DSPeaker Anti-Mode 2.0 Dual Core Room EQ Review

[anibal66]

Thanks for the review! It adds to the results of an unflattering "test bench" post in DIY-audio forum, which was also negative regarding the full digital path.

The Antimode still seems the simplest solution for those that have little time and knowledge, and not into computer audio, like myself.

I bought the DSPeaker in order to tame a difficult room. Work is still ongoing, with limited success, so I will probably post a S.O.S in this forum, when I find the time

In the meantime, my main grudge is that the 2.0 has only one spdif input, and I have not yet found any test of spdif switches that give me enough trust to use them.

 

[Willem]

I have an AM 8033 to equalize my sub and I have been very pleased. I did consider the AM 2.0 but was a bit skeptical. I heard too many disappointing stories and connectivity was not great either. In the end I went for the combination of my existing AM 8033 for the sub and manual REW correction for the main speakers with an ADI-2. I may add a minidsp ddr22 for Dirac.

 

[Willem]

Of course this test makes me curious how my old Antimode 8033 measures and also the very new all singing and dancing X4 model.

 

[tw99]

Posting this in case it's interesting to other owners.

I needed to re-run the calibration on my room today, so I downloaded the before/after values from the unit, and plotted them. This is just using the standard correction algorithm which seems to cut off at 270hz. It successfully flattens the large peaks, and also adds some overall boost to the corrected region, to create more of an overall "slope downwards to the right" graph, although the upper frequencies aren't shown.

So it looks like my room could actually be corrected manually with just a couple of parametric EQs for those bass peaks, and an overall boost to the lower frequencies (or slope off to the higher frequencies). I think this could be done using an RME ADI2 DAC, except I need an analogue input, so would need the Pro version...at which price a MiniDSP SHD is an alternative.

 

[RonAudio]

It seems that this topic attracks disappointed DSpeaker users.

The reviewer said:
As is, I can't recommend the DSPeaker Anti-Mode 2.0 on the basis of its basic performance.

Well it's basis performance is to get rid of the room modes. Test this!

The input level can be choosen, either 3.9 or 7.9 Vrms. So, if you use 4.0 while the input is set on 3.9 there is distortion.
I suggest to read the manual before measuring.

@tw99:
You should understand that the graphs are relative values to 0 dB as highest value.
It means that the blue graph is almost simular to the red one (shape and volume). In the region below 100 Hz the correction is made.

Your remark "be corrected manually with just a couple of parametric EQs for those bass peaks," shows you have no knowledge of filters and their effects. DSpeaker does automaticly and as you can see (and hopefully hear) the result is good!

Ron

 

[tw99]

@RonAudio I think I have an adequate understanding of filters thanks, and I posted the graph as an illustration of what the device does in addition to the (compromised) DAC function. If you bothered to read my earlier replies you'll see that I'm subjectively happy with the performance I'm getting from it.

Given the sub par nature of the DAC, I'm just musing on alternative options for the future.

 

[MattHooper]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the DSPeaker Anti-Mode 2.0 Dual Core Room Equalizer. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $1,200. This review is only focused on electronic performance of the device. If I have time, I may test its correction ability later.

There is not a whole lot to look at as far as the design of the Anti-Mode:

View attachment 80202

The display is quite tiny but usable if you sit close to it. The back panel shows the good connectivity:

View attachment 80203

For this testing, I focused on both analog XLR input and Toslink S/PDIF digital input. There are some lofty statements the company makes about the performance of this unit:

View attachment 80204

Well, I qualify as most demanding audiophile so let's see how the Anti-Mode performs with basic tests.

DSP Audio Measurements
I started my testing by feeding the unit via its XLR input. To my surprise, it complained about 4 volts input causing clipping. That is the nominal level from any desktop DAC so it should have handled it. Anyway, I dialed that down a bit and the warning went away, giving me this outcome:

View attachment 80205

As you see, the output level is even lower than input. That is not a huge deal but the problem is the high distortion and noise which combine to give us a poor SINAD of just 83 dB. We are missing CD/streaming 16 bit content's noise floor of 96 dB by a good mile. There is really no excuse for any digital audio product to degrade performance this much.

Hoping this was an ADC problem and not DAC (the input has to be digitized to perform signal processing), I fed the Anti-Mode via its Toslink input:

View attachment 80207

We still have a pile of noise and distortion so the DAC is subpar for sure.

View attachment 80206

At this point there was no reason to keep going so I stopped.

Conclusions
I have been waiting to test a device from DSPeaker for some 10 years since I saw one functioning at an audio show. I had come close a few times but never succeeded in getting my hands on one. Sadly, the long wait was not worth it. The non-DSP performance of the Anti-Mode 2.0 is unacceptable and anything but "highest performance" as claimed by the company. The company needs to go back and refresh the basics of this device.

Fortunately there is a digital output and assuming the resampling is clean, maybe there is a good use scenario for that.

As is, I can't recommend the DSPeaker Anti-Mode 2.0 on the basis of its basic performance.

