A much happier update today. I tried some more experimenting with Roon's parametric EQ today, and now I can get it to do exactly what I failed to do yesterday. A simple case of being on the learning curve, doing a bit of reading, and discovering what the "Q" parameter does. The situation is not totally satisfactory though, I can achieve an almost perfect curve, move the microphone a few millimeters, and then the curves drift significantly. I have also tried REW using the microphone pointing upwards, which is something that has been posted about elsewhere on the forum. Based on subjective listening, this does seem to have yielded the best results, but again, move the microphone a bit, and different settings are needed. I can produce fine looking curves, but the results are clearly a bit arbitrary. I think I have a lot to learn, and I plan to do a bit of reading up before spending much more time on this. The good news is that I now have a small collection of EQ's saved on Roon, and a couple of them seem to really work. I am quite sure that what I have done today is a very long way from the optimum, but the good news is that that with a couple of the EQ's I can now sit and listen totally untroubled by my earlier presence region woes. Some tracks that were bothering me a little since introducing the SOtM kit now sound sublime, indeed, I have just been listening to one track that has been bothering me a little since upgrading to the 1000Pro, and this sounds better than ever. Plus, I have only tried correcting from about 4kHz upwards, there is much more I can do here. I am sure that I can optimise this further, but meanwhile, I am delighted by the results.
Also, many thanks for the recent posts, suggestions and comments.
@David A - Some very wise words in your post! In fact, there is only one point I do not fully agree with, you mention "There could be several reasons but I strongly suspect that part of it is simply that you're noticing the presence band more because of the aspects of the sound that you're paying attention to" In part, you are correct, I have most definitely been paying attention to treble and the presence band, no doubt about it. But this is missing the point, prior to installing the SOtM kit, I was not paying attention to treble or the presence band. It is a case of after installing the SOtM kit, the treble and presence band become subjectively more prominent, and this is why I started to pay so much attention to it. Yes, this might be a bit of a vicious circle, but I remain intrigued as to why improving resolution of the HF makes it subjectively more prominent. Oh, and there is no shortage of bass with the Blades! Yes, the peaks and nulls could be tidied up, but the Blades are showing decent levels down to 10Hz, which is adequate. That said, now that I have entered the room correction rabbit hole, tidying up the LF end of things has to be a good idea, something for the future. I absolutely agree with your point about making changes slowly though. My own rule is never change more than one thing at a time. If you can A/B test the change, do so, this provides a good reference. Then, live with the change for at least a month before changing anything else, it is not until you have lived with something for a while that you really understand it. In the case of my recent changes, I had my reasons for not following my own rules, in hindsight, this was a big mistake!
@Rama - I think I have written so much in some of my posts that the key points get lost a little. So one point to clarify, at first I thought I had some HF harshness, but after much experimenting, it became clear that the issue was not harshness, just that the HF subjectively sounded too prominent. You mention speaker cables, so for the record I can advise that I am using Chord Epic Reference cables, which I bought at a very good price when buying the Blades. If I am honest, I have heard the Blades with these, and with hugely expensive Chord Sarum cables, and couldn't really tell a blind bit of difference! It is not something I have experimented with much, maybe I should be more open-minded, but I kind of feel that if the cables are of a large gauge and made of copper, then it is more or less job done. The Chord Epic Reference cables do look good though, which is a bonus.
@PeppaPig - To add to Axel's comments, when you feed the Devialet via AES/EBU, the Devialet has to extract the clock signal from the source feed, so the better the clocking in the source, the better the sound, or at least that is the theory.
@cereal killer - Are you suggesting I go back to AIR?
Also, many thanks for the recent posts, suggestions and comments.
@David A - Some very wise words in your post! In fact, there is only one point I do not fully agree with, you mention "There could be several reasons but I strongly suspect that part of it is simply that you're noticing the presence band more because of the aspects of the sound that you're paying attention to" In part, you are correct, I have most definitely been paying attention to treble and the presence band, no doubt about it. But this is missing the point, prior to installing the SOtM kit, I was not paying attention to treble or the presence band. It is a case of after installing the SOtM kit, the treble and presence band become subjectively more prominent, and this is why I started to pay so much attention to it. Yes, this might be a bit of a vicious circle, but I remain intrigued as to why improving resolution of the HF makes it subjectively more prominent. Oh, and there is no shortage of bass with the Blades! Yes, the peaks and nulls could be tidied up, but the Blades are showing decent levels down to 10Hz, which is adequate. That said, now that I have entered the room correction rabbit hole, tidying up the LF end of things has to be a good idea, something for the future. I absolutely agree with your point about making changes slowly though. My own rule is never change more than one thing at a time. If you can A/B test the change, do so, this provides a good reference. Then, live with the change for at least a month before changing anything else, it is not until you have lived with something for a while that you really understand it. In the case of my recent changes, I had my reasons for not following my own rules, in hindsight, this was a big mistake!
@Rama - I think I have written so much in some of my posts that the key points get lost a little. So one point to clarify, at first I thought I had some HF harshness, but after much experimenting, it became clear that the issue was not harshness, just that the HF subjectively sounded too prominent. You mention speaker cables, so for the record I can advise that I am using Chord Epic Reference cables, which I bought at a very good price when buying the Blades. If I am honest, I have heard the Blades with these, and with hugely expensive Chord Sarum cables, and couldn't really tell a blind bit of difference! It is not something I have experimented with much, maybe I should be more open-minded, but I kind of feel that if the cables are of a large gauge and made of copper, then it is more or less job done. The Chord Epic Reference cables do look good though, which is a bonus.
@PeppaPig - To add to Axel's comments, when you feed the Devialet via AES/EBU, the Devialet has to extract the clock signal from the source feed, so the better the clocking in the source, the better the sound, or at least that is the theory.
@cereal killer - Are you suggesting I go back to AIR?
1000 Pro - KEF Blade - iFi Zen Stream - Mutec REF10 - MC3+USB - Pro-Ject Signature 12
