or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › BassThatHz Theater Build
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

BassThatHz Theater Build - Page 18

post #511 of 727
Well that should even make you want to upgrade your LCRs even more. You have everything else except you pre and yet you still contimplate if will be worth it.

DO IT DO IT!

You won't be dissapointed and even if you somehow are sell them and take it as a loss while being able to admit you at least tried upping your LCRs to more closely match the rest.
post #512 of 727
Thread Starter 
Just purchased an new Oppo BDP-105 WOOT WOOT! Should be here in a week or so! smile.gif

I wanted to try out the SABRE32 Reference ES9018 DAC. 32Bit/192khz. 135db Dynamic Range and -120db THD+N eek.gif

It has a USB DAC Input, which I will be using for 2-ch music, this will go directly into my amplifiers. XLR for the pro gear, and RCA for the "Hi-Fi" amps.



The HDMI 1 output will go into my projector.
The HDMI 2 output will go into my UMC-1.
My UMC-1 now becomes nothing more than a HDMI-enabled FM tuner and a HDMI Cable TV relay, with an XLR LFE subwoofer output (the SW on the oppo goes unused).
The HDMI TV out of the UMC-1 will go into the input on the Oppo (for when I want to listen to the radio over HDMI or cable TV).

So in summary the Oppo 105 now becomes my Video Processor, movie and music DAC and analog "pre-amp". Did I mention: 192khz and 135DNR and -120THD+N smile.gif

I hope this thing works wonders, otherwise it is going back to the store!!!

(More info here: http://www.oppodigital.com/blu-ray-bdp-105/)
post #513 of 727
Thread Starter 
Here's some Transistor Porn. Sexy! biggrin.gif

post #514 of 727
Thread Starter 
OMG!!!!!! That's all I can say. Throw your AVR's in the crash RIGHT NOW and buy one of these! (Heck even 99% of pre-pro's and pre's too!)

The reviewer said: it was testing the limits of his $40,000 AP bench tester and the Nyquist Sampling Frequency! Nicely done Oppo!

There is no WAY I could be unhappy with these DAC results. This is world-class, and for relatively-cheap!
Now I'm not going to be able to sleep for the next WEEK! tongue.gif








By comparison, my current DAC looks aweful:
-77db vs -115db second harmonic @ 2khz.
-100db vs -130db in bass region and -115db treble vs -130db. LOL that's a lot better!

Edited by BassThatHz - 5/20/13 at 2:36am
post #515 of 727
Yea, I saw that before. That would do very nicely with an HTPC using JRiver.
post #516 of 727
Yes, it looks great but what about EQ and such.
post #517 of 727
Meh, I had a 105, it was fine and everything but if you're not using the analog only, it's a waste of money vs the 103. For digital, they are the exact same. I haven't used analog anything in that last 5 years at least and I'll never use it again. Even in 2 channel, it didn't do anything better than my 80.3 does. I since sold it and got a 103 and bought some other gear with the difference.
Thats not to say it's not a great unit but it wasn't worth it to for me since I'm digital everything.
post #518 of 727
Those are pretty damn impressive results but it needs to have other functionality for me to want to dump my AVR for one.
post #519 of 727
Whether a considering a pre/pro, or nice player like the Oppo, the big audible gains are found elsewhere.

Addressing the room, and both it's decay characteristics in the LF, and (primarily) three treatment panels/absorption locations, would likely transform your system's attributes into the stratosphere. You've got all the LF capability in the world, yet I'd guess it's not fully realized due to a problematic lack of LF damping.


I've got an Oppo too, they're superb. High-end playback, made affordable. Plus, it'll do anything/play anything. The quality DAC, to analog XLR outs, is so sweet. Spend some time with the manual, the capabilities are just great.

Also, a properly optimized SEOS based approach would outperform your current set-up, IMO. But, I hesitate to recommend any hardware based purchases until the LF decay (bass trapping) is addressed. That's my take, fwiw. I've given much thought as to a ground up room build, and I think you missed a killer opportunity when building the walls to incorporate some simple damping techniques. But I realize you had other priorities, and that cool too. The room turned out nice, I just would've incorporated some other acoustic elements into the boundaries.

A SEOS approach would lower distortion for realistic or live type playback levels. The B&Ws are great, but a well executed compression HF approach can achieve wonderful things.

"honky/bright/distorted sounding"

Not at all. Plus the controlled directivity inherent to the SEOS design, helps minimize the room's negative influences and can likely increase IACC, and thus a higher level of resolution into the recorded event. Also, properly set up, and by utilizing time-intensity trading, one can create a huge sweet spot, whereby the image is stable over a big listening area.

Bill Waslo describes it here.

All said, if you really like the B&W mains, I'd not change.

