20-Aug-2015, 17:56
(This post was last modified: 20-Aug-2015, 17:57 by Hifi_swlon.)
(20-Aug-2015, 17:32)Confused Wrote: These are interesting observations, I have noticed very similar with the KEF Blade. However, I think these might be differences between the "original" SAM and SAM V2, rather than related specifically to firmware differences. Although the two are obviously related, as "old" SAM can only be used with 7.x.x firmware. I can't help thinking that there is something not quite right with SAM 1 profile conversion to SAM V2.
Maybe all legacy SAM profiles need a SAM Lab update to get full benefit of SAM 2?
I'm sure you're right - it makes the most sense, although I didn't do much SAM on/off testing in either.
It would be be a shame (and a bit of a blunder in my opinion) if all speakers now had to be re-done rather than being able to use the original data. I suppose it just depends on how much data they took first time round - maybe there a things they just couldn't have envisaged being needed? It's taken a long time to build that portfolio of speakers, I guess that's what the SAMlab's all about as it wouldn't be conceivable to have to drag all those speakers back to the lab in Paris.
>>> 1st Place Award: Devialet, last decades most disappointing technology purchase. <<<
