• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!

I've performed some Measurements on SPL Volume2 (Model 2602) volume control

Rja4000

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
2,751
Likes
4,616
Location
Liège, Belgium
Hi

I own a SPL Volume 2 and wanted to check how it measures.
So I tried.

SPL (Sound Performance Lab) is a German company, specialised in Pro audio electronics.

They are not new comers in that market (they say they're in the business for 30 years).
They offer analog preamps, channel strips, control room volume and control switches, headphone amps, and some interesting effects devices.
Personnaly, my first SPL device was the SPL Transient designer 4.
This very special (unique) analog device which, although looking simple, is doing some magic inside, allowing you to modify the transient attack of live instruments.
It can do magic indeed, as an example on drums in live events.


Back to the Volume 2:
One may find doc and manual (including serious Audio Precision measurements) for this device here.

_32A6960_1046.jpg

The volume 2 is a 1/2 rack wide, and some 2U high.
It's also approximatively as deep as wide. Not a small box.

The big volume knob is smooth and pleasant to use.
It's labelled from 0% to 100%.

There is also a Mute button, which lights in RED if active.

The device doesn't look cheap, for sure, and weights some...
List price is below 400€. I bought mine new, for less.


Back panel has XLR connectors only. Target is Pro audio.

_32A6959_966_SN.jpg


Inside the box, everything is proper and neat.

_32A6963_1004.jpg



Measurements
(Measurements all performed with Virtins Multi Instrument 3.8 and RME ADI-2 Pro fs.
RME DAC > Volume2 > RME ADC.)

000280-THD+N_THD+N_-4 50pc.png


Red: SPL Volume 2,
Black: RME ADI-2 Pro fs in loopback (DAC > ADC) for reference.
Volume matched to get same input level on the ADC


At Max level (100%) position, when fed with +15dBu (4.36Vrms), we have a SINAD of 103dB
That's a bit lower than the RME, due to a higher distortion.
We see some H2, H3 and H4. Level is very low though (THD around 106dB below signal level).

Note that SNR (un-weighted), at above 107dB, is indistinguishable from the RME, which is very good.

This is all above the specs, which are
THD & N (@ +15dBu Input Level) ›-100dBu
S/N A-weighted -102dBu


Also note that, even at Max level, there is some attenuation (around -4.3dB).
It never reaches unity gain.
The Volume 2 always provides attenuation.

Looking at the attenuation vs volume setting, we see the following

000318-THD+N_Multiple 50pc.png


X is the volume setting, from 0% to 100%
Y is the ADC input level, where 0dBFS is +19dBu
DAC output level is 4Vrms or +14.3 dBu

Left channel is black, Right channel is red: We see a pretty good channel coherence.
Also, the attenuation is smooth from around 90% to 20%, with 40dB more attenuation at 20%


But such a volume control is rather used at lower volume settings:

Here is a trend of THD+N and THD vs volume setting
000318-THD+N_Multiple_2 50pc.png


X is the ADC input level (ie the level at the output of the Volume 2)
Left channel in Black and Right in Red.

THD (dashed), under a certain level, can't be measured correctly.
THD+N (solid), mainly follows the noise.

Except at the highest level settings, where it shows a bit more distortion, the Volume 2 measures the same than the RME, when we match the levels.

(More to come...)
 
Last edited:
OP
R

Rja4000

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
2,751
Likes
4,616
Location
Liège, Belgium
Here are a few additional plots

Volume @50%
000299-THD+N_Multiple_20191109_1730.png


000309-THD vs Frequency_Multiple_20191109_1822.png

Volume @75%
000311-THD+N_Multiple_20191109_1748.png


000316-THD vs Frequency_Multiple_20191109_1827.png


Notes
With Volume @50%, the SINAD performance is slightly better than the RME with the digital volume control.
With Volume @75%, the RME digital volume control still performs better.
50% is around 28dB attenuation

Distortion vs Frequency plots are at 192kHz.
The noise in high frequencies (>20kHz) impacts the figure

DAC output range +19dBu

I was expecting all distortion plots to merge at some point.
I don't understand why their "noise-limited" level is different.
I'll double check.

(More to come...)
 
Last edited:
OP
R

Rja4000

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
2,751
Likes
4,616
Location
Liège, Belgium
Update:
SMPTE IMD is measured against the 7kHz tone level, which is 12dB lower.
That's why we see this noise level shift up.
That's also why nobody shows THD @1kHz and IMD on the same graph.
Maybe I should lower its level by 12dB, to make it comparable.
For CCIF IMD, where both signals are at same level, I don't know why the noise level is lower.
Still investigating...
 
