Arnyk: Thoughts on this Room Correction device. DSP Anti-mode Dual Core?? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 21 Old 08-16-2012, 01:24 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
syd123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: mid-atlantic region of US
Posts: 449
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Arnyk (and any/ all others, of course)...

Given your strong support of room correction devices and ostensible knowledge of same, I'm curious to know your thoughts on this device. I'm considering installing this b/w the pre-amp out and amp-in jacks of my McIntosh MA6600 Integrated amp.

Yes... I know there are much cheaper ways to achieve room-corrected amplification than using the McIntosh/ DSP combo, but I very much like the aesthetics and operational feel of the Mac Integrated, so I'm not looking to replace it. However, if there are cheaper alternatives to the DSP Dual Core, I'd love to know what they are.

Thanks,

Syd123

http://www.dspeaker.com/en/products/20-dual-core.shtml

edit: ..BTW. ..To the extent that it matters, my speakers are floor-standers (Paradigm Signature S8 v2.) ..I have no plans for integrated subs into my system. Given this, can I still expect some benefit from using room-correction?
syd123 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 21 Old 08-16-2012, 02:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lovinthehd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: OROR
Posts: 7,336
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 509 Post(s)
Liked: 1024
You might ask here http://www.avsforum.com/t/1392947/how-good-is-the-new-antimode-dual-core-eq

"I realize that somebody playing free music isn't as commercial as a hamburger stand. But is it because you can eat a hamburger and hold it in your hand and you can't do that with music? Is it too free to control?" - Don Van Vliet (aka Captain Beefheart) discussing commercial success in the music biz


lovinthehd is online now  
post #3 of 21 Old 08-16-2012, 04:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MarkHotchkiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Long Beach, California
Posts: 1,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 82
Hi Syd,

It is a strange bird, indeed. The specs look impressive, but you need to notice what they don't say.

Here are some observations. They are not necessarily bad, just unusual.

First-off, it is based on some low-cost OGG-Vorbis decoder chips from VLSI (they also do FLAC and MP3), meant for battery-powered music players.

Second, they appear locked to a 48kHz sample-rate. That's not an issue when it is analog in and out, and the built-in sample-rate converter can down-convert (or upconvert, if 44.1kHz) to 48kHz if the input is digital. Notice that the sample-rate was not mentioned, except for the meaningless 6.144 mHz system-clock, to keep from scaring-off the high-sample-rate crowd.

They mention that the processing is 40-bits, but that is a stretch. The DSP accumulator may be 40 bits, but the DSP's native data-buses are all 16 bits. Again, I suspect they didn't want to scare away the 24-bit crowd.

The DAC is 18-bits. Again, it's not something they would want to mention.

The one specification that I would question is the >108dB dynamic range as the VS8053 DSP lists Dynamic Range (DAC unmuted, A-weighted) as 100dB, and the VS1000 lists Dynamic range (DAC unmuted, A-weighted, min gain) as 96dB. Still, all numbers are adequate.

Now, the real worth of this device would be in the firmware that has been added to do the specialized job that it was designed to perform. Anything unusual about the implementation is really meaningless if it succeeds at that job. Still, 715 euro seems awfully high for something based on commodity chips designed for low-cost MP3 players.
BarracudaDelGato likes this.
MarkHotchkiss is offline  
post #4 of 21 Old 08-16-2012, 08:40 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
syd123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: mid-atlantic region of US
Posts: 449
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Your knowledge about this is wayyy beyond mine. ..So what you're saying is that this device isn't transparent? Well that would be disappointing. ...But I guess I should tell you that I don't have the hearing quality that many here at AVS have (or at least claim to have...). For example, I don't hear any difference b/w various sample rates or b/w an Apple Lossles file and say a 356kp MP3. ..So I'm not sure that the inadequacies your citing would be of much significance to me.

The reason I'm considering this device is because the room in which my system is located is very reverberant and I'm not going to be able to deal with all the reflections by hanging wall treatments or bass traps. So I'm hoping that this thing will go at least part of the way in reducing the effects these reflections have on my music (which accounts for 95% of what I use my system for).

thx for your reply Mark!!
syd123 is offline  
post #5 of 21 Old 08-16-2012, 09:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MarkHotchkiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Long Beach, California
Posts: 1,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 82
Hi Syd,

Don't get me wrong, the only inadequacy I can see is the price, and depending on how well it works, that might not be an inadequacy at all. The specs are all up where you need them.

