miniDSP Flex

[Keened]

Thx Michael ... I didn't realize the SHD doesn't have a DAC, should have seen the specs more closely.

Just the Studio doesn't, and it does have a DAC of some kind (since it has a Headphone out) but it's not the star of the show and it doesn't have multi-channel output. SHD has a DAC that hopefully the Flex matches.

 

[Ataraxia]

Thx Michael ... I didn't realize the SHD doesn't have a DAC, should have seen the specs more closely.

The SHD has a DAC, the SHD Studio does not have a DAC.

 

[envydd]

The SHD has a DAC, the SHD Studio does not have a DAC.

Got it. Thanks. Flex it is.

 

[Ataraxia]

Got it. Thanks. Flex it is.

Flex will probably be my choice too.

 

[Dj7675]

Only a few AVR's from Arcam, Focal and Bryston so far I think.

And StormAudio

 

[RosalieTheDog]

It seems like it is still available for $200 -> https://www.paradigm.com/en/wireless/pw-link.

Another data point on the digital Flex pricing, the OpenDRC-DI which is all digital, has no screen, no ADC and two channels of output is $325. Actually makes me think the all digital version might be in the $400-$450 range but we will see. Really stinks that they do not have replacement for the nanoDIGI which was 8 channels and only $170!

Michael

I can't seem to find it in Europe. Some Martin Logan Unison for €500 only.

 

[Worth Davis]

Tempting, I have an SHD but currently fiddling with an akm4499 dac and Audiolense vs only shd/Dirac. TRS conversion cables is a little annoying. Volumio is trash imo anyways good riddance.

 

[poxymoron]

I can't believe the Studio is that much these days, I got mine for under $800 just over a year ago. The Studio does run Dirac at 96 kHz while the Flex runs Dirac at 48 kHz. I don't mind this (and actually prefer it is I know the FIR taps will go farther) but some people get bothered by that stuff.

Agree that I really do not see a reason to get the Studio these days. Full blown SHD still has some advantages if you want / need all the I/O flexibility but the Studio is in no mans land in terms of features / price.

Michael

So should one expect the SHD Studio to perform better, objectively at least, running Dirac at 96KHz than the Flex running it at 48KHz? The differences probably not being audible?

 

[phoenixdogfan]

So should one expect the SHD Studio to perform better, objectively at least, running Dirac at 96KHz than the Flex running it at 48KHz? The differences probably not being audible?

I don't see that that would be audible. To me the Flex looks like a sweet spot product. If I wasn't already using Dirac on the PC with software based multichannel crossovers together with an Octo DAC 8 Pro, I would definitely consider it.

 

[mdsimon2]

So should one expect the SHD Studio to perform better, objectively at least, running Dirac at 96KHz than the Flex running it at 48KHz? The differences probably not being audible?

Define better? There advantages and disadvantages to each sample rate.

48 kHz will use FIR taps much more efficiently which is especially important at low frequencies. As Dirac is somewhat of a black box unsure of how much processing power actually comes in to play but theoretically it will allow you to do more. Frequency response will not extend past 24 kHz but for humans that should not be an issue.

96 kHz will have much less warping at high frequencies than 48 kHz when implementing IIR filters. I really don't think this is an issue but it will cause slightly different response from the analog ideal. Frequency response can extend up to 48 kHz but I really do not think this is an advantage.

IMO with limited DSP resources give me 48 kHz any day. Flex is also more versatile in that can it can do Dirac or user defined FIR filters where the Studio is Dirac only.

For reference on the high frequency warping, see below for plots of the same PEQ (f = 15800 Hz, Q = 10, gain = 6) for 48 kHz and 96 kHz, each compared to the analog ideal. You can see that the response narrows at 48 kHz while at 96 kHz the response is much closer to the analog ideal.

48 kHz

96 kHz

Michael

 

[poxymoron]

I don't see that that would be audible. To me the Flex looks like a sweet spot product. If I wasn't already using Dirac on the PC with software based multichannel crossovers together with an Octo DAC 8 Pro, I would definitely consider it.

thanks for the reply

 

[poxymoron]

Define better? There advantages and disadvantages to each sample rate.

48 kHz will use FIR taps much more efficiently which is especially important at low frequencies. As Dirac is somewhat of a black box unsure of how much processing power actually comes in to play but theoretically it will allow you to do more. Frequency response will not extend past 24 kHz but for humans that should not be an issue.

96 kHz will have much less warping at high frequencies than 48 kHz when implementing IIR filters. I really don't think this is an issue but it will cause slightly different response from the analog ideal. Frequency response can extend up to 48 kHz but I really do not think this is an advantage.

IMO with limited DSP resources give me 48 kHz any day. Flex is also more versatile in that can it can do Dirac or user defined FIR filters where the Studio is Dirac only.

For reference on the high frequency warping, see below for plots of the same PEQ (f = 15800 Hz, Q = 10, gain = 6) for 48 kHz and 96 kHz, each compared to the analog ideal. You can see that the response narrows at 48 kHz while at 96 kHz the response is much closer to the analog ideal.

48 kHz
View attachment 176967


96 kHz
View attachment 176966
Michael

a not inconsiderable reply, many thanks for taking the time. food for thought....

 

[TreveK]

Hello all. I currently use the basic minidsp 2x4 for bass management and EQ using one of the plugins (the name of which currently escapes me). To begin with, I would probably buy the Flex without Dirac. Do you expect that I would be able to run my current 2x4 plugin and import the settings onto the Flex?

 

[FrantzM]

Hello all. I currently use the basic minidsp 2x4 for bass management and EQ using one of the plugins (the name of which currently escapes me). To begin with, I would probably buy the Flex without Dirac. Do you expect that I would be able to run my current 2x4 plugin and import the settings onto the Flex?

No. Settings do not travel very well though the miniDSP products.. They may not even work with miniDSP 2x4 HD

 

[deafenears]

IIRC, the PEQ plugin differs between the 2x4 and 2x4HD. The Flex is said to use the same plugin as the 2x4HD though - I don't yet have a Flex to confirm but do plan on getting the Digital version (I've had the 2x4HD).

 

[antcollinet]

Does anyone know: Can the flex provide the digital version of an analogue input signal back to a pc via USB (Ie act as an adc)?

Thanks.

 

[mdsimon2]

In my experience any miniDSP with bi-directional USB audio can route any input to a computer via USB, imagine the Flex is the same.

Michael

 

[TreveK]

No. Settings do not travel very well though the miniDSP products.. They may not even work with miniDSP 2x4 HD

Thanks for the reply. I am using this plugin with my 2x4. I see from the description that it is not compatible with the 2X4HD. Which plugin is likely to give me similar functionality with the Flex (crossover and EQ settings)? Thanks again!

 

[antcollinet]

In my experience any miniDSP with bi-directional USB audio can route any input to a computer via USB, imagine the Flex is the same.

Michael

Cool!

Thanks.

 

[TreveK]

Thanks for the reply. I am using this plugin with my 2x4. I see from the description that it is not compatible with the 2X4HD. Which plugin is likely to give me similar functionality with the Flex (crossover and EQ settings)? Thanks again!

Answering my own question, this plugin seems to offer similar functionality with the 2X4HD. Perhaps the same will work with the Flex?