEQ band-width filters of variable widths and frequencies.
Because I am not a detail person but rather likes to do things through understanding what is happening I personally found the user manual a bit frustrating. For me this was also acerbated by much of the work just disappearing into 'the cloud' through the wifi/Internet whereas in the previous versions where my PC and HDP4 were directly connected through a USB cable one could see & readily contro what was happening on each - and correct any problems.
However all the above frustration was more than melted away through the improved sound quality when I eventually got to playing some music. Probably the most striking sound quality was the extraordinary speed and resolution - the pre-8 was more like an electron microscope (that I did most of my DPhil in Oxford on) rather a very good optical one (that I used in my undergrad at UniMelb) of the HDP4. A classical musician friend says that where hifi systems often do not sound like a live event is their lack of 'speed' but my system with the pre-8 now sounds much more like the real thing. The other audiophile criteria like tonality, imaging etc were also exceeded.
Of course for this the rest of the system is also important. It is shown in the attached photo. It starts with a recently bought mini PC with Jriver MC34 whose USB3 output feeds a Topping D10s to convert it to S/Pdif to go into the digital cox input of the pre-8. As with Berkley Audio DACs this reduces jitter. The midrange output goes to a recent SMSL PA200 GaN amp, that I found gives superior sound to anything I have used before, and then the modified SB Acoustics ceramic-coated midrange driver of my Legend Tikandi mk4 loudspeakers. The high output of the pre-8 goes to a 25mm Be tweeter from China through a 3eaudio class D amp; and the bass output goes through another pair of 3eaudio class D modules to a Peerless 10" XLS subwoofer coupled to a Scan-Speak 10" passive radiator. All cables have been carefully selected to try to minimise loss/distortion but without spending silly money.
The most 'natural' sounding results seem to occur when I measure the drivers slightly off axis (to reduce baffle diffraction effects) at 300 mm from the drivers - even though closer microphone positions of 100 and 200 mm give less room interference on the driver measurements. However I have yet to master the pre-8's method of truncating the measured impulse to reduce/remove room reflections, a process that was much easier on the previous DEQXcal of the HDP4 and can have a significant impact on SQ. But no doubt some of the problems I experienced are just me - and others will be improved as DEQX fine tunes it new programs. It took 9 man years for previous models from DEQX to be perfected.
Apologies if the above seems rather long and convoluted but hopefully some of it may be useful to someone!
There's a 59 page (currently) Owners Thread here that probably fits the bill: https://www.stereonet.com/forums/topic/65965-deqx-owners-thread/
I’ve been running the Pre-8 for about a year and a half now, and my experience has been a bit mixed. The setup process isn’t very straightforward, as it’s hard to understand exactly what the software is doing at each stage. There’s no real user manual—just a few videos that don’t really explain what’s going on.
As a technician, I naturally want to know what’s happening “under the hood” to fully grasp things, but with this software I’m left guessing. Either the details are being kept under wraps, or the manual just hasn’t been written yet, despite several years having passed. With knowing waht it does at each stage it is much easier to understand how the measurements have to be taken to get good results. The software isn't very clear, especailly the layout is pretty hard to read and the fact that they don't use the proper technical terms is a bit confusing. If you try to speak in non-technical terms all you do is confuse people who do speak technical language becuase everything is called differently.
Progress at DEQX seems to move quite slowly. The software was announced as coming out of beta more than once, yet each time the timeline got pushed back by months. To be honest, with the old DEQX software I could get a good sounding system in about one-tenth of the setup time. On the Pre-8, setting up a crossover can take hours for each one—it’s that slow, especially because you have to repeat the slow process over and over to get the best results
That said, after literally days of configuration, I did manage to achieve a setup that sounded about as good as my old DEQX configuration, though I haven’t surpassed it on all fronts yet. I should note that I run open-baffle speakers, which are a particular challenge for DEQX, but I did get some very nice results when testing with a pair of inexpensive closed-box speakers.
All in all I don't regret my purchase but I think there is a long way to go and they should get out of beta today, not tomorrow, not in a month. There is nothing worse for customer confidence than total radio silence.
As a technician, I naturally want to know what’s happening “under the hood” to fully grasp things, but with this software I’m left guessing. Either the details are being kept under wraps, or the manual just hasn’t been written yet, despite several years having passed. With knowing waht it does at each stage it is much easier to understand how the measurements have to be taken to get good results. The software isn't very clear, especailly the layout is pretty hard to read and the fact that they don't use the proper technical terms is a bit confusing. If you try to speak in non-technical terms all you do is confuse people who do speak technical language becuase everything is called differently.