I guess my observation boils down to this: the parts they used are more suited for something completely different: a portable MP3 player. There are DSPs designed to do exactly what this device does, but they instead used a DSP designed for battery operation, with the limitations that battery operation requires (which is what required them to be cagey with the specs). But that doesn't mean that they weren't entirely successful in accomplishing what they set out to do, it just means that they might have made it harder on themselves to get there. It also makes marketing more difficult, as they didn't have all of the latest buzzwords available.

The price still seems high to me. You should have a look at miniDSP for similar products with a lower cost.
MarkHotchkiss is offline  
post #6 of 21 Old 08-16-2012, 11:31 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
I listened to a prototype of this at CES and spoke to their engineers. The demo sounded good and their people seemed quite friendly. From what I recall though it does not have a PC interface and the display is quite small. So if you want a black box that automatically does its thing, which is what they said was the target market, it is a good solution.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #7 of 21 Old 08-17-2012, 05:17 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 763 Post(s)
Liked: 1178
Quote:
Originally Posted by syd123 View Post

Arnyk (and any/ all others, of course)...
Given your strong support of room correction devices and ostensible knowledge of same, I'm curious to know your thoughts on this device. I'm considering installing this b/w the pre-amp out and amp-in jacks of my McIntosh MA6600 Integrated amp.
Yes... I know there are much cheaper ways to achieve room-corrected amplification than using the McIntosh/ DSP combo, but I very much like the aesthetics and operational feel of the Mac Integrated, so I'm not looking to replace it. However, if there are cheaper alternatives to the DSP Dual Core, I'd love to know what they are.
Thanks,
Syd123
http://www.dspeaker.com/en/products/20-dual-core.shtml
edit: ..BTW. ..To the extent that it matters, my speakers are floor-standers (Paradigm Signature S8 v2.) ..I have no plans for integrated subs into my system. Given this, can I still expect some benefit from using room-correction?

I would be unable to comment on a product like this until I had personal experience with it.
arnyk is offline  
post #8 of 21 Old 08-17-2012, 06:45 AM
Advanced Member
 
terry j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by syd123 View Post

The reason I'm considering this device is because the room in which my system is located is very reverberant and I'm not going to be able to deal with all the reflections by hanging wall treatments or bass traps. S

You'd better make sure you are using the right terms in the description. Reverberant (per my understanding or how I would use that word) is not something curable by these type of products. So you'd better nail that one down.
terry j is offline  
post #9 of 21 Old 08-17-2012, 10:33 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
syd123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: mid-atlantic region of US
Posts: 449
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by terry j View Post

You'd better make sure you are using the right terms in the description. Reverberant (per my understanding or how I would use that word) is not something curable by these type of products. So you'd better nail that one down.

Well, I'm not sure I'm using the word "reverberent" properly, but what I'm trying to describe is that my listening room has a fair amount of echo. It's quite large (18' x 22'), has vaulted ceilings, rug-covered hardwood floors and the end opposite to my speakers opens up to the kitchen. ..So it has some weird elements. And, as I said, I really can't go about placing bass traps or sound treatments everywhere. ...So I'm wondering if a DSP room correction device would help. ..And I'm definitely looking for a plug it in and forget kinda thing. I have no interest in hooking it up to a laptop to customize contouring, etc...

Of course, I'd love to hear of other devices that might accomplish the same thing...

thanks to all!

syd
syd123 is offline  
post #10 of 21 Old 08-17-2012, 11:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New Milford, CT, USA
Posts: 5,748
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by syd123 View Post

my listening room has a fair amount of echo.

Electronic devices like that will not reduce echo or reverb. Not even a little.
Quote:
I'd love to hear of other devices that might accomplish the same thing.

The only thing that will do what you need is acoustic treatment, specifically absorbing panels.

--Ethan

RealTraps - The acoustic treatment experts
Ethan's Audio Expert book

Ethan Winer is offline  
post #11 of 21 Old 08-17-2012, 01:31 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by syd123 View Post

Well, I'm not sure I'm using the word "reverberent" properly, but what I'm trying to describe is that my listening room has a fair amount of echo. It's quite large (18' x 22'), has vaulted ceilings, rug-covered hardwood floors and the end opposite to my speakers opens up to the kitchen. ..So it has some weird elements. And, as I said, I really can't go about placing bass traps or sound treatments everywhere. ...So I'm wondering if a DSP room correction device would help. ..And I'm definitely looking for a plug it in and forget kinda thing. I have no interest in hooking it up to a laptop to customize contouring, etc...
Of course, I'd love to hear of other devices that might accomplish the same thing...
thanks to all!
syd
Can you add more furnishings to the room? I am talking curtains, art work that is made out of fabric (e.g. quilts), seating, bookcases, etc? All of these help to reduce reverberation times. So you are definitely not stuck with traditional acoustic products.

