Yeah - that makes sense - it is what usually needs the most correction and is arguably least noticeable (in terms of artifacts/being able to tell it is being corrected), but people always told me bass was non-directional, and I sorta always disagreed, having played bass most of my life.
Yes - I meant that it “sounds better” in that it tames the given issues. So it is hard to argue with both that and the improved response curve. But it comes at a cost. No free lunch.
Also my experience with multiple sampling points in the room, while it may average things out for a larger group of listeners, it takes an additional toll at the sweet spot.
EQ or DSP are easy to “overly mess with” and literally make a mess of the sound. Best to start with a good room (very few do). Read Floyd Toole’s “Sound Reproduction” to get a handle on room effects, how bass behaves in-room, and what constitutes a good room. Next apply a proper speaker/listener setup, (again few do). Then add acoustically effective treatments. Finally tweak with EQ/DSP.
Nearly all rooms, setups, treatments I see online are garbage compared to the gear and almost nobody is knowledgable of room acoustics. After speakers the room is your second most important component. Most overload the room with bass (use fixed output extended range floor standers). Typical audiophile traits: over buy gear, then keep repeating; never learn what unamplified music sounds like; never learn how rooms behave acoustically; follow their untrained/subjective ears versus measurements.
What really makes the Ki3 special is the advanced use of controlled directivity. Earl Geddes was one of the first to develop the concept of blending woofer/tweeter directionality at the crossover point. Dutch & Dutch 8C uses similar technology. JBL 705, 708, and M2 also use controlled directivity (under the direction of Toole). Amphion, Genelec, KEF, and a few others have adopted the basic concepts as well, if not in name.
Hi @kin, you might trust Zeus’s honesty but do you trust his ears?
For me I view audio reviews as entertainment. Yes, the general sentiment does effect what products I will be focusing on. For cheap equipment I might buy on a recommedation but for the expensive stuff I reserve judgement until I get a chance to out myself.
Whether I will like the Navis or not, I would like to see other manufacturers take a similar approach. The idea of active analog crossover and taking out the power amp from the equation makes it easier to concentrate on the other stuff, IF you like the speaker. Without mucking with the sound too much. At least you know somebody has matched the amp to the speaker who is in the best position to do so.
I’ll join in the discussion. I don’t post very often and have mentioned my system elsewhere. I’ve built a room that’s 30’ * 20’ * 8’. Unfortunately where I want to sit there’s a huge null. I have been fiddling with multiamping and my own version of active speakers for about 25 years now. I built the large room about 7 years ago but found my old setup couldn’t really drive it. I use lots of absorption to control reverberation times (and use several large RPG bass traps to control low frequency reverberation) and my aim is to try to make the walls disappear. I don’t know what passive speakers would sound like in the room and the affect of all the damping might soak up too much treble. I’ll also add that I hate reflex enclosures and always use large transmission lines.
When I found out about the DEQX digital crossover it seemed like an obvious way to go because it works at 96/24 and can not only do the crossover but also allows the setting of parametric equalisation to facilitate EQ of the heavily damped room. So, with the DEQX calibrated for the speakers I just need to provide a very good digital signal and use its three coax digital outputs into great dacs/amps/speakers.
The vast majority of music I listen to is CD quality. However, it’s located on a Melco server and if 16/44.1 gets upscaled to 24/88.2 within a Chord M-Scaler to feed the DEQX (I actually go via a Wyred4Sound Remedy reclocker to covert to femtoclocked 24/96 for input to the DEQX).
The three 96/24 coax outputs from the DEQX feed three Direcstreams (again, via femtoclocked W4S reclockers). The whole system is run from a pair of P10s, the mid/treble amps are BHK250s and