Minidsp SHD Review Updated (DSP, DAC & Streamer)

[RichB]

That's an interesting tool that I'll have to check out. It looks like it takes a very similar approach as to I how I integrate my own system, but does so in a guided fashion which can be useful for people dipping their toes into this stuff. I'll see how its results stack up to my own.

15 Steps is pretty daunting for the first run. I may try it sometime when I am less busy.

- Rich

 

[nothingman]

Don’t let me pull this off-topic, but: @Sonnie My hat is off to you, sir. Good grief. Four SB16 Ultras for music, PLUS two PB16 Ultras for movies? I’m surprised you‘re not setting off local seismic meters. Must be so much fun.

 

[Sonnie]

Don’t let me pull this off-topic, but: @Sonnie My hat is off to you, sir. Good grief. Four SB16 Ultras for music, PLUS two PB16 Ultras for movies? I’m surprised you‘re not setting off local seismic meters. Must be so much fun.

lol... yeah... well... 8.5" thick walls, staggered studs, layers upon layers on the walls and ceiling, with blown insulation everywhere, extra structural support in the attic to hold the ceiling up, etc, etc, and a hallway between the room and the house. My wife still says she can hear what sounds like distant thunder from time to time when she is at the other end of our house in the bedroom. Thankfully we are in the backwoods of Alabama, and our house sits 1/4 mile off the road, and surrounded by lots of land.

It's what I call "effortless" bass... and well balanced.

The SHD does help me keep the SB's separate from the PB's for music.

 

[SinaHakman]

Hello all,

I am in the same dilemma as many: MiniDSP SHD or NAD C658 (1500 vs 1600EUR here in Europe, so same price ballpark).

What I like about the NAD compared to the miniDSP:

1- Better implementation of DIRAC LIVE (and an App to control it)
2. Roon ready (it may come in the minidsp soon, but waiting for ages already)
3. Sub-correction through Dirac, dedicated sub channels for Dirac correction (while in miniDSP you can only use Dirac as 2.0, although this is useless if the sub output is weak in the NAD as many claim)
4. More chances of DLBC due to #3
5. Headphone out
6. Trigger in/out
7. 5-years guarantee (less when bought used, but miniDSP is 1 year only)
8. BlueOS instead of Volumio (if Roon is not used)

What I like about the miniDSP compared to the NAD:

1. Flexibility on the crossovers/slopes and independent channel customization
2. PEq on top of DIRAC LIVE
3. Possibility to use REW and REW filters
4. Better SINAD as measured by ASR (112 vs 90db - I think that 90db is not audible)

What are your takes on this one?
Cheers,
dathzo

I had the same dilemma and decided to go with miniDSP SHD Studio + external DAC(s). In addition to your points, here are the factors for my decision:

Pro miniDSP SHD Studio

• SHD Studio has a headphone out.
• miniDSP comes with Dirac Live full version, that is a separate purchase with NAD.
• Although NAD comes with Bluetooth, it does not have a USB digital input to connect to a computer, which I found very odd.
• I liked the idea of utilizing my existing DACs as Studio does not have a DAC only SPDIF out. (Mind you, I needed a second DAC for subs as SHD Studio only has digital outs. Luckily I had one.)
• From the specs NADs DAC is inferior to my SMSL SU-9.
• It is physically much smaller so it fits into my limited space.

Pro NAD

• BlueOS: I haven’t used it extensively but it feels much better than Volumio. I use Roon so I don’t really care but still.
• Roon Ready: As you said, we are waiting for ages to get Roon Ready for miniDSP SHD but I think it is nearly there.
• One more Coaxial and Optical input.
• Compared to SHD Studio, there are not analog inputs but SHD has analog inputs.
• Phono input, if you have a turntable.

Other than the Roon Ready saga, I am pretty happy with miniDSP SHD Studio.
I hope this helps.

