(15-May-2018, 16:01)zdenes Wrote: [ -> ] (15-May-2018, 15:50)RebelMan Wrote: [ -> ] (14-May-2018, 19:55)zdenes Wrote: [ -> ]Mathieu said that "the Devialet is true/transparent to the source" i.e. if you improve the source you improve the SQ. When they demoed the EUR160K system with a Macbook and a 5m USB cable (for printers) I asked why they don't improve the source. His answer was that "let's say that this is the minimum performance of the system".
That's because there is nothing wrong with the source.
Nothing wrong with a Macbook. I have a Macbook Pro myself. A perfect laptop computer.
It is also a superb source. That's why the engineer (as am I) "politely" stated what he did. If you want to debate the matter further we'll probably need to take it up in a new thread.
(07-Dec-2017, 19:28)Wdw Wrote: [ -> ] (07-Dec-2017, 18:38)Confused Wrote: [ -> ] (07-Dec-2017, 17:57)Damon Wrote: [ -> ]Morning all,
Without any of the glib silliness of my previous post, I wanted to post to say that I do, absolutely, believe that there is a sonic difference to my D220 Pro following the installation of the CI board and the current software. I'll try to be clear and direct in this post.
I started listening this morning to one of my favourite albums, Bande A Part, by Nouvelle Vague. A 'go to' track from that album is Dance with Me. I have no doubt that the are acoustic percussion tones, or nuances (etc) that are now apparent that I have not heard before. Both tonally and spatially (in that they had their own 'space'), these miked acoustic instruments are definitely presented differently than they were before. Other parts of the music were also better but I was first distracted by the acoustic percussion.
As I was distracted by the differences I was hearing, I then played recordings of a previous band I was in. These are studio recordings but live off the floor, with some mixing and light mastering. The point being that I am very familar with the sound of these songs. I heard bass parts- my own bass parts- differently than I have before, including being aware of very small changes in the bass dynamics. And what I am saying is that I heard much more inconsistency in my own playing; the physical inconsistency in my own technique. The bass I used has a funny kind of harmonic resonance that changes as the string is left vibrating on long notes; that too is now apparent and I know, absolutely, that it was not reproduced so clearly before.
For the members here who do not obsess about their own playing, I will say also that the vocal presentation is absolutely different and improved. More forward, as in more independent space, and more of the nuance. Essentially, all these elements come through more with more ease... that is how I would describe it. These are vocal parts that I have heard hundreds of times; if there is any recorded sound that I feel I know to my core, this is it.
With the Pro upgrade, I felt I had reached my 'this is enough' point, and I was not expecting or desiring any sound quality change with the CI installation. I still feel that way and I have little interest in other additions to the system. That said, I would not go back to the pre-CI amplification. I don't know if it is a hardware or a software influence, but I do solidly believe that there is a difference, and that for me, in my system, it is gently remarkable.
@Damon Thank you for your clear, lucid & reliable comments. Good stuff! One point to clarify, am I right in assuming that you were listening via 'new' AIR?
I easily second @Damon's comments and observations.
Had a good chance to listen last night after a couple of days of casual "background" listening and to our ears this is a sizeable upgrade in dynamic contrast, soundstage and low level articulation.
Our speakers are accurate (delightful) but considered by some to be reticent and lacking in bass energy, and it is often suggested that a subwoofer would complete the mix, but with the Core board they simply just barked with bass energy and definition.
Very familiar pieces had, as Damon points out above, harmonic resonances not heard before and passages from loud to soft were simply breathtaking. Listened to the "suite", from Abbey Road starting from "You Never Give Me Your Money" and it was just remarkable. Ringo's short solo work later in the mix, "Carry That Weight" was just so dam punchy and rhythmic, Paul's bass work far more apparent. Melody Gardot was spellbinding as was "When I Fall in Love" from Keith Jarrett's, At the Blue Note.
There is more going on here than I had ever expected.
Well done Devialet.
