Poll: How forgiving is the Pro series top end?
More forgiving to bright/harsh recordings.
As forgiving to bright/harsh recordings.
Less forgiving to bright/harsh recordings.
[Show Results]
 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Pro vs Non-Pro Top End
#1
How does everyone find the top end of the Pro vs non Pro expert amps?

Which is more forgiving to harsher recording?
Roon->HQPlayer->Air 3.04->Devialet 220 Pro->Transparent Super->Wilson Audio Sabrinas w/ Shunyata Denali, Rega RP8, Rega Apheta 2, Rega Aria


Reply
#2
As always it's about the system as a whole. I feel the Pro is more accurate and transparent to the source and all other influencing factors like quality of power etc.

I believe the Pro will make any good system sound better but will also more clearly expose faults/shortcomings in a system or better said not mask them. And no it's not clinical or analytical in my opinion, rather the opposite: very musical and engaging.
PS Audio P3, Shunyata ΞTRON Alpha Digital/Lessloss DFPC Signature/Furutech power cables, Paul Hynes SR7EHD-MR4, Roon, SoTM sMS-200, Curious USB cable, Audioquest Diamond RJ/E ethernet, Mutec MC-3+ USB, Shunyata ΞTRON Anaconda Digital XLR AES/EBU, Devialet Expert 250 Pro, Nordost Tyr Reference LS cables, Von Schweikert VR-5 SE Anniversary Edition, Anti-Mode Dual Core 2.0, JL Audio Fathom F112. More detail here.

The Netherlands


Reply
#3
By coincidence I read an article by Hans Beekhuyzen recently and I think this applies a bit here as I feel there are very little -really- bad recordings. Of course there are many that are 'hotter' in the treble than others or horribly compressed ones with distortion, in some productions there's even added edge to voices (e.g. modern pop recordings) but if someone finds his system (including the room) is in general or too often "sibilant" I think the system itself is the problem. Of course a system should not mask/filter out highs and should still be able to portray those frequencies, it should "just do so" without distortion or pulling attention to that (or any specific) frequency range. Also one should be able to easily differentiate different qualities of recordings, when everything sounds more or less the same or dull, soft or recessed something's wrong as well.

http://thehbproject.com/en/articles/52/3...your-brain


Quote:Let’s take one of the most difficult things to get right in a stereo: sibilance control. Many audiophiles take for granted that sibilance is not on par with the real world. Even seasoned listeners tell me that it’s in the recording when I know it isn’t. That’s ok for it is rather difficult and often expensive to get it right. So you better learn to live with it. But for arguments sake, let’s say that you want to improve sibilance control in your set. Then it would be nice to find out what causes it. The only way to find out is to replace individual components - piece by piece  and including cables and the music file or disks. It is therefore handy to have audiophile friends to exchange equipment and cables with. Friends can also point you to properties of the sound - both positive and negative - that are remarkable. That way you teach each other to listen. And, yes, initially you will misinterpret some properties as will your friends. That will bring us back to the beginning of this video: make sure that no egos get in the way for that will absolutely lead to errors.
PS Audio P3, Shunyata ΞTRON Alpha Digital/Lessloss DFPC Signature/Furutech power cables, Paul Hynes SR7EHD-MR4, Roon, SoTM sMS-200, Curious USB cable, Audioquest Diamond RJ/E ethernet, Mutec MC-3+ USB, Shunyata ΞTRON Anaconda Digital XLR AES/EBU, Devialet Expert 250 Pro, Nordost Tyr Reference LS cables, Von Schweikert VR-5 SE Anniversary Edition, Anti-Mode Dual Core 2.0, JL Audio Fathom F112. More detail here.

The Netherlands


Reply
#4
(14-Dec-2016, 17:06)Antoine Wrote: As always it's about the system as a whole. I feel the Pro is more accurate and transparent to the source and all other influencing factors like quality of power etc.

I believe the Pro will make any good system sound better but will also more clearly expose faults/shortcomings in a system or better said not mask them. And no it's not clinical or analytical in my opinion, rather the opposite: very musical and engaging.