 

[nothingman]

Everyone has already provided a bunch of good points on SHD vs. C658. Personally, when I weighed them, I didn’t think too far ahead about it and mostly looked at price and measured performance. The price difference is quite huge, especially when you add $100 for full range Dirac and $500 for the USB audio module. To me it seemed crazy spend almost double - $1200 vs. $2250 USD - for a similar device that doesn’t perform as well in the basic audio reproduction department.

Now that I have the SHD and know a lot more about the two units, I’m still glad I went with the higher peforming unit, but I’m also glad because the SHD gives me 2x4 I/O and total control over PEQ and crossover. It’s been such a fun device to own and to learn REW and Dirac and all that. Having a balanced analog input is really nice for high quality phono stages and whatnot. For two channel, it feels like the sort of device I won’t grow out of (impossible, but it’s a good feeling to have in the meantime).

Volumio isn’t perfect, but I do appreciate how hard those guys try to deliver and provide updates. It’s grown on me. Once miniDSP delivers Tidal Connect and Roon for their implementation I think that will really even things out. From what I understand BluOS has its problems too.

I, too, wish for DL Bass Control on the SHD but hearing some of these other guys talk negatively about it tempers that a little. Wouldn’t be terrible to have the option, but I guess I’m not dying for it.

 

[Dathzo]

You need to optimize your speaker/sub setup as best as you can BEFORE performing DIRAC. What does optimize mean?

1. Placement - Measure speakers and subs individually, and find placements that give you the flattest response possible. You are looking for complimentary frequency responses. For example if sub 1 has a 50-70Hz null, then find a place for sub 2 that can help fill that null.
2. Set crossovers - 80Hz is my go to and I wouldn't go any lower. I would only go higher if it helps fill a null and is still not localizable. Do not use crossovers with slopes higher than 24dB.
3. Acoustic Time Alignment in REW - Perform time alignment of speakers and subs and input delays into the MiniDSP and verify the time alignment is correct. Crossovers effect these measurements so set them first, including any subsonic filters. Also check the polarity of your speakers/subs using the impulse response. The delays should be somewhat close to an actual distance measurement. If it is wildly different then either you must adjust how you perform the acoustic timing measurement or the polarity of one of your speakers/subs is incorrect.
4. Volume match subs and adjust sub gain to be around 10dB higher than your mains. Running the bass hot gives you more flexibility in your DIRAC target curves.
5. Verify the setup by running measurements with everything on at the same time. The response should be close to an averaging of the individual responses. If it doesn't match then you aren't properly time aligned.

DIRAC will perform its own time alignment and volume matching of the Left and Right channels. If you set up your system up correctly, then these values should be very close to zero.

There is no need for your own use of PEQ. Especially when it comes to the subwoofers as I would argue it will actually hurt performance. DIRAC target curve is where all your focus should be when tailoring the sound to your own preferences.

Thank you @CumSum for the educational post. This makes a lot of sense to me and that’s the way I setup my system, but without the Dirac step. A key difference is that I went for a steep slope (48db/octave). Why would you limit it to 24db?
Best.-

 

[Dathzo]

I have what is probably a convoluted way of handling my calibration setup with two systems... or really just two processors, one for two-channel and one for multi-channel. My room is indeed dedicated, so it makes a difference in how I setup the calibration. Everything in the room is pretty much symmetrical. My two front subs are equidistant to the MLP, as are the two rear subs. I use the acoustic reference timing in REW to time align those two sets of subs from front to back, which in essence makes them one sub, and I daisy chain them front to back. Then I use the PEQ's on the subs to fix a couple of minor issues. I measure the combined response of all four subs, since they are mono and all play the same bass at the same time, and should be adjusted likewise. The combined response looks good, so Dirac takes care of the super minor anomalies. I could use the PEQ's in the SHD as well... just whatever is needed. I do have a couple of high-pass filters on my subs at maybe 12-15Hz (can't remember exactly), but it takes care of a little hump I have down really low that I can't get to with the SVS PEQ filters. The HTP-1 also has a host of features and adjustments, including PEQs, shelf filters, etc... very much like the SHD. I also have no limitations to placement of the subs, so they are placed optimally for the best response, therefore not a lot of filters are needed... thankfully.