(note: listening via AES from the dCS bridge)
(15-May-2018, 13:17)ssfas Wrote: [ -> ] (15-May-2018, 12:11)GuillaumeB Wrote: [ -> ] (15-May-2018, 10:57)IanG-UK Wrote: [ -> ]The last time I heard that mentioned was a year ago, maybe two. I wasn't mentioned at all in Munich and with the sense that they now recognised that Expert and Phantom appeal to two distinct populations I'm not sure it is still on the agenda.
Actually the point was made by Devialet about how few people were using Spark to control their Phantoms. 90% prefer to use Spotify and other native apps.
The same would surely follow with Expert.
Guillaume
Exactly my experience. Now uPnP works via iOS, OSX and Android using third party apps, and Air works as well (but uPnP via OSX seems better), there is no need for the iOS app.
All they have to do is sort out the volume control and get it to revert back to the set default level when switching sources.
However, if they ever get Qobuz onboard, they will need some way of controlling it. Hopefully they will get a modified version of the Qobuz app, but if Qobuz build uPnP into their iOS app, then that will become irrelevant.
Do you have to use the new 12.2.12 beta firmware for UPNP to work??
(15-May-2018, 17:30)Mr_Bill Wrote: [ -> ] (07-Dec-2017, 19:28)Wdw Wrote: [ -> ] (07-Dec-2017, 18:38)Confused Wrote: [ -> ]@Damon Thank you for your clear, lucid & reliable comments. Good stuff! One point to clarify, am I right in assuming that you were listening via 'new' AIR?
I easily second @Damon's comments and observations.
Had a good chance to listen last night after a couple of days of casual "background" listening and to our ears this is a sizeable upgrade in dynamic contrast, soundstage and low level articulation.
Our speakers are accurate (delightful) but considered by some to be reticent and lacking in bass energy, and it is often suggested that a subwoofer would complete the mix, but with the Core board they simply just barked with bass energy and definition.
Very familiar pieces had, as Damon points out above, harmonic resonances not heard before and passages from loud to soft were simply breathtaking. Listened to the "suite", from Abbey Road starting from "You Never Give Me Your Money" and it was just remarkable. Ringo's short solo work later in the mix, "Carry That Weight" was just so dam punchy and rhythmic, Paul's bass work far more apparent. Melody Gardot was spellbinding as was "When I Fall in Love" from Keith Jarrett's, At the Blue Note.
There is more going on here than I had ever expected.
Well done Devialet.
(note: listening via AES from the dCS bridge)
(15-May-2018, 13:17)ssfas Wrote: [ -> ] (15-May-2018, 12:11)GuillaumeB Wrote: [ -> ]Actually the point was made by Devialet about how few people were using Spark to control their Phantoms. 90% prefer to use Spotify and other native apps.
The same would surely follow with Expert.
Guillaume
Exactly my experience. Now uPnP works via iOS, OSX and Android using third party apps, and Air works as well (but uPnP via OSX seems better), there is no need for the iOS app.
All they have to do is sort out the volume control and get it to revert back to the set default level when switching sources.
However, if they ever get Qobuz onboard, they will need some way of controlling it. Hopefully they will get a modified version of the Qobuz app, but if Qobuz build uPnP into their iOS app, then that will become irrelevant.
Do you have to use the new 12.2.12 beta firmware for UPNP to work??
uPnP worked with the second beta (February 2018). The third beta did not work, probably my fault as I had wifi enabled in the configuration and was using ethernet, which was not a problem with the second beta.
(15-May-2018, 12:48)zdenes Wrote: [ -> ]They made promises for an online configurator, wifi board, etc. All in all, I must say that many (perhaps not all) were delivered with often long delays and bugs. But, if you look at the whole picture, name another hi-fi brand that upgrades firmware every 2-4 months, many times with new functions, and offers upgrades to hardware every 3 years or so.
Once you buy a piece of hi-fi equipment, you don't normally need any communication from the manufacturer and vice versa unless your unit is broken.
