Is the AudioVero / ABACUS AcourateCleaner some kinda snake oil doohicky or what is it?

[Recluse-Animator]

https://www.audiovero.de/en/acouratecleaner.php

AcourateClean Line Driver features:

• more relaxed listening and improved spaciousness with music playback by computer
• directly applicable with AudioVero software AcourateConvolver, AcourateNAS
• decodes MS signal to standard stereo
• also serves as a common precision line driver with 1:1 gain
• perfectly adapts to properties of connected cables and following devices
• compact size
• included power supply
• maximum voltage level 28Vp-p
• gold-plated RCA connectors
• high-quality anodized aluminum housing

Background:

Based on received soundwaves the ears and the brain localize the sound source. The localization is achieved with an amazing performance by analyzing the interaural level and time differences.
But the localization efficiency may get distorted by signal components that do not fit to the original music content or even alter the content. Possible reasons are jitter (adding frequency modulation to the original signal), non-linearities of the DAC channels or other channel differences. Thus the brain is stressed by the distortions and it is less capable to receive the details and subtleties of the music.
The undesired effect may be compared e.g. with viewing a 3D movie without the usual 3D glasses.

The AcourateClean solution:

The signal dependent jitter (but e.g. also the nonlinearities of the DA converters) causes different signal distortions in the left and right stereo signal. With AcourateClean the signal data stream now is encoded into a mid-side representation just before signal transfer and DA conversion. Right after the conversion the signal is decoded back to the left-right channels. Thus the undesired signal components are evenly shared by both channels. The left/right distortions are now correlated. The listener receives a more pleasant, more relaxing and less stressing result. Thus the brain has more free capacity to detect subtle details in the music. The listening is more enjoyable.

Encoding:

The AcourateClean idea is based on a corresponding encoding and decoding. But here the encoding takes place in the digital domain. The latest versions of the programs AcourateConvolver and AcourateNAS allow to select the encoding function. Just in the fina step before dithering the left-right signal is encoded into mid-side representation. AcourateConvolver furthermore applies the pairwise encodiing for all channels of a multiway or multichannel system.
Of course there are more possibilities given:

• professional soundcards allow an MS encoding also directly, e.g. Totalmix with RME soundcards
• use of plugins in combinaton with media player software. For Foobar e.g. the plugin foo_dsp_midside is applicable. Another solution ist the VST plugin Voxengo MSED

Decoding:

After encoding, data transfer and DA conversion the analog MS signal has to be decoded in analog domain, preferably right behind the DAC. This is now the task of AcourateCleaner, which has been developed in cooperation between ABACUS and AudioVero. The AcourateCleaner serves two functions, it is a decoder and a line driver. The high precision decoding function can be switched on by the Clean! switch, it is indicated by a corresponding LED. In off position the hardware is usable as a 1:1 precision line driver for a standard stereo signal.

 

[tonycollinet]

Yes - it is snake oil.

No way to remove disortion once it is there, it is not possible to tell what is distortion and what is music.

 

[Rednaxela]

Well that’s what the decoding is for!

But only when the Clean! function is engaged. Otherwise it’s just a 1:1 precision line driver.

 

[Somafunk]

Is the AudioVero / ABACUS AcourateCleaner some kinda snake oil doohicky or what is it?​

Its precisely the correct size and weight to beat the shite out of any reviewer who dares to utter the phrases : inky blackness, open wide soundstage, etc…..etc

 

[Rednaxela]

Air around the instruments!

 

[tonycollinet]

Well that’s what the decoding is for!

But only when the Clean! function is engaged. Otherwise it’s just a 1:1 precision line driver.

Without a smiley - poes law applies!

Air around the instruments!

Same

 

[maverickronin]

This would seem to actually do do something the the signal, so I wouldn't really call it snake oil.

Is anyone in audio production familiar with mid-side encoding and why one would wand to "decode" it?

I think this product is more poorly explained than anything else/

 

[tonycollinet]

Of course it is badly explained - because if they explained it properly it would be obvious that mid-side encoding/decoding cant to what they claim it is doing. They do what all purveyors of snake oil do - throw in some words of reals stuff that exists to claim that real stuff does something it can't. In other words - bamboozle the customer.

 

[Rednaxela]

What is it about Clean! that you guys do not get?

(Smiley for Tony)

 

[maverickronin]

Of course it is badly explained - because if they explained it properly it would be obvious that mid-side encoding/decoding cant to what they claim it is doing. They do what all purveyors of snake oil do - throw in some words of reals stuff that exists to claim that real stuff does something it can't. In other words - bamboozle the customer.

That's not really a good definition for snake oil - at least in audio, as opposed to say, medicine. Snake oil in audio something that does nothing at all, like magic quantum rocks, or is measurably identical over the relevant frequency range like overpriced cables.

I think this is probably actually doing something to the signal, which would make it an effects box. If it turns out to be just a 1:1 line driver with those claims then I'd call snake oil.

Maybe that's just a difference of opinion in definitions. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The fact that this is the same company which also makes well regarded room correction software incline me to believe it probably does something.