I use PEQs in the subs because we do a lot of speaker evaluations in my room, and we don't want to always use Dirac, although we might use the subs on some speakers. Having worked for SVS and knowing their engineers, etc, using PEQ before Dirac or Audyssey in no way affects the performance. A lot of guys do this... never heard of anyone complaining about it having any adverse affects... and I've done it for years on top of years.

I have two inputs on my subs. One set is from the HTP-1 and the other set is from the SHD. One or the other is OFF so that only one set of inputs are fed live by whichever processor I'm using. Then as previously mentioned, front subs are daisy chained to the back subs with timing adjusted.

I run my HTP-1 calibration first, which does separate the subs from the mains. This also gives me the correct timing between my mains and subs, which I can plug into the SHD. For example... the mains are delayed by 12.4ms to time align with the subs... so I set the delay on the mains in the SHD to 12.4ms. Then I run Dirac.

The issue with Dirac normalizing the levels in the HTP-1 is that I already have my subs at the proper level to match my mains... which is typically about 10dB higher than the mains (gradual slope / house curve). Dirac removes it when it normalizes the response measurement, and I have to set my target curve so that it boosts the bass back up that 10dB. I can start with the subs level down, but I don't want to do that... as it is perfect for the SHD, and I'd have to boost it there as well. In essence it's not really a boost because all Dirac did was lower the output of the subs. Yet, I still like the way the SHD handles it with the actually level since it is 2.0.

Thank you Sir for the detailed explanation: I now know what you mean with the need of bumping the levels up. It is a very peculiar system you run, but as you replied to CumSum, sounds like a lot of fun (pun intended) .
Thank you again for the great knowledge sharing.-

 

[Dathzo]

I had the same dilemma and decided to go with miniDSP SHD Studio + external DAC(s). In addition to your points, here are the factors for my decision:

Pro miniDSP SHD Studio

• SHD Studio has a headphone out.
• miniDSP comes with Dirac Live full version, that is a separate purchase with NAD.
• Although NAD comes with Bluetooth, it does not have a USB digital input to connect to a computer, which I found very odd.
• I liked the idea of utilizing my existing DACs as Studio does not have a DAC only SPDIF out. (Mind you, I needed a second DAC for subs as SHD Studio only has digital outs. Luckily I had one.)
• From the specs NADs DAC is inferior to my SMSL SU-9.
• It is physically much smaller so it fits into my limited space.

Pro NAD

• BlueOS: I haven’t used it extensively but it feels much better than Volumio. I use Roon so I don’t really care but still.
• Roon Ready: As you said, we are waiting for ages to get Roon Ready for miniDSP SHD but I think it is nearly there.
• One more Coaxial and Optical input.
• Compared to SHD Studio, there are not analog inputs but SHD has analog inputs.
• Phono input, if you have a turntable.

Other than the Roon Ready saga, I am pretty happy with miniDSP SHD Studio.
I hope this helps.

Great additions @SinaHakman! I have looked at the studio version, but I am looking to simplify my setup, and hence the SHD is more pertinent. It has a sufficient DAC for me (I even think that the DAC in the C658 is sufficient, no audible concerns there, only engineering ones). And when ROON certification lands, the arguments for the SHD become stronger. I see a pattern here

 

[Dathzo]

Everyone has already provided a bunch of good points on SHD vs. C658. Personally, when I weighed them, I didn’t think too far ahead about it and mostly looked at price and measured performance. The price difference is quite huge, especially when you add $100 for full range Dirac and $500 for the USB audio module. To me it seemed crazy spend almost double - $1200 vs. $2250 USD - for a similar device that doesn’t perform as well in the basic audio reproduction department.