Best of luck
post #520 of 727
You don't need to replace all your speakers to try out the SEOS designs. Just build 1 pair. You can even order the CNC cut cabinet to make it easier to assemble.

I recommend you check out these:
http://www.diysoundgroup.com/waveguide-speaker-kits/fusion12-kit.html

And no, you can't really swap the horns for your tweeter for a number of reasons. 1) not level/sensitivity matched 2) not impedance matched 3) crossover point not ideal. It's not going to sound good if it's more sensitive than your current tweeter, the phase might be way off, the response might not work at that particular crossover point or slope. Lots of reasons why that won't work.
post #521 of 727
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8DOGG View Post

Meh, I had a 105, it was fine and everything but if you're not using the analog only, it's a waste of money vs the 103. I'm digital everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian View Post

it needs to have other functionality for me to want to dump my AVR for one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MKtheater View Post

Yes, it looks great but what about EQ and such.

I'm 90% 2-ch music so having the shortest and purest unmodified signal path is a must-have. The -77 distortion in my current DAC is clearly audible to me, and it has been bugging me for 6 years now. (No other AVR or Pre-pro I've tried did a better job; most had far worse quality)
I don't use any EQ on my mains (nor surrounds), never have, never will; if find it adds too much noise and distortion. I hate distortion with a passion.

The 103 DAC is much lower quality (if you use it, which you don't). It also lacked the differentially balanced XLR that I need, and a USB DAC (both of which are at -120db or better).

Basically, I just want the signal to go from digital to analog and then into the amps. Which this does.
The subwoofers and bass woofers get EQ, but the mids and tweets don't.
post #522 of 727
Have you ever measured your response and THD? With my EQ in my chain I get a out 1.6% THD at reference at my LP so not audible at all.
post #523 of 727
Quote:
Originally Posted by djkest View Post

You don't need to replace all your speakers to try out the SEOS designs. Just build 1 pair. You can even order the CNC cut cabinet to make it easier to assemble.

I recommend you check out these:
http://www.diysoundgroup.com/waveguide-speaker-kits/fusion12-kit.html

And no, you can't really swap the horns for your tweeter for a number of reasons. 1) not level/sensitivity matched 2) not impedance matched 3) crossover point not ideal. It's not going to sound good if it's more sensitive than your current tweeter, the phase might be way off, the response might not work at that particular crossover point or slope. Lots of reasons why that won't work.

This 315.00 speaker is really better than B&W 803's? What are the negatives to these speakers? Having to build them yourself? Ugly?
post #524 of 727
"The -77 distortion in my current DAC is clearly audible to me"

are you sure that you are hearing what you think that you are hearing? i suspect that you might be hearing something, but -77db distortion probably isn't it.
post #525 of 727
Quote:
Originally Posted by WagBoss View Post

This 315.00 speaker is really better than B&W 803's? What are the negatives to these speakers? Having to build them yourself? Ugly?

I don't know if they are better, but it seems a lot of new members don't know that diysoundgroup is not a speaker store in the sense that it doesn't make a profit. It's run by a very generous member on this forum with help from many other members and components are shipped at cost.

All this is to help the DIY community. Understanding that, its easy to see that this $315 speaker would sell for $1500+ if it were commercialized.
post #526 of 727
Thread Starter 
I think it's a DAC and circuitry self-noise problem and maybe a slight digital clock sync transport issue.
It should be noted that this isn't a problem for blu-ray because blu-ray has lossless & encrypted encodings, removing the transport issue from the equalization completely, and also has a native bit depth and sample rate far beyond the -96db theoretical maximum for CD quality;
which helps overcome nearly all of the DAC noise problems at lower rates. (Ignoring downstream EQ/DSP)

Unfortunately 99% of music is still CD quality.
So this only is noticeable with 16/44.1khz CD-quality sources. Basically music that was extracted off a CD and transported with Raw PCM between devices.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MKtheater View Post

Have you ever measured your response and THD? With my EQ in my chain I get a out 1.6% THD at reference at my LP so not audible at all.
Here's the frequency response I was getting with the same gear in my previous theater. Which had the same "problem" (not really a problem, just hair-splitting).

I haven't measured the THD, not sure if I trust my SPL meter or ECM8000 enough to take an accurate spectrum snap; I would imagine that it isn't poor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

"The -77 distortion in my current DAC is clearly audible to me" are you sure that you are hearing what you think that you are hearing? i suspect that you might be hearing something, but -77db distortion probably isn't it.
I'm not entirely sure, I could create a video of my system with the auto-eq applied (UMC-1 stereo DSP mode) in non-upsampled 44.1k (regular quality) vs the raw 192khz upsampled ASIO streaming in pure-mode (highest quality). It might be noticeable even over youtube...
To me the EQ/DSP mode robs the sound of all life, ok maybe not all but good deal of it; it gives it a sort of digital sheen/mask.
It's a rather small difference, but that small difference; is all the difference there is between a $1500 system vs a $40,000 system SQ wise (level matched of course).