 

[KSTR]

As now is usual on this site, the nay-sayers have absolutely no clue.
The device does what it does and does it effectively so: LR-->MS encoding (and vice versa).
Also, the idea has been put forth by one of the most serious and down-to-earth engineers around (he's an ASR member as well).
So completely unsubtantiated dissing, actually the effect is easily measured (say, for a DAC that is fed MS-encoded data).

The simplest way to describe how it does reduce percieved distortion/error is when it is applied around a volume pot with bad channel tracking. The usual quite significant and annoying center image shift at low settings is converted into a small stereo width modulation which is unnoticable, typically.

 

[tonycollinet]

That's not really a good definition for snake oil - at least in audio, as opposed to say, medicine. Snake oil in audio something that does nothing at all, like magic quantum rocks, or is measurably identical over the relevant frequency range like overpriced cables.

I think this is probably actually doing something to the signal, which would make it an effects box. If it turns out to be just a 1:1 line driver with those claims then I'd call snake oil.

Maybe that's just a difference of opinion in definitions. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The fact that this is the same company which also makes well regarded room correction software incline me to believe it probably does something.

What makes you think it is doing something?

If you just encode, then decode (which seems to be what they say they are doing), then the decoded signal is the same as before encoding.

Further snake oil is generally a product that does not do what is claimed - often in ways where it never could - where the claims are ludicrous. Not necessarily something that does nothing.

 

[tonycollinet]

As now is usual on this site, the nay-sayers have absolutely no clue.
The device does what it does and does it effectively so: LR-->MS encoding (and vice versa).
Also, the idea has been put forth by one of the most serious and down-to-earth engineers around (he's an ASR member as well).
So completely unsubtantiated dissing, actually the effect is easily measured (say, for a DAC that is fed MS-encoded data).

The simplest way to describe how it does reduce percieved distortion/error is when it is applied around a volume pot with bad channel tracking. The usual quite significant and annoying center image shift at low settings is converted into a small stereo width modulation which is unnoticable, typically.

Since distortion (of the kind caused by jitter, or amp non-linearity) once put into a signal, is not possible to differentiate from the actual signal. How does this device only apply the change to the distortion, and not to the signal?

Further - if straight encoding/decoing is done the resulting L/R signal will be unchanged from the input. So if processing is done in the MS domain how is it able to impact only distortion (able to shift only distortion into the mid)? And not degrade the imaging of the actual music? I also remain unconvinced that non linear distortion shifted to the mid is going to be any less objectionable.

(I am willing to learn here, and if someone can show how I've got it wrong, I'll apologise)

 

[UliBru]

Sometimes even "opened" secrets are still secrets
Ok, you want some more explanations:

1. Let's start with all the bad, good and very good DACs discussed so much at this forum. Now take any digital signal of your choice and create an inverted signal.
It should be very clear that the digital sum of both signals is zero.
Now feed your DAC with positive and inverted signal as stereo signal and add the results of the DAC outputs by any analog circuit of your choice.
Feed the sum result to an amplifier and listen to it.
I would be curious if there is someone who gets a zero result (btw. I have never come across a zero sum but you guys may have much better equipment).

If the result is not zero then please start to think about. It simply means that the result is a residue of one or the other or of both DA conversion results.
Usually we listen to stereo. Both channels correlate but of course there are differences as we do not listen to stereo mono.
So each analog channel will have its own deviations from the correct digital input signal. These deviations will be played by the corresponding speakers together with the nominal signal. We may claim a thesis: the brain has to detect the proper signal content despite of the deviations.

2. Now you can do a next test: encode a LR stereo signal into a MS signal at the digital side and play it again by the same DAC. OF COURSE the DAC will again create its own deviations from the nominal MS channels. As we do not enthusiastically listen to MS now convert the DAC output back to LR. It should be clear that an analog decoding circuit is the proper choice. And of course you should use a good design and good analog parts.
Now listen again to the result. If properly done it should sound cleaner. That's it.
And think about by yourself what happens to the DA conversion deviations by the MS decoding and how they are now shared between the LR channels. A possible thesis: the brain is more relieved.

Beside a MS decoder based on operational amplifiers there are two further possibilities:
a. you can use a passive layout with properly connected audio transformers
b. audiophiles with bridge type amplifiers can achieve the decoding by connecting the speakers to the output post in a different way: +banana of left speaker to -output of right channel, +banana of right speaker to +output of right channel, both -bananas of both speakers to +output of left channel. Caution: this is only possible if the -outputs of the amp are not connected and not grounded.

So you can simply try and decide by your own ears.

PS:
The AcourateCleaner produced by Abacus is just a ready-to-go solution and IMO the opposite of over-priced. But you can follow the recipe above with your own solution.

 

[tonycollinet]

OK - here comes my apology (but not without reservations). I've had to spend some time reading your site together with your post above - and found I've been misunderstanding the purpose of the device specifically linked above.

I'd understood it to be an analogue in/analogue out device that was intended to do the balancing of distortion fully internally by LR to MS to LR within the one box.

Whereas if I understand correctly it works in cooperation with your software which converts the LR Music internal to the source (presumably a PC) before the DAC process, then this box simpy does the MS to LR conversion in analogue domain.