As noted no electronic product fixes a room that is too live although some do compensate for timbre (tonal) effect. That compensation may actually degrade the sound by the way so it is important to listen before/after.

Note that you definitely have low frequency reproduction problems in addition to above as all rooms have that problem. So the DSP will help that, reducing the boominess that may be there.

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #12 of 21 Old 08-18-2012, 02:29 AM
Member
 
fightclub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 123
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
i just got one for my Roksan Caspian CD+AMP+ProAc 1sc. It really helps to automatically lower down the too much base in my small room. I love it. BTW, pls note it only has coxial digital input.
fightclub is offline  
post #13 of 21 Old 08-18-2012, 06:06 AM
Advanced Member
 
terry j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by syd123 View Post

Well, I'm not sure I'm using the word "reverberent" properly, but what I'm trying to describe is that my listening room has a fair amount of echo. It's quite large (18' x 22'), has vaulted ceilings, rug-covered hardwood floors and the end opposite to my speakers opens up to the kitchen. ..So it has some weird elements. And, as I said, I really can't go about placing bass traps or sound treatments everywhere. ...So I'm wondering if a DSP room correction device would help. ..And I'm definitely looking for a plug it in and forget kinda thing. I have no interest in hooking it up to a laptop to customize contouring, etc...
Of course, I'd love to hear of other devices that might accomplish the same thing...
thanks to all!
syd

Well 'echo' is the word I feared if you follow. That is not the realm these devices will correct. As amir said you could also have bass problems-almost universal-but if that has not even appeared on your radar as an obvious problem (even tho you might appreciate it if gone) rather the word 'echo' does, then I fear you could be looking in the wrong area.

I appreciate these things might not be a permanent solution, but try hanging heavy rugs, blankets whatever and see if the 'echo' problem improves. If it does then it more surely points to dsp not being the solution to the problem bugging you right now.

It should be enough perhaps that you will notice the difference even without music playing (ie, do too 'little' and it won't actually be a helpful experiment)

If it helps, yet you don't want permanent acoustic solutions....I guess you gotta try and get as much absorption in there as you can yet not have it look like treatment, if looks is the problem.

If not looks but cost (for example) then there are plenty of diy solutions available.

There are cheap ways to test this. The main thing is to KNOW where you are going, hence the experiments.
terry j is offline  
post #14 of 21 Old 08-20-2012, 10:27 AM
Member
 
a1bert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkHotchkiss View Post

Now, the real worth of this device would be in the firmware that has been added to do the specialized job that it was designed to perform. Anything unusual about the implementation is really meaningless if it succeeds at that job. Still, 715 euro seems awfully high for something based on commodity chips designed for low-cost MP3 players.

Aren't you contradicting yourself here? You say that the magic is in the firmware, then go on saying the unit is too expensive because of the components used. So, I have trouble deciding which point you are making.. :-)
a1bert is offline  
post #15 of 21 Old 08-20-2012, 12:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MarkHotchkiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Long Beach, California
Posts: 1,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 82
Hi Albert,

Yeah, I guess it does sound a little contradictory. But that's because I'm only looking at the device, and not listening to it or testing it. Firmware can be worth an awful lot. Here are two perspectives, and I can't say which one is more applicable:

If this "Anti-mode" DSP firmware that this device is based on was developed by this company, and if it works really well, they they deserve to profit from their investment. In that situation, the cost of the parts are not really relevant to what they should be charging for the unit. They are selling the firmware, and that could easily be worth 730 euro.

If, on the other hand, the firmware was developed by someone else and they are simply licensing it, then they have competition and would have a harder time justifying the price. License costs are not usually that high. It would also be hard to justify the cost if "anti-mode" didn't really work better then the myriad of other algorithms available. In those situations, it appears they are competing against devices like the miniDSP, which is about one-fifth the price, or the AVRs that come standard with similar capabilities.

So I was trying to say that it could go either way . . . I am very aware of the wonders that DSP processing can do, but I also know that audio algorithms are already well developed and available for the downloading. And I'm very aware of the potential to make a killing off of a simple buzzword, when it's portrayed as a miracle breakthrough. So I really can't pass judgment on this device right now.
MarkHotchkiss is offline  
post #16 of 21 Old 08-21-2012, 02:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CruelInventions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 4,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 200
There is a long-running Anti-Mode thread around here somewhere, mostly centered around the previous generation(s) of the product. Not as active as it used to be but it should provide enough information to address these latter questions. The gist seems to be that with the Anti-Mode products, very little knowledge and "tweaking" is required from the user, yet it provides almost as good results as the more knowledge and time intensive solutions. It gets you most of the way there without having to crack the manual or seek guidance for it in a dedicated thread. I suspect the dual-core version is very much in the same vein.