Progress at DEQX seems to move quite slowly. The software was announced as coming out of beta more than once, yet each time the timeline got pushed back by months. To be honest, with the old DEQX software I could get a good sounding system in about one-tenth of the setup time. On the Pre-8, setting up a crossover can take hours for each one—it’s that slow, especially because you have to repeat the slow process over and over to get the best results
That said, after literally days of configuration, I did manage to achieve a setup that sounded about as good as my old DEQX configuration, though I haven’t surpassed it on all fronts yet. I should note that I run open-baffle speakers, which are a particular challenge for DEQX, but I did get some very nice results when testing with a pair of inexpensive closed-box speakers.
All in all I don't regret my purchase but I think there is a long way to go and they should get out of beta today, not tomorrow, not in a month. There is nothing worse for customer confidence than total radio silence.
Sined
Member
Sined
Member
Thank you very much for your post, very helpful !
I was hesitating to participate to the beta testing, firstly because I am very satisfied with my good ol' HDP-4; also because I don't need the new features such as a 4 way crossover and be able to connect to a streaming service. Finally, I was wondering if my old ears would still be enough on shape to enjoy the promised SQ improvements.
I asked for a copy of the current user's manual (if we can call this a user manual...
) to have an idea on how the new unit works, i.e., how the processes are established in the software, how it is presented on the screen, etc., etc.
Well... it was a clear show stopper from the start when I saw that the unit is no longer a stand alone processor but need to be connected to a DEQX cloud server to proceed with the calculations: NO !... I don't want to depend on an external source, period! How fast is the return process? What if the server is down or worse, if DEQX runs bankrupt? As an example, when I'm searching for the best crossover configuration (frequency and slope) between two drivers, I may be changing the values many many time in a very short period of time: quite easy with the HDP-4; from the cloud, you confirmed that it is now a rather long process: that's not what I call improvement...! Also, when I'm doing the listening tests, I'm using intensively the 4 profiles in which I stored the various configurations to compare "from the flip of a switch" the results from my listening position: I didn't see these P1-P4 buttons on the new remote control: again, NO !... I do not like at all the new software layout display on the screen: you didn't seem to enjoy it much either! Finally, I thought may be I didn't fully understand how the new processes of creating a speaker are now built, it seemed to me to be a lot less intuitive than what's currently in the HDP-4: you also confirmed that !
So, that's why I really appreciated your post, your year and a half experience with the Pre-8 confirmed what I was unfortunately afraid of after reading the manual. For sure, like it is now, me and the Pre-8 would not be a love story such as the one I'm having with my HDP-4 !! Thanks again !
I was hesitating to participate to the beta testing, firstly because I am very satisfied with my good ol' HDP-4; also because I don't need the new features such as a 4 way crossover and be able to connect to a streaming service. Finally, I was wondering if my old ears would still be enough on shape to enjoy the promised SQ improvements.
I asked for a copy of the current user's manual (if we can call this a user manual...
) to have an idea on how the new unit works, i.e., how the processes are established in the software, how it is presented on the screen, etc., etc. Well... it was a clear show stopper from the start when I saw that the unit is no longer a stand alone processor but need to be connected to a DEQX cloud server to proceed with the calculations: NO !... I don't want to depend on an external source, period! How fast is the return process? What if the server is down or worse, if DEQX runs bankrupt? As an example, when I'm searching for the best crossover configuration (frequency and slope) between two drivers, I may be changing the values many many time in a very short period of time: quite easy with the HDP-4; from the cloud, you confirmed that it is now a rather long process: that's not what I call improvement...! Also, when I'm doing the listening tests, I'm using intensively the 4 profiles in which I stored the various configurations to compare "from the flip of a switch" the results from my listening position: I didn't see these P1-P4 buttons on the new remote control: again, NO !... I do not like at all the new software layout display on the screen: you didn't seem to enjoy it much either! Finally, I thought may be I didn't fully understand how the new processes of creating a speaker are now built, it seemed to me to be a lot less intuitive than what's currently in the HDP-4: you also confirmed that !
So, that's why I really appreciated your post, your year and a half experience with the Pre-8 confirmed what I was unfortunately afraid of after reading the manual. For sure, like it is now, me and the Pre-8 would not be a love story such as the one I'm having with my HDP-4 !! Thanks again !