So fair enough - that will take any distortion from the DAC, and balance it between left right speakers, and my reasoning for describing it as snake oil was faulty.

For that I apologise.


But the reservation to that apology:

Lets recognise that for any modern halfway decent DAC, the distortion and noise on the analogue output are below level of audibility. And for the vast majority of people that is the case even at the poorer end of the SINAD chart here at ASR - especially once played through real world speakers in real world rooms. Certainly all the DACS at the top half of the chart are audibly transparent with inaudible noise & distortion.

So you are offering a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. And even if someone is using a DAC that is so bad, that your device might make an audible improvement - it would still be cheaper to solve that by buying a new high SINAD DAC which eliminates audible distortion completely rather than moving existing distortion about in the stereo soundstage.

 

[UliBru]

OK - here comes my apology (but not without reservations). I've had to spend some time reading your site together with your post above - and found I've been misunderstanding the purpose of the device specifically linked above.

I'd understood it to be an analogue in/analogue out device that was intended to do the balancing of distortion fully internally by LR to MS to LR within the one box.

Whereas if I understand correctly it works in cooperation with your software which converts the LR Music internal to the source (presumably a PC) before the DAC process, then this box simpy does the MS to LR conversion in analogue domain.

So fair enough - that will take any distortion from the DAC, and balance it between left right speakers, and my reasoning for describing it as snake oil was faulty.

For that I apologise.


But the reservation to that apology:

Lets recognise that for any modern halfway decent DAC, the distortion and noise on the analogue output are below level of audibility. And for the vast majority of people that is the case even at the poorer end of the SINAD chart here at ASR - especially once played through real world speakers in real world rooms. Certainly all the DACS at the top half of the chart are audibly transparent with inaudible noise & distortion.

So you are offering a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. And even if someone is using a DAC that is so bad, that your device might make an audible improvement - it would still be cheaper to solve that by buying a new high SINAD DAC which eliminates audible distortion completely rather than moving existing distortion about in the stereo soundstage.

You are invited to check by yourself if there is a problem or not. I have described two of them.
Just exchanging opinions does not help in this case (and many others).

 

[tonycollinet]

You are invited to check by yourself if there is a problem or not.

No need - but thanks.

Just exchanging opinions does not help in this case (and many others).

Clearly.

 

[kemmler3D]

Here's my understanding of what this is and why you would want to use it:

-First you use a DSP to encode your audio to Mid-Side.
-You feed it through the rest of your signal chain.
-This box decodes the Mid-side signal back to stereo.

So it's a M/S decoder, nothing really exotic or snake-oil about that. It's been a common technology since stereo LPs were invented.

The point of this as I understand it is to minimize any L/R difference in distortion accumulated in your signal chain. Whatever happens to one channel will happen to both. The theory is that this will improve stereo imaging.

It actually kinda makes sense, at least to the extent that channel matching is key for stereo image.

I guess it could help if you have audible disparities in distortion between L/R in your system, before the amp.

However IMO if you have $250 to spend on this, hopefully your other gear is already performing better than that. In other words the use case for this is you have an audible channel mismatch that can't be fixed with DSP and would cost more than $250 to fix via upgrades or otherwise.

I don't think this is an impossible scenario, (maybe someone with a funky tube pre could use this?) but I don't think I need it myself.

 

[Rednaxela]

As now is usual on this site, the nay-sayers have absolutely no clue.

Guilty as charged. I have absolutely no clue. Still struggling a bit to be honest.

Apart from me being clueless, I have to say the product doesn’t explain itself very well to the uninitiated, and together with its marketing copy the package rather closely resembles any other audio device that has to be heard to be believed. Something we don’t tend to embrace here.

A diagram or two and maybe a link to some DBT results might have helped. Just thinking out loud.

 

[voodooless]

So completely unsubtantiated dissing, actually the effect is easily measured (say, for a DAC that is fed MS-encoded data).

So let me try a somewhat more substantiated diss

Yes it’s measurable. So bring it! Where are the measurements @UliBru?

The simplest way to describe how it does reduce percieved distortion/error is when it is applied around a volume pot with bad channel tracking. The usual quite significant and annoying center image shift at low settings is converted into a small stereo width modulation which is unnoticable, typically.

By that logic this device should be behind the pre-amp, not just the DAC.

Sure it may reduce channel imbalance a little, but it’s also known that we cannot hear such small deviation to begin with. Your amplifier has imbalance, and much worse, your transducers have it as well. Move your head a few cm and you have a larger difference. Not to mention the effect of the room.

So you can simply try and decide by your own ears.

No, just show us some measurements that show the claims are true.

Show us how it reduces jitter? Show us it lower distortion, show us it lowers channel imbalance? Why not use something like the € 150 Topping E30II, which has poor jitter performance on toslink.

The AcourateCleaner produced by Abacus is just a ready-to-go solution and IMO the opposite of over-priced.

As far as a box of electronics goes and a software license, it’s probably halfway fine. Not too much to complain about. The real question is if it actually does something to objectively make a DAC have a better output.