To me this life-robbing-quantization-noise (for lack of a better phrase) is what kills the experience for me, and making me want the "that's it" sound. Enough to go out and buy the 105, when a regular BD player would otherwise suffice.
post #527 of 727
Thread Starter 
Here is the raw wave file and youtube version.

UMC-1 DAC Test: AutoEQ 44.1khz (worst), 192khz ASIO (best), No-EQ 44.1khz (norm)
(Subwoofers Off)

Youtube camera stream:


Raw camera mic wave file:
http://ge.tt/5HZSLDh/v/0


As per the UMC-1 review article:


I'm hoping the 105 beats this hands down.
post #528 of 727
I would make sure the response is the same as before since you liked it before. I would also check the THD to see what you are getting at that level and compression sweeps. Just rule out everything before changing things. I bet the EQ done manually in the UMC-1 would be much better than the auto EQ function. The only way to know for sure is compare responses and listen to them.
post #529 of 727
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MKtheater View Post

I would make sure the response is the same as before since you liked it before. I would also check the THD to see what you are getting at that level and compression sweeps. Just rule out everything before changing things. I bet the EQ done manually in the UMC-1 would be much better than the auto EQ function. The only way to know for sure is compare responses and listen to them.

Nope, just engaging the EQ all-flat causes a massive degradation of sound quality. Similar to the wave file above.
Note: I didn't like the sound before, and I still don't. Well maybe that's a bit "too strong" of a wording, let's just say, I'm all but certain it can do "much better" being feed by the 105 instead of the UMC-1.
post #530 of 727
I never liked my UMC-1 I owned and the newer processors I have are much better but I still EQ using a DCX 2496. My processors are considered on the higher end side though. The only problem using this oppo as a processor is that you can't connect anything else to it like cable, x-box, PS3, etc... Can you?
post #531 of 727
Quote:
Originally Posted by BassThatHz View Post

Here is the raw wave file and youtube version.

Sorry but FYI, all these YouTube posts sound completely retched so its almost impossible to gather any useful information from them. It is a shame because many of them seem interesting but I find myself regretting clicking on almost every one of them!
post #532 of 727
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SXRDork View Post

Sorry but FYI, all these YouTube posts sound completely retched so its almost impossible to gather any useful information from them. It is a shame because many of them seem interesting but I find myself regretting clicking on almost every one of them!

SXRDork: Here are two sinewaves played through my speakers. Basically an IMD Test done with speakers. They sound reasonably accurate to me. No?

There can be no disputing the accuracy of sinewaves. wink.gif

45hz and 4khz IMD Test

Not too shaby for a 50cent "made in china" mic.

http://ge.tt/4hBW4Eh/v/0


Quote:
Originally Posted by MKtheater View Post

I never liked my UMC-1 I owned and the newer processors I have are much better but I still EQ using a DCX 2496. My processors are considered on the higher end side though. The only problem using this oppo as a processor is that you can't connect anything else to it like cable, x-box, PS3, etc... Can you?

You can, but it can only do 1 HDMI input, otherwise you need an HDMI switching box. It's definitely geared to be more of a "Disc Player with an uber-DAC for a limited number of other digital sound-only sources too" rather than a "massive be-all video routing/sound matrix array" box. So you'd still have to augment it with a AVR or External Processor if you need to connect the kitchen sink to it.
Edited by BassThatHz - 5/21/13 at 12:33am
post #533 of 727
Thread Starter 
Crap, after reading the 105 manual. Looks like it might not be able to bitstream both the signal over HDMI2 AND Sabre Decode it to the analogs concurrently?
Not because it probably can't, but because there isn't a menu option for that in the software?

In any case, I can use the SW RCA output jack into the UMC-1 RCA SW Input jack to then be converted to XLR, instead of over HDMI. Which is probably the better connection anyways.

and another thing that made me sad when I read it (assuming I read it correctly), is that it can't bitstream both Audio and Video over both HDMI ports. 1 is video only and 2 is audio only in dual-mode OR bitstreaming on only ONE PORT AT A TIME? confused.gif

Luckly that too is not a problem, since I don't need that feature.