A little history
HI I am Dutch a new member and own a pdc-2,6 since 2003 (? so long ago I forgot) and I LOVE it in my open baffle system including open baffle subwoofers, but after I replaced the input clock for a femto one with its own dedicated power supply and replaced all the crappy electrolytic output capacitors with too very expensive audiophile capacitors. The difference was between day and night. Then years later I bought the HDP-4 and replaced all the output Wima caps for very too expensive but supreme sounding audiophile caps. I needed Kim's approval for replacing the clock but he convinced me not to that. He helped me to replace the caps. My first criterion for listening is musicality and secondly live performance-like with fast transients and all the goodies I respected since the pdc-2.6. To be honest -140 decibel noise or -110 is not really my concern as I can so easily live with -60 decibel of my cleanest recorded and cleaned LPs. If I listen to high 60.000+ € expensive systems in shows or in dedicated audiophile shops. I still miss something be it transparency and so often musicality and intimacy.
Then I bought a week ago the Pre 8 beta which I dont have yet with delivery problems of DHL Spain where I live now.
Now the main reason of my post after I asked Kim about a (minimal) manual to download
I did not ask for his permission to post his answer here from yesterday, but id don't think I am wrong that he won't mind as it is even when later realized as stated, good news.
"...
This is good timing because it has been six months since our last software release, but we have a new release coming out next week, I hope.
The reason we only have a very basic manual is that the user interface displays have been improving with each software release, so there will also be a revised version soon."
Notice the "I hope" but even when it is not really next week even then it is a sign to a near immediate future
HI I am Dutch a new member and own a pdc-2,6 since 2003 (? so long ago I forgot) and I LOVE it in my open baffle system including open baffle subwoofers, but after I replaced the input clock for a femto one with its own dedicated power supply and replaced all the crappy electrolytic output capacitors with too very expensive audiophile capacitors. The difference was between day and night. Then years later I bought the HDP-4 and replaced all the output Wima caps for very too expensive but supreme sounding audiophile caps. I needed Kim's approval for replacing the clock but he convinced me not to that. He helped me to replace the caps. My first criterion for listening is musicality and secondly live performance-like with fast transients and all the goodies I respected since the pdc-2.6. To be honest -140 decibel noise or -110 is not really my concern as I can so easily live with -60 decibel of my cleanest recorded and cleaned LPs. If I listen to high 60.000+ € expensive systems in shows or in dedicated audiophile shops. I still miss something be it transparency and so often musicality and intimacy.
Then I bought a week ago the Pre 8 beta which I dont have yet with delivery problems of DHL Spain where I live now.
Now the main reason of my post after I asked Kim about a (minimal) manual to download
I did not ask for his permission to post his answer here from yesterday, but id don't think I am wrong that he won't mind as it is even when later realized as stated, good news.
"...
This is good timing because it has been six months since our last software release, but we have a new release coming out next week, I hope.
The reason we only have a very basic manual is that the user interface displays have been improving with each software release, so there will also be a revised version soon."
Notice the "I hope" but even when it is not really next week even then it is a sign to a near immediate future
Last edited:
I have had my Pre-4 since the beginning of March this year. It replaced my PDC2.6P which had been in constant use in my system since 2007.
Despite how the Pre-4 is depicted on the DEQX website, it is indeed HD ready and runs with exactly the same software as the Pre-8. Only difference being that only 4 channels are active as opposed to eight. During set up, if you click on any of the four inactive channels, nothing happens.
I’ve had years of experience with the older software and I found the new software to be an absolute breeze by comparison. OK, I only had one crossover to set up!
Within the first hour of receipt, I had set up the Pre-4 with the same crossover as the PDC and was able to sit down and listen. For that first measurement, I had followed the Videos and measured step 1 at 6” from the drive unit(s), step 2 at the mid-point between drivers and listening position and the final step at the listening position. I deliberately left the few variables that are available at their default position.
My initial reaction was that the clarity/transparency was better than the PDC, but otherwise, the overall sound quality was not great.
Day 2 - I repeated the same process, but with both steps 2 at 3 at the listening position. Things improved, but still not as good as I had anticipated.
I decided to persevere with this 2nd measurement and just enjoy the music and try and identify where I had expected better (bass and treble!).
In the meantime, I also rewatched the set-up videos countless times and spoke with Alan. Alan asked me to wait for the release of the new software (as the resultant charts would be easier to read) and he also suggested taking all three measurements at the listening position – in other words, the mic position does not change throughout the process.
I did this and with only one measurement under my belt with v.1.4.0 I have been really impressed with the SQ. So much so that I am not doing another measurement until the next software release comes out and the documentation improves (hopefully).