Now that I have the SHD and know a lot more about the two units, I’m still glad I went with the higher peforming unit, but I’m also glad because the SHD gives me 2x4 I/O and total control over PEQ and crossover. It’s been such a fun device to own and to learn REW and Dirac and all that. Having a balanced analog input is really nice for high quality phono stages and whatnot. For two channel, it feels like the sort of device I won’t grow out of (impossible, but it’s a good feeling to have in the meantime).

Volumio isn’t perfect, but I do appreciate how hard those guys try to deliver and provide updates. It’s grown on me. Once miniDSP delivers Tidal Connect and Roon for their implementation I think that will really even things out. From what I understand BluOS has its problems too.

I, too, wish for DL Bass Control on the SHD but hearing some of these other guys talk negatively about it tempers that a little. Wouldn’t be terrible to have the option, but I guess I’m not dying for it.

Thanks @nothingman for chiming in. You bring a good point about the 99usd extra for full range Dirac. As for the usb module, I do not care about it since I plan to use Roon for streaming.
I am glad you are happy with your unit, and that seems to be the case for most SHD owners. I cannot say the same for the C658 ones reading forums elsewhere. The truth is that I have been offered a C658 for a solid price (1100eur), with 4 years guarantee still. So it’s very tempting (even a new SHD will give me only 1 year guarantee). Its very tempting, but based on the wisdom of this thread, does not seem like the right path to take.
Cheers!

 

[RichB]

lol... yeah... well... 8.5" thick walls, staggered studs, layers upon layers on the walls and ceiling, with blown insulation everywhere, extra structural support in the attic to hold the ceiling up, etc, etc, and a hallway between the room and the house. My wife still says she can hear what sounds like distant thunder from time to time when she is at the other end of our house in the bedroom. Thankfully we are in the backwoods of Alabama, and our house sits 1/4 mile off the road, and surrounded by lots of land.

It's what I call "effortless" bass... and well balanced.

The SHD does help me keep the SB's separate from the PB's for music.

That is an amazing build and still the bass gets though.,,

- Rich

 

[nothingman]

Thank you @CumSum for the educational post. This makes a lot of sense to me and that’s the way I setup my system, but without the Dirac step. A key difference is that I went for a steep slope (48db/octave). Why would you limit it to 24db?
Best.-

Others can chime in, but as a starting point it is almost universally recommended to start with 24db slopes set to 80hz. Whether those are LR or BW curves differs more from place to place (and the SHD lets you do either). I recently heard it said that on the xover for the mains, depending on their capability, it can be beneficial to go down to a 12db slope which combined with the natural roll-off of the mains essentially creates a 24db slope which then better matches the subwoofer‘s roll off.

I personally haven’t heard or seen a tutorial/guide that recommends a 48db slope for either crossover. That’s awfully abrupt and I don’t see the upside.

And back on topic… the SHD excels at giving full control over all of these parameters.

 

[Dathzo]

Others can chime in, but as a starting point it is almost universally recommended to start with 24db slopes set to 80hz. Whether those are LR or BW curves differs more from place to place (and the SHD lets you do either). I recently heard it said that on the xover for the mains, depending on their capability, it can be beneficial to go down to a 12db slope which combined with the natural roll-off of the mains essentially creates a 24db slope which then better matches the subwoofer‘s roll off.

I personally haven’t heard or seen a tutorial/guide that recommends a 48db slope for either crossover. That’s awfully abrupt and I don’t see the upside.

And back on topic… the SHD excels at giving full control over all of these parameters.

That is clear, thanks a lot

 

[CumSum]

Thank you @CumSum for the educational post. This makes a lot of sense to me and that’s the way I setup my system, but without the Dirac step. A key difference is that I went for a steep slope (48db/octave). Why would you limit it to 24db?
Best.-

There are no free lunches. On the surface it may seem like the right choice is to pick the filter with the steepest slope. The perfect filter is a brick wall with infinite slope. But when you understand the math behind these filters you see that you are always compromising some aspect of performance. A steep IIR filter will have great attenuation performance, but they will come with other negative side effects that can effect the frequency domain and more importantly the time domain.