I'm done with accurate and there is nothing more I can do with my room.  If it makes my 80s hair metal sound even more like the turd it is, I'm not sure I want it.   Big Grin
Roon->HQPlayer->Air 3.04->Devialet 220 Pro->Transparent Super->Wilson Audio Sabrinas w/ Shunyata Denali, Rega RP8, Rega Apheta 2, Rega Aria


Reply
#5
Haha, I can understand that but I don't think that's the case and feel Devialet has accomplished something very special and hard to do: making the Pro sound more clean, detailed and transparent (in the good way) while at the same time sounding more fluid, refined and musical. In short it's more class A and analog sounding, less digital. No digital edge or brightness, rather the opposite it's rich and perhaps a tad warm sounding compared to the non Pro in my system.

edit: I'll stop repeating those last words everywhere now!! Big Grin
edit2: Talking about 80's productions; I wrote: "Old lifeless (eg. 80's pop albums) are much more enjoyable now." here: http://devialetchat.com/showthread.php?t...7#pid52947 Smile
PS Audio P3, Shunyata ΞTRON Alpha Digital/Lessloss DFPC Signature/Furutech power cables, Paul Hynes SR7EHD-MR4, Roon, SoTM sMS-200, Curious USB cable, Audioquest Diamond RJ/E ethernet, Mutec MC-3+ USB, Shunyata ΞTRON Anaconda Digital XLR AES/EBU, Devialet Expert 250 Pro, Nordost Tyr Reference LS cables, Von Schweikert VR-5 SE Anniversary Edition, Anti-Mode Dual Core 2.0, JL Audio Fathom F112. More detail here.

The Netherlands


Reply
#6
I'm starting to think the Shunyata Denali 2000t is something I need to add to my system it doesn't require me losing my amp for a month.
Roon->HQPlayer->Air 3.04->Devialet 220 Pro->Transparent Super->Wilson Audio Sabrinas w/ Shunyata Denali, Rega RP8, Rega Apheta 2, Rega Aria


Reply
#7
Sorry if it's off topic but here's some examples of modern pop/poppy recordings I feel illustrate what I mean (don't mind the musical selections I made too much or thinkmI'm a huge fan of Alexis Jordan for example! Big Grin)

OK but 'hot' upper mids/treble (close miked, breathy vocals):
Andra Day - Rise up
Angus and Julia Stone - album Down the way
Birdy - album Birdy

Added edge:
Alexis Jordan - Happiness (an extreme example this one, it's used as an effect here)
Beyonce - I am Sasha Fierce (album eg. song Disappear)
Adele - 21

Thin/edgy/slightly distorted:
The Script - For the first time

OK but softer/softened treble:
Frazey Ford - September Fields

Bad/brittle:
Metallica - the black album with songs like Nothing Else Matters

Even with the worst of these examples I would no longer feel the need to turn the volume down. It'll still sound crap but doesn't hurt my ears anymore. This was way different some years back. Wink
PS Audio P3, Shunyata ΞTRON Alpha Digital/Lessloss DFPC Signature/Furutech power cables, Paul Hynes SR7EHD-MR4, Roon, SoTM sMS-200, Curious USB cable, Audioquest Diamond RJ/E ethernet, Mutec MC-3+ USB, Shunyata ΞTRON Anaconda Digital XLR AES/EBU, Devialet Expert 250 Pro, Nordost Tyr Reference LS cables, Von Schweikert VR-5 SE Anniversary Edition, Anti-Mode Dual Core 2.0, JL Audio Fathom F112. More detail here.

The Netherlands


Reply
#8
This is a very interesting poll! Although perhaps not for the right reasons. For me, I am not sure I even understand the question. I think the Pro DAC/ADH is in effect 'higher resolution' versus the Expert. Does higher resolution equal less forgiving? Would lower resolution be more forgiving, so lower resolution is better? How far do you go with this, no resolution would be no sound. Anyway, here is my view. The Pro and the Expert are tonally identical, so something that sounded too bright on an Expert will also sound too bright on the Pro. I am quite sure that if you had some sophisticated lab equipment that could test such things, you would find no more that an absolute fraction of difference between the Expert and Pro in terms of frequency response.