In fact, I can't even name any company/product off top of my head in any industry that does that. You don't have to communicate with the manufacturer/dealer of your car, TV, phone, etc unless there is a problem. You don't upgrade the firmware in your car every two months (I haven't ever checked if there is a new one for mine...).
So they created a new type of product/business model and still haven't figured out the communication channels that would fit it. Actually, that was not discussed in Munich this time either, and I feel a little bad about it. We should have asked them to properly explain how that communication is going to be from now on to ALL customers.
I heard from an expert who is closely following what's going in "audio software" world that most companies with streaming devices or programmable audio gear have third parties to develop their software and test it before they deliver it. Devialet is one of the few who does it in-house. So that is another source of struggles.
To summerize my rambling,
- Devialet has to set up proper channels for bi-directional communication with full-time knowledgeable staff. Not random Q&A event with a handful of people, although it maybe a good start.
- They should employ a few more software engineers or outsource some development to specialized firms.
- They should test new firmware releases a lot more thoroughly following a strict protocol in-house and with a number of volunteer testers and forget about this constant beta-release. They introduce two new functions and eliminate two bugs while deleting an existing function and introducing a new bug with every beta firmware release.
Zoltan
Good post.
Devialet are trying to do stuff which customers have never had in the past so it is an untested model.
In the fullness of time it might prove to be the right model as the low-to-mid hifi retailers get squeezed out by Amazon and the high end hifi is more reliant on customer/manufacturer liaison. In the UK I bet less than half Devialet's UK retailers can really explain what a Devialet can do. And few have time to learn it. So why have an amateur in the communication chain when you have one or two experts at the ends?
I agree with Zoltan's summary with the proviso that it all takes time, internally, through sourcing, with distributors and dealers, with customers. If they deliver it within the rest of 2018 it will be quite an achievement.
(Zoltan - I did ask Joachim a quick question about the communication lines and he said this needed to be more through the dealers, but this does not work if it is merely a conduit so the dealers need training and/or reducing in number)
(15-May-2018, 15:59)RebelMan Wrote: [ -> ] (14-May-2018, 20:10)ssfas Wrote: [ -> ] (14-May-2018, 19:55)zdenes Wrote: [ -> ]As one of the magnificent seven being there in Munich (Literally. Not the magnificent, the seven) I think I am obliged to cover some areas that have not been mentioned. One being using different sources rather than streaming with AIR.
Totally confused here as I have no idea about broadcast protocols and where the bits go.
I only rarely use Air, but have been using uPnP with my Devialet connected to an access point by an ethernet cable. It works faultlessly and sounds brilliant. Is there any jitter going on, or is it limited to usb devices?
Ethernet is the best way to fly, not USB. No jitter at the (ether) interface only at the DAC. Keep your system simple for the best sound. What you observed could have been predicted. Nice job!
Thanks for that. I assume people here have to spend significant sums to use usb devices supporting Roon.
The tech people at Devialet have been emailing me about uPnP and any problems I may have with it. They seem focused on getting it 100% faultless, and they are not far off, the problems seem to be more with the third party apps than Devialet.
MCRU made me a PSU for the ASUS RT-AC86U (I think) access point. It's connected to my modem by a long cable and to my Devialet by a short one. That's it for music.
(15-May-2018, 17:08)RebelMan Wrote: [ -> ] (15-May-2018, 16:01)zdenes Wrote: [ -> ] (15-May-2018, 15:50)RebelMan Wrote: [ -> ]That's because there is nothing wrong with the source.
Nothing wrong with a Macbook. I have a Macbook Pro myself. A perfect laptop computer.
It is also a superb source. That's why the engineer (as am I) "politely" stated what he did. If you want to debate the matter further we'll probably need to take it up in a new thread.
We’re in the wrong place for this discussion, but
Archimagos latest post on USB measurements show the MacBook to be unexpectedly poor (ie noisy). Nothing was implied about sonic effects as these weren’t measured but I have to say I was pretty surprised. Maybe time for another USB thread?