MiniDSP offers a Bessel filter. The frequency attenuation is pretty poor compared to a 24dB or 48dB BW/LR filters, but it is linear phase and has flat group delay so its time domain performance is exceptional. Hence the tradeoff that particular filter makes.

Previously I would use a 48dB high pass filter for just the subs. This was basically a subsonic filter. So I used it to kill off frequencies below 20Hz. Little did I know at the time that this aggressive filter at 20Hz killed off some bass output from my entire system from 50-100Hz. How could this happen? That filters effect on the time domain introduced quite a bit of destructive interference between the subs and speakers. Switching to a Bessel filter or a 12dB/24dB BW fixed the issue the 48dB filter was giving me.

For a crossover filter at around 80Hz, the slope really hasn't made much of an audible difference from my experience (unless I am running subs above 80Hz), which is why I just stick with using a Bessel filter since I know it won't cause any issues with respect to the time domain.

 

[Dathzo]

There are no free lunches. On the surface it may seem like the right choice is to pick the filter with the steepest slope. The perfect filter is a brick wall with infinite slope. But when you understand the math behind these filters you see that you are always compromising some aspect of performance. A steep IIR filter will have great attenuation performance, but they will come with other negative side effects that can effect the frequency domain and more importantly the time domain.

MiniDSP offers a Bessel filter. The frequency attenuation is pretty poor compared to a 24dB or 48dB BW/LR filters, but it is linear phase and has flat group delay so its time domain performance is exceptional. Hence the tradeoff that particular filter makes.

Previously I would use a 48dB high pass filter for just the subs. This was basically a subsonic filter. So I used it to kill off frequencies below 20Hz. Little did I know at the time that this aggressive filter at 20Hz killed off some bass output from my entire system from 50-100Hz. How could this happen? That filters effect on the time domain introduced quite a bit of destructive interference between the subs and speakers. Switching to a Bessel filter or a 12dB/24dB BW fixed the issue the 48dB filter was giving me.

For a crossover filter at around 80Hz, the slope really hasn't made much of an audible difference from my experience (unless I am running subs above 80Hz), which is why I just stick with using a Bessel filter since I know it won't cause any issues with respect to the time domain.

Very interesting indeed. I should get deeper into the theory of this, but for now, will just use the good advice you are given

 

[Sparky]

lol... yeah... well... 8.5" thick walls, staggered studs, layers upon layers on the walls and ceiling, with blown insulation everywhere, extra structural support in the attic to hold the ceiling up, etc, etc, and a hallway between the room and the house. My wife still says she can hear what sounds like distant thunder from time to time when she is at the other end of our house in the bedroom. Thankfully we are in the backwoods of Alabama, and our house sits 1/4 mile off the road, and surrounded by lots of land.

It's what I call "effortless" bass... and well balanced.

The SHD does help me keep the SB's separate from the PB's for music.

Living the dream........

 

[Sonnie]

There are no free lunches. On the surface it may seem like the right choice is to pick the filter with the steepest slope. The perfect filter is a brick wall with infinite slope. But when you understand the math behind these filters you see that you are always compromising some aspect of performance. A steep IIR filter will have great attenuation performance, but they will come with other negative side effects that can effect the frequency domain and more importantly the time domain.

MiniDSP offers a Bessel filter. The frequency attenuation is pretty poor compared to a 24dB or 48dB BW/LR filters, but it is linear phase and has flat group delay so its time domain performance is exceptional. Hence the tradeoff that particular filter makes.

Previously I would use a 48dB high pass filter for just the subs. This was basically a subsonic filter. So I used it to kill off frequencies below 20Hz. Little did I know at the time that this aggressive filter at 20Hz killed off some bass output from my entire system from 50-100Hz. How could this happen? That filters effect on the time domain introduced quite a bit of destructive interference between the subs and speakers. Switching to a Bessel filter or a 12dB/24dB BW fixed the issue the 48dB filter was giving me.