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Well, while I did not get to throw a party while my wife was out last night, the panthers did! They trashed the whole house with food scraps everywhere and scratch marks all over the floor. Need to get a professional crew here to clean or hide what they can before my wife comes back. Please donate what you can quickly before I get in trouble using : https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

Amirm,

I have a DSPeaker Anti-Mode 2.0 that I bought a few years ago and was finally going to try it out on a subwoofer. This review is disappointing but I'm wondering if it really has any consequences for how I intend to use the Anti-Mode.

I wanted to add the subwoofer to my 2 channel system, but in this way: I want to run my main speakers full range and simply add the subwoofer. (I would have to place the sub behind my listening sofa). I want to use the Anti-Mode ONLY with the subwoofer frequencies. So I have a pre-amp with two main outputs, both active. I run the usual main outputs to my stereo amps. I run the other output to the Anti-Mode and send that signal to my powered JL Audio subwoofer. I would use a low crossover point (e.g. 50Hz or below) and have the Anti-Mode do it's thing just with the subwoofer signal to get the best blend it can manage.

If the antimode is only processing the analog signal to subwoofer frequences, can I presume that it's unlikely I'd hear any sound quality issues arising from the poor performance you measured? I presume that any distortion or inadequacy would mostly be audible in the higher frequency spectrum?

Thanks.

 

[tw99]

It'll certainly be fine for that application. In fact I'd suggest that you also try running your 2.1 system through it to get the most benefit. Despite the unimpressive test results, it can give very good subjective results.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

If the antimode is only processing the analog signal to subwoofer frequences, can I presume that it's unlikely I'd hear any sound quality issues arising from the poor performance you measured?

I used a Dual-Core this way for a long time and use an X-4 that way, now.

 

[Willem]

I am very happy with my Antimode 8033 for subwoofer equalization. I would not have bought a Dual Core for that, but if you have it, you might as well use it. And of course, I am curious what Kal thinks about his X4.

 

[MattHooper]

Thanks for the replies. I'll probably try it out this weekend. I also have a JL Audio CR-1 analog crossover that I bought quite a while back and it's supposed to be excellent at dialing in subwoofers.

However my priorities and plans changed since I bought a bunch of subwoofer stuff. Too much hassle and aesthetic compromises. I'm trying one Hail Mary of sticking a sub behind my sofa and if the Anti-mode can't get it to work, then I'll sell the whole lot. I'm not exactly starving for low bass
and my experience recently of putting spring footers under my speakers actually gave me a lot of what I was looking for in adding a sub (tighter bass, clearer sound top to bottom, better soundstaging, etc).

 

[Sonny1]

Wow! I dodged the bullet on another one! Was seriously close to buying one of these for bass management. Going the Minidsp route instead. Thanks Amirm!

 

[Ron Texas]

Yuck! Thank you @amirm for another great set of measurements.

 

[MattHooper]

I used a Dual-Core this way for a long time and use an X-4 that way, now.

I am very happy with my Antimode 8033 for subwoofer equalization. I would not have bought a Dual Core for that, but if you have it, you might as well use it. And of course, I am curious what Kal thinks about his X4.

Question:

For using the Anti-Mode on the subwoofer only:

I was in touch with the DSPeaker guys asking about this implementation. My JL sub has a crossover control (and level, phase controls). I had presumed if I'm sending the signal to the sub via the Anti-Mode, that I'd use the Anti-Mode to set the low-pass crossover frequency to the sub.
But they suggested if my sub has a crossover control, to use the sub. "Easiest."

So they suggest I have the sub crossover dialed all the way up for calibration by the Anti-Mode, once calibration is done, dial the crossover via the sub to where I want. So I guess dialing it in by ear.

How were you guys doing the crossover - using the Anti-mode or your subwoofer crossover?

Thanks.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I am very happy with my Antimode 8033 for subwoofer equalization. I would not have bought a Dual Core for that, but if you have it, you might as well use it. And of course, I am curious what Kal thinks about his X4.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/music-round-97-hegel-c53-dspeaker-anti-mode-x4-page-2
I am now using it in the 4 sub mode (with only 3 subs) which has been updated since the time of my review.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

How were you guys doing the crossover - using the Anti-mode or your subwoofer crossover?

Neither. I have the crossover at max for all the subs and the X-4, too, is set at 200Hz (max if I recall correctly). I use the crossover my my Audyssey-equiped prepro.

 

[Tenor]

Did this unit you reviewed have the latest 2019 patch installed, which includes spdif input enhancements?

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Did this unit you reviewed have the latest 2019 patch installed, which includes spdif input enhancements?

Yes but I don't use the S/PDIF input.

 

[Dathzo]

Good day all,

Has anybody tested the X4 correction vs. Dirac Live? I have compared the antimode 2.0 vs. Dirac Live and enjoyed more the latter, but I read that the X4 is way superior than it’s little brother 2.0.
ím debating between a miniDSP SHD (Dirac) and Dspeaker X4. Maybe @Kal Rubinson has a perspective there?

thank you.-

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I use the X4 only for multiple subs.