Last edited:
OP
R

Rja4000

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
2,751
Likes
4,616
Location
Liège, Belgium
Plots
Red: SPL Volume 2

Black: RME ADI-2 Pro fs, with level set for similar ADC level

THD + SINAD @50%
000299-THD+N_THD+N_0_50pc.png


IMD SMPTE (60Hz +7kHz 4:1) @50%
000300-IMD SMPTE_IMD SMPTE_0_50pc.png


IMD CCIF (19kHz+20kHz) @50%
000301-IMD CCIF_IMD CCIF_0_50pc.png


Harmonic distortion levels @ Max volume
Volume2 @Max HD.png


Frequency response (48kHz bandwidth)
(Note the vertical scale: 1 division = 0.1dB - Black is RME in loopback)
Volume2_FFR.png


Crosstalk @1Khz @50%
(Tone generator was in 16bits. My mistake.)
Crosstalk.png


Multi tone 1 channel + Crosstalk
Red plot indicates crosstalk. It raises with frequency.
3rd Octave.png
 
Last edited:
OP
R

Rja4000

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
2,751
Likes
4,616
Location
Liège, Belgium
About the difference in noise-limited level in above combined IMD an THD trends:
View attachment 38322

THD level is measured relative to 1kHz tone level
IMD SMPTE is to be measured against the level of the 7kHz tone, which is 12dB below 60Hz tone
IMD CCIF is defined as measured relative to the sum of the two tones, which are same level.

So we should see indeed, when there is just noise to measure, CCIF 6dB lower than THD, and SMPTE 12dB higher than THD.
That's 18dB difference between CCIF and SMPTE IMD levels, and that's about what we see on the plots.
But THD looks higher (4-5dB higher) than what this theory suggests.

Am I right?
If anyone has an idea why we see that...
 
Last edited:
OP
R

Rja4000

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
2,751
Likes
4,616
Location
Liège, Belgium
Also, I noted that, in the plots showing distortion vs frequency, the levels of H2 and H3 should be higher.
THD is versus signal level, while H2 and H3 are versus 0dBFS.
I'll correct that later on.
 

Harry

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2019
Messages
9
Likes
1
Thanks for the detailed and helpful research.
So is it OK to understand that DAC + good Preamp connected to Poweramp is better than DAC directly connected to power amp?
 

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,294
Likes
9,851
Location
NYC
Looks to me as if the actual potentiometer is a standard dual-gang unit meaning that the balanced in/outs are passed through it as single-ended unbalanced signals. Can you confirm this?
 
OP
R

Rja4000

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
2,751
Likes
4,616
Location
Liège, Belgium
Thanks for the detailed and helpful research.
So is it OK to understand that DAC + good Preamp connected to Poweramp is better than DAC directly connected to power amp?
A good-measuring analog volume like this one is equal or slightly better at low volume than one of the best DACs.
"Better" is a fuzzy word. The difference is very small, if any.
I guess a device like the Benchmark LA-4 may show a bigger gap (but, given the cost, ...)
The main drawback is channel imbalance at very low level (Which remains very limited here).
 
Last edited:
OP
R

Rja4000

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 31, 2019
Messages
2,751
Likes
4,616
Location
Liège, Belgium
Looks to me as if the actual potentiometer is a standard dual-gang unit meaning that the balanced in/outs are passed through it as single-ended unbalanced signals. Can you confirm this?
I think is not balanced indeed. But I'm not an electronic expert.
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,690
Likes
37,412
Looks to me as if the actual potentiometer is a standard dual-gang unit meaning that the balanced in/outs are passed through it as single-ended unbalanced signals. Can you confirm this?
I didn't puzzle thru the pictures of the board. If the pots are varying resistance between the plus and minus side of the balanced signal that would still work and stay balanced. You'd need a pair of resistors and the pot between them.

Since it apparently is an active buffer it is also possible the pot is simply varying gain of the buffer op amp and doesn't have signal passing thru it at all. The specs say the input is into an instrumentation differential amplifier.
 

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,294
Likes
9,851
Location
NYC
I didn't puzzle thru the pictures of the board. If the pots are varying resistance between the plus and minus side of the balanced signal that would still work and stay balanced. You'd need a pair of resistors and the pot between them.

Since it apparently is an active buffer it is also possible the pot is simply varying gain of the buffer op amp and doesn't have signal passing thru it at all. The specs say the input is into an instrumentation differential amplifier.
Understood and that is why I was hoping that someone knew more. I have another similar device (Coleman SR5.1, Mk.II) in which the balanced/buffering inputs and outputs are passed through a single-ended pot.
 

MC_RME

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
May 15, 2019
Messages
871
Likes
3,607
> Frequency response (48kHz bandwidth)
> (Note the vertical scale: 1 division = 0.1dB - Black is RME in loopback)

Looks aweful ;)

Why didn't you do this at 384 kHz sample rate? Fully linear then...

BTW, I assume you use the mono trick at the input to get 3 dB more SNR? Are you aware you can do the same at the output? You can use a simple split cable, two XLR female to one XLR male. Let the generator send out the same signal on both channels. Internal resistors in the ADI cause an unchanged output level and THD, but 2.5 dB less noise. I use that quite often.
 

restorer-john

Grand Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
12,670
Likes
38,764
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
Kal's block diagram and a few photos of the PCB suggest it's likely differential input into a TL07x, a mute switch, the pot, a buffer and a balanced driver per channel.

inside spl2.jpg



open2.jpg



From the manual: "The Volume 2‘s design is based on active switching to avoid nonlinear frequency response introduced by impedance changes with passive designs when changing levels."

Why they say "switching", is anyone's guess.

"High end volume potentiometer and illuminated mute switch from ALPS; the potentiometer controls signals directly (without VCA or DAC circuitry)"
 

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,294
Likes
9,851
Location
NYC
I used to have a volume 8 in my active system some 8 or 9 years ago, but I was not very happy with the channel matching I measured at the time:
Yuck.
 
Top Bottom