For a crossover filter at around 80Hz, the slope really hasn't made much of an audible difference from my experience (unless I am running subs above 80Hz), which is why I just stick with using a Bessel filter since I know it won't cause any issues with respect to the time domain.

In finding the infrasonic filter I wanted to use for my SB16's, I chose each type, then experimented with the frequency to see how the response was rolling off with REW. Initially it was easy to set it higher than it needed to be, which caused it to roll-off too quickly. I was able to get it set perfectly with REW.

 

[Nullproblemo]

Does it make sense to use the minidsp shd just in a stereo setup without subs? I just have to correct too much bass in my room because I can't place the speakers away from the walls. Was looking for a Dac to directly feed a power amp, but bass/treble adjustments seem mostly absent. Dirac might partially solve my issues but the minidsp seems to be overkill for what I need ?

 

[Sonnie]

It really depends on what you have now. If you have a processor that you are happy with, you could get a miniDSP 2x4, or something along those lines that has Dirac. If you are using something computer based (Roon, etc), you can also use REW to create filters, or hire one of the several companies out there the create filters for convolver type applications. There are several options that will allow correction.

 

[Nullproblemo]

It really depends on what you have now. If you have a processor that you are happy with, you could get a miniDSP 2x4, or something along those lines that has Dirac. If you are using something computer based (Roon, etc), you can also use REW to create filters, or hire one of the several companies out there the create filters for convolver type applications. There are several options that will allow correction.

Oh... for the moment I just have a notebook hooked to an AVR over hdmi. So I'm starting from scratch. Already decided to get a new stereo power amp, not integrated. Dac and streamer are still open choices. What I like with minidsp is the fact that streamer,Dirac and Dac are integrated, but it's also the most expensive solution. Roon is not part of the plan because I just stream music from subscription services and I won't rip my old CDs.
This works quite well using Windows remote desktop over android or a second PC to control the setup, but it's also noisy because the fans in the notebook are loud and cannot be controlled. It doesn't matter once I've got the new equipment: Dacs do not support HDMI, streamers on raspberry basis do not support remote desktop I guess; I'm willing to pay for Volumnio but not for Roon. Minidsp shd could be very interesting without analog inputs to make it cheaper.In Europe I have to pay 1600euros for it although a good Dac (500) + Dirac licence (400) + Raspberry (100) cost 1000 euros. But for the moment I couldn't find any integrated solution for such price, Minidsp Shd does not have a lot of competition unfortunately.

 

[kokoon]

Oh... for the moment I just have a notebook hooked to an AVR over hdmi. So I'm starting from scratch. Already decided to get a new stereo power amp, not integrated. Dac and streamer are still open choices. What I like with minidsp is the fact that streamer,Dirac and Dac are integrated, but it's also the most expensive solution. Roon is not part of the plan because I just stream music from subscription services and I won't rip my old CDs.
This works quite well using Windows remote desktop over android or a second PC to control the setup, but it's also noisy because the fans in the notebook are loud and cannot be controlled. It doesn't matter once I've got the new equipment: Dacs do not support HDMI, streamers on raspberry basis do not support remote desktop I guess; I'm willing to pay for Volumnio but not for Roon. Minidsp shd could be very interesting without analog inputs to make it cheaper.In Europe I have to pay 1600euros for it although a good Dac (500) + Dirac licence (400) + Raspberry (100) cost 1000 euros. But for the moment I couldn't find any integrated solution for such price, Minidsp Shd does not have a lot of competition unfortunately.

You can get the SHD a bit cheaper from minidsp.nl and afaik they're also the only ones in europe that include the microphone. I got one from them to replace my integrated and I'm super happy. Started off with stereo, now I have 2.1. Got all sorts of sources hooked up to it and it just works. I think it really has no competition, so if you don't want separate boxes for streamer and dac and preamp (for additional analog sources), then this is the clear choice.