Having said that, the Pro is a magnitude ahead of the Expert in terms of detail and absolute realism, and in a good way, with everything sounding just plain real, or truer to the source at least, for good or ill. I think this does have some consequences, on occasion you can be playing something on the Pro and it sounds quite startling, it really grabs your attention. So whereas with your Expert, which you may have owned for a couple of years so you've stopped thinking too much about if the treble is harsh, more prominent or whatever, you come across a song where the treble is a bit harsh or the mix is a bit bright, and you think, 'the mix is a bit bright on this track'. With the Pro, on the occasional recording, the treble can grab your attention like you would not believe, but it is far cleaner and more accurate that it was on the Expert, and not one iota more prominent in terms of overall balance. However, with your attention grabbed, the issue is launched into you consciousness and you start noticing the treble like never before.

I have not had my Pro that long, first to say that I am absolutely loving the thing. However, I still have not yet got the Pro sound fully worked out, or should I say I am not fully used to having the Pro. It is still surprising me, but the journey is immensely enjoyable.

In summary, versus the Expert the Pro is tonally identical but has much higher resolution. A simple statement. However, the consequences of the resolution on your brain, your perception, can lead to very misleading thoughts along the way. OK, I am not a piece of lab equipment, so this needs to stand as my opinion, other views will vary. As I said earlier, I am still getting used to the Pro, I may post again on this topic in a years time, to see if the view stands. Currently I am simply enjoying the Pro's epic insight in to everything, it's utter ruthlessness in transparency, which I guess is not for everyone.
1000 Pro - KEF Blade - microRendu - Mutec MC3+USB - Pro-Ject Signature 12
Reply
#9
(14-Dec-2016, 19:00)Antoine Wrote: Sorry if it's off topic but here's some examples of modern pop/poppy recordings I feel illustrate what I mean (don't mind the musical selections I made too much or thinkmI'm a huge fan of Alexis Jordan for example! Big Grin)

OK but 'hot' upper mids/treble (close miked, breathy vocals):
Andra Day - Rise up
Angus and Julia Stone - album Down the way
Birdy - album Birdy

Added edge:
Alexis Jordan - Happiness (an extreme example this one, it's used as an effect here)
Beyonce - I am Sasha Fierce (album eg. song Disappear)
Adele - 21

Thin/edgy/slightly distorted:
The Script - For the first time

OK but softer/softened treble:
Frazey Ford - September Fields

Bad/brittle:
Metallica - the black album with songs like Nothing Else Matters

Even with the worst of these examples I would no longer feel the need to turn the volume down. It'll still sound crap but doesn't hurt my ears anymore. This was way different some years back. Wink
Just had a quick spin through the above, none of them were bad recordings in my book, and the faults in most sounded quiet deliberate. So I tried the most recent Garbage album, which was unlistenable on the 400, it's still a loudness war causality, but the 440 makes it hugely better somehow.

This is what I want from a hifi, something that let's me know where any problem in a recording lies, and in all these cases the problem isn't in my home, but in the master.

I don't know how to vote I the poll, the top end of the pro is simply better to me, and is much closer to the sound of real instruments, that often have very aggressive leading edges. To me the pro focuses the energy more clearly on the leading edge, though what sounds like the use of massive power, to be more accurate. So sometimes the music is much less polite than before, but only because the music is meant to be.
For example Dry by PJ Harvey is a dynamic album, and played loud (-2 the other day) on the pro it's about as close to a rock band in a lounge as I think I might want, it's a raw and visceral experience, utterly thrilling. But put something else on and the system sounds totally different, the pro does this more clearly than before. Not sure this is any use, but I love the upgrade.
Air 3, Rega P9 with Dynavector XX2Mk2 > 440 Pro > Sonus Faber Guarneri Evolution
Reply
#10
(14-Dec-2016, 19:51)Confused Wrote: This is a very interesting poll!  Although perhaps not for the right reasons.  For me, I am not sure I even understand the question.  I think the Pro DAC/ADH is in effect 'higher resolution' versus the Expert.  Does higher resolution equal less forgiving?  Would lower resolution be more forgiving, so lower resolution is better?  How far do you go with this, no resolution would be no sound.  Anyway, here is my view.  The Pro and the Expert are tonally identical, so something that sounded too bright on an Expert will also sound too bright on the Pro.  I am quite sure that if you had some sophisticated lab equipment that could test such things, you would find no more that an absolute fraction of difference between the Expert and Pro in terms of frequency response.