(15-May-2018, 20:21)Hifi_swlon Wrote: [ -> ] (15-May-2018, 17:08)RebelMan Wrote: [ -> ] (15-May-2018, 16:01)zdenes Wrote: [ -> ]Nothing wrong with a Macbook. I have a Macbook Pro myself. A perfect laptop computer.
It is also a superb source. That's why the engineer (as am I) "politely" stated what he did. If you want to debate the matter further we'll probably need to take it up in a new thread.
We’re in the wrong place for this discussion, but Archimagos latest post on USB measurements show the MacBook to be unexpectedly poor (ie noisy). Nothing was implied about sonic effects as these weren’t measured but I have to say I was pretty surprised. Maybe time for another USB thread?
Actually I think it is a good place to cover this MacBook issue, if only in the context of how Devialet's position has quietly changed.
For years, Mathieu sad that a MacBook was perfectly ok as a source. I can't remember a Devialet demonstration (other than at a dealer) where Devialet used anything else.
But now, their stance is along the lines of "use what you want if you are happy with it" (from Joachim) and "MacBook is the minimum" (as reported by Zoltan though perhaps in only a personal conversation with Mathieu).
Of course, this new stance by Devialet is commercially sensible, even if some in your organisation think otherwise. If you don't make a source, why potentially alienate some potential customers by saying "a MacBook is perfectly ok" if the customer's views are firmly different?
I remember Quad taking a similar intransigent stance years ago. I seem to recall them saying CDs were better than vinyl - when Quad didn't make either a CD player or a turntable - which alienated potential Linn-owning customers who loved their LP12s; or by them saying that speaker cables didn't matter so alienating those who thought they did. Quad should have been one of the most financially robust hifi businesses in the UK but (not just for this intransigence, of course) they went bust.
I've a MacBook and an Antipodes and I use both. Any differences which I might hear (and I can't be bothered to compare them really) are swamped by differences one can make in room, speaker position, listening position, precision of correct volume level, ... (the list goes on). In my opinion, but it's fine if others think differently!
I think not getting involved in the debate seems sensible in business terms as you say, but I’d love it if a company like Devialet (or dCS or anything be with high standing in the DA measurement area) would come out and show something about the subject based on evidence. Even if it was just a ‘we measured a mac, agaibst other options, fed into our hardware and found these results’ with grams and data of source ‘quality’ vs analogue output measurements. There are so few people that could do it that it would be a really interesting thing for them to put out there. Ok so if there were differences perhaps some could say their usb input wasn’t filtered enough or whatever but I just think it would help the debate and stop all this guesswork and things based on hearsay (to a degree). As let’s face it it’s not trivial stuff to understand and or test at the home user level. The same for dcs. They seem pretty straight talking to me, yet I read comments like ‘the Vivaldi stack really needs circa 10k of cables to shine’ why don’t dcs show exactly if and what the differences are with stock cables etc, they’re self proclaimed FFT analysis experts after all. Anyway, sorry for adding more OT stuff.
And yeah for me the room correction and even slight PEq adjustments make more of adifference than anything else but it’s still good to understand.
(15-May-2018, 20:21)Hifi_swlon Wrote: [ -> ] (15-May-2018, 17:08)RebelMan Wrote: [ -> ] (15-May-2018, 16:01)zdenes Wrote: [ -> ]Nothing wrong with a Macbook. I have a Macbook Pro myself. A perfect laptop computer.
It is also a superb source. That's why the engineer (as am I) "politely" stated what he did. If you want to debate the matter further we'll probably need to take it up in a new thread.
We’re in the wrong place for this discussion, but Archimagos latest post on USB measurements show the MacBook to be unexpectedly poor (ie noisy). Nothing was implied about sonic effects as these weren’t measured but I have to say I was pretty surprised. Maybe time for another USB thread?
Also absent was a discussion of transfer modes and how the noise might manifest itself in the resultant signal. Without this data no conclusions can be made on audio quality.