Mourning the disappearing usage of the -ly suffix. Words being cut-off before they've had a chance to fully form, left incomplete, with their shoelaces untied and their zippers undone. If I quote your post (or post in your thread) without comment, please check your zipper.
CruelInventions is offline  
post #17 of 21 Old 05-25-2013, 07:11 PM
Newbie
 
growers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: California
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkHotchkiss View Post

Hi Syd,

It is a strange bird, indeed. The specs look impressive, but you need to notice what they don't say.

Here are some observations. They are not necessarily bad, just unusual.

First-off, it is based on some low-cost OGG-Vorbis decoder chips from VLSI (they also do FLAC and MP3), meant for battery-powered music players.

Second, they appear locked to a 48kHz sample-rate. That's not an issue when it is analog in and out, and the built-in sample-rate converter can down-convert (or upconvert, if 44.1kHz) to 48kHz if the input is digital. Notice that the sample-rate was not mentioned, except for the meaningless 6.144 mHz system-clock, to keep from scaring-off the high-sample-rate crowd.

They mention that the processing is 40-bits, but that is a stretch. The DSP accumulator may be 40 bits, but the DSP's native data-buses are all 16 bits. Again, I suspect they didn't want to scare away the 24-bit crowd.

The DAC is 18-bits. Again, it's not something they would want to mention.

The one specification that I would question is the >108dB dynamic range as the VS8053 DSP lists Dynamic Range (DAC unmuted, A-weighted) as 100dB, and the VS1000 lists Dynamic range (DAC unmuted, A-weighted, min gain) as 96dB. Still, all numbers are adequate.

Now, the real worth of this device would be in the firmware that has been added to do the specialized job that it was designed to perform. Anything unusual about the implementation is really meaningless if it succeeds at that job. Still, 715 euro seems awfully high for something based on commodity chips designed for low-cost MP3 players.
Great post. The reason that DSPeaker are using the $1-2 VLSI DSP with integrated DAC is because VLSI is the parent company. Given the parts cost for this product I would think ~€300 would be a good price including a healthy m,ark-up for the firmware development. There's a VS8053 demo board on the VLSI web store that comes with the same display as the Dual Core - it's €100.
growers is offline  
post #18 of 21 Old 05-26-2013, 09:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,458
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 175 Post(s)
Liked: 115
Damn that's expensive for what it does. MiniDSP or Behringer could do the same with similar or better specs for much less and a PC interface.
Just noticed the dates.
A9X-308 is offline  
post #19 of 21 Old 05-27-2013, 07:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Martycool007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,692
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 280 Post(s)
Liked: 172
I am trying to understand why the Firmware would be of any value? Perhaps I don't fully understand what Firmware is or what it does, but I was under the impression that firmware was simply a method of sending patches and fixes to various electronics. Can someone explain this to me?
Martycool007 is offline  
post #20 of 21 Old 05-27-2013, 12:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MarkHotchkiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Long Beach, California
Posts: 1,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 82
Hi Marty,

The firmware is simply the program that the processor inside the device is running.

The term came from a combination of the terms "software" and "hardware". Software was the program running inside a computer, and was "soft" because it could be loaded and unloaded at will. Hardware was the physical electronics, typically in the form of integrated circuits on printed-circuit boards, that ran the program, and was "hard" because it was permanently cast in silicon.

Then, one day, someone put the "software" program in a "hardware" ROM chip, and plugged it into the computer hardware. It was no longer "soft", because it couldn't be loaded and unloaded at will, but wasn't quite "hard" because it could be unplugged and replaced. So it was deemed to be "firm" - a combination of hard and soft.

In the case of the DSPeaker, the firmware is the program that implements their "Anti-mode" algorithm. Therefore, the firmware contains the "secret-sauce" of their device.
BarracudaDelGato likes this.
MarkHotchkiss is offline  
post #21 of 21 Old 06-11-2013, 10:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
RicardoJoa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Posts: 628
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 22
I found out this product from AC. I thought that the Emotiva UMC200 can do similar functions or even better ones. The only thing about emotiva, is that it seems that ocasional problems with it after reading their forum. A processor like the UMC200 can be quiet handy, specially when one consider sub integration. It has PEQ, Xovers, and is able to adjsut pahse on both the front and sub, which can make integration easier.
Alot of people dont like processing the digital signal though. I wonder how much worse can it get compare to like DAC and straight down to all anolgue.
RicardoJoa is offline  
Reply 2-Channel Audio

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off