Having said that, the Pro is a magnitude ahead of the Expert in terms of detail and absolute realism, and in a good way, with everything sounding just plain real, or truer to the source at least, for good or ill.  I think this does have some consequences, on occasion you can be playing something on the Pro and it sounds quite startling, it really grabs your attention.  So whereas with your Expert, which you may have owned for a couple of years so you've stopped thinking too much about if the treble is harsh, more prominent or whatever, you come across a song where the treble is a bit harsh or the mix is a bit bright, and you think, 'the mix is a bit bright on this track'.  With the Pro, on the occasional recording, the treble can grab your attention like you would not believe, but it is far cleaner and more accurate that it was on the Expert, and not one iota more prominent in terms of overall balance.  However, with your attention grabbed, the issue is launched into you consciousness and you start noticing the treble like never before.

I have not had my Pro that long, first to say that I am absolutely loving the thing.  However, I still have not yet got the Pro sound fully worked out, or should I say I am not fully used to having the Pro.  It is still surprising me, but the journey is immensely enjoyable.

In summary, versus the Expert the Pro is tonally identical but has much higher resolution.   A simple statement.  However, the consequences of the resolution on your brain, your perception, can lead to very misleading thoughts along the way.  OK, I am not a piece of lab equipment, so this needs to stand as my opinion, other views will vary.  As I said earlier, I am still getting used to the Pro, I may post again on this topic in a years time, to see if the view stands.  Currently I am simply enjoying the Pro's epic insight in to everything, it's utter ruthlessness in transparency, which I guess is not for everyone.

Yes. That's exactly what I'm experiencing. The more open/resolving a system is the less forgiving it is and the more sensitive it is reacting on interferences. But if there is nothing to forgive you win a lot on realism in the musical presentation.
On the other side if there allready was something to forgive the 'old' Experts have forgiven your 'inability' to plug an adequate source and cables to the inputs/devices a lot more I would say. They smoothed it out.

I've heard quiet the same with other electronics. Lets take a Spectral Pre- Power-Amp. Very open/revealing system...and very picky to drive to its best. Devialet is not the only machine in the market that has to deal with weaknesses in an audio system and reacting on the 'harsh side' on it.

Devialets's greatest 'bug' is that it quiet heavily reacts with the D-Amp section on interferences and that gives us more of this ugly digital sound (jitter). And this fact is logical as the Class A-Amp does only a fraction (<1%) of amplification compared to the D-Amp.
I think we can not digest this ugly digital sound as good as a distorted analogue sound. Analogue distortion is kind of 'natural' in our daily life. Digital distortion is unnatural to us hence it immediately stands out of the music and it distracts us...we hate it.

gui

edit: This thought gives me an idea why I hear such a big improvement in my D200's sound with the new mod I meantioned in Tweakers Corner. The mod shortens the signal path of the D-Amp of the D200 by a large amount compared to the signal path through the pin contacts and riserboard. I'm still wondering on the great outcome of this simple mod.
- D200 (mod) - ML Motion40 (mod) - Manger P1 (mod) - foobar 1.3.14/AO 2.20 b4/jplay 6.2/process lasso 9.0b/fidelizer 7.6 Pro/ssd/laptop(mod)/usb-D200 - 
"Oh, you can buy the other. But then it is a cost intensive learning process"
berlin
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)