But the worst of all... it doesn't support the full Bluray HD Audio via the HDMI input jack. What??? confused.gif
Only up to 6 PCM or DD+ downmix!
So now I'd have to reverse the flow of all the HDMI ports OR require a projector with two HDMI input jacks (which I have), but there is no work-around for the audio.
Oppo what are you thinking? confused.gif No 7.1 external input into the Sabre DAC???????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Disc Only. Wow that's a pretty big blunder...
Since 2-ch music is my priority, I guess for now I won't have support for full HD Audio off my Cable TV without rewiring my amps each time. Luckily not a show-stopper because I have YET to try that mode on that device, most TV programming is just old DD5.1; but still a future pain point.
post #534 of 727
post #535 of 727
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SXRDork View Post

Sorry but FYI, all these YouTube posts sound completely retched so its almost impossible to gather any useful information from them. It is a shame because many of them seem interesting but I find myself regretting clicking on almost every one of them!

My room is nearly a full anechoic chamber, for example: on my side walls I have a 60% absorption coverage 76sqft out of 128sqft. x2
My ceiling has 43% coverage, 172sqft out of 400sqft.
At a rating of 100% above ~300hz or so.
Additionally the floor is half plush-carpet (adding even MORE absorption).

Needless to say it's extremely dry and void of almost all reflections. (I like my sound extremely flat and dry.)
As such, it has a totally different acoustical-profile than anything you are likely acustomed to.

Additionally, I have ten 18's in this room, so if they are moving even 3mm's (which they do often) you'd have to have a single 18" moving 30mm's to match the SPL that my system does effortlessly.

Additionally, the mic isn't Spielberg-quality either (to say the least).

All of which may only ADD to the frustration of trying to both record, and play back the stuff.

It's a complicated beast, and not much can be done about it.
post #536 of 727
Good news! Bossobass is using the oppo 105 and says it is much better than his onkyo processor and he gets about 3-5 dBs gain at 3 hz with it! It is making me want one!
post #537 of 727
Quote:
Originally Posted by BassThatHz View Post

My room is nearly a full anechoic chamber, for example: on my side walls I have a 60% absorption coverage 76sqft out of 128sqft. x2
My ceiling has 43% coverage, 172sqft out of 400sqft.
At a rating of 100% above ~300hz or so.
Additionally the floor is half plush-carpet (adding even MORE absorption).

Needless to say it's extremely dry and void of almost all reflections. (I like my sound extremely flat and dry.)
As such, it has a totally different acoustical-profile than anything you are likely acustomed to.

Additionally, I have ten 18's in this room, so if they are moving even 3mm's (which they do often) you'd have to have a single 18" moving 30mm's to match the SPL that my system does effortlessly.

Additionally, the mic isn't Spielberg-quality either (to say the least).

All of which may only ADD to the frustration of trying to both record, and play back the stuff.

It's a complicated beast, and not much can be done about it.

Yes, I understand. I'm sure your system sounds amazing in your room. smile.gif

Sigh, I must admit that I have been listening to low bitrate versions. frown.gif I just learned yesterday that YouTube's audio quality is linked with video quality. (I must be getting old. I'm out of touch with the YouTube generation, haha) My default playback settings were somewhat low (320p I think). I just re-listened to your UMC-1 DAC test on headphones and yes, I can tell a difference and I agree that AutoEQ sounded the worst. The other two sounded about the same to me. Honestly, I'm not that surprised that Emotiva's AutoEQ sounded poor. They don't exactly have the best track record in implementing equalization...
post #538 of 727
BTW, I have 4 18's so they'd only have to be moving like 7.5 mm tongue.gif Still working on treatments, at the moment EQ is my friend...
post #539 of 727
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MKtheater View Post

Good news! Bossobass is using the oppo 105 and says it is much better than his onkyo processor and he gets about 3-5 dBs gain at 3 hz with it! It is making me want one!
Well that's good news because I don't get ANY response below 5hz, the UMC-1 literally starts making popping and farting noises at those frequencies. It's very annoying.
Another thing that sucks about it, is that it has channel seperation or grounding issues at bass frequencies, so if the Left channel has bass at 0 degrees and the Right channel has bass at 180degrees, they cancel out and you get no sound, which is bad because I have at least two songs with stereophonic bass as such.
One from Bassotronics and another from Bass Mekanik, and I've been unable to play either of them for years now.

I have stereo-bass BTW, 5 on the Left, 5 on the Right. With the ability to add LFE to any of the subs connected to the DCX (via input ch 3).

I'm really hoping the 105 and DCX doesn't also share this issue. (I'll find out soon enough.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SXRDork View Post

I'm not that surprised that Emotiva's AutoEQ sounded poor. They don't exactly have the best track record in implementing equalization...
Yeah it sounded godawful. If I was an EQ circuitry teacher, little Jimmy would be repeating a grade. hehe wink.gif
Edited by BassThatHz - 5/22/13 at 9:39am
post #540 of 727
The reasons I did not like the UMC-1! I also have the DCX doing EQ and DSP for my center. I happen to have x-box, ps3, cable as well so the oppo would still need a processor for me.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DIY Speakers and Subs
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › BassThatHz Theater Build