I only play CDs and have not tested any other aspect of the Pre-4 and my ‘speakers have open- baffle bass drivers.
I have yet to take up my included session with a DEQXpert, but that’s my choice and I’m waiting until I think I’ve achieved the best I can on my own.
Despite how the Pre-4 is depicted on the DEQX website, it is indeed HD ready and runs with exactly the same software as the Pre-8. Only difference being that only 4 channels are active as opposed to eight. During set up, if you click on any of the four inactive channels, nothing happens.
I’ve had years of experience with the older software and I found the new software to be an absolute breeze by comparison. OK, I only had one crossover to set up!
Within the first hour of receipt, I had set up the Pre-4 with the same crossover as the PDC and was able to sit down and listen. For that first measurement, I had followed the Videos and measured step 1 at 6” from the drive unit(s), step 2 at the mid-point between drivers and listening position and the final step at the listening position. I deliberately left the few variables that are available at their default position.
My initial reaction was that the clarity/transparency was better than the PDC, but otherwise, the overall sound quality was not great.
Day 2 - I repeated the same process, but with both steps 2 at 3 at the listening position. Things improved, but still not as good as I had anticipated.
I decided to persevere with this 2nd measurement and just enjoy the music and try and identify where I had expected better (bass and treble!).
In the meantime, I also rewatched the set-up videos countless times and spoke with Alan. Alan asked me to wait for the release of the new software (as the resultant charts would be easier to read) and he also suggested taking all three measurements at the listening position – in other words, the mic position does not change throughout the process.
I did this and with only one measurement under my belt with v.1.4.0 I have been really impressed with the SQ. So much so that I am not doing another measurement until the next software release comes out and the documentation improves (hopefully).
I only play CDs and have not tested any other aspect of the Pre-4 and my ‘speakers have open- baffle bass drivers.
I have yet to take up my included session with a DEQXpert, but that’s my choice and I’m waiting until I think I’ve achieved the best I can on my own.
This was my main concern as well and I have talked about it with them, it is in the pipeline that the software 'might' eventually become offline, but in this tempo this can take another year or two. I surely hope so, I can imagine it will be the biggest showstopper for many otherwise. And offcoarse it is in my own interest to keep them into business.
No worries, you can now store as much profiles as you want directly on the DEQX. I have about 12 of them loaded at the moment which can be choosen directly and remotely via the webbrowser-remote
Yes, for me it is less intuitive, but that is because I'm an engineer and I get really confused when I don't know what's happening under the hood and when things aren't named properly. Others have found it more intuitive than the HDP software. Horses for coarses but yes, I think there is a lot of room for improvement.
Don't get your hope high up, I hope this as well but "next week" means maybe next month and "soon" means maybe within half a year in DEQX lingo.
Last edited:
@El Geffe:
Could you please help me understand what you mean by "it is in the pipeline that the software 'might' eventually become offline"?
Thanks!
BTW, the hardware feature-set on this box seems awesome, but the software story seems "bleak" to this point.
(As user-unfriendly as it may be, I wonder if users would have the option to use PC-based software, like Audio Weaver, instead of their Cloud-server)
It means I have discussed this with them. At first, they explained that the processing was done in the cloud because it requires significant computing power. Later, they clarified that the internal processor is actually capable of handling the software, but the cloud setup made development easier and allowed them to roll out small changes instantly. They also mentioned they might look into making it work offline in the future.
I shared that the cloud dependency was my main concern and almost made me pass on this product. I believe I’m not alone in this, and that many others likely share the same concern. So yes, my hopes for an offline version are high up as well.
So, their software may just run in the DEQX itself, without requiring a cloud-server or software running on a local PC.
If so. I presume the user would connect to the DEQX via local-network or USB, and there would be some sort of front-end GUI running on the local PC (maybe just a web browser). Thanks for the clarifications!
OK, based on your reply I'm interpreting "offline" to mean software running on the user's (local) PC, but please correct me if I'm wrong.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2020
- Messages
- 1,308
- Likes
- 1,726
Auralic may be an example of why deqx may not be a great long term solution.
PC base + multichannel dac or minidsp maybe safer bets
PC base + multichannel dac or minidsp maybe safer bets
Yes, but MiniDSP is not really comparable in sound quality so not really an option if it where me. I think your best bet would be a dedicated PC with Acourate or Audiolense and something like an Octoresearch DAC8. I have been thinking along that line as well but decided to go for the convience of having it all in one box that just works so my family is able to use it as well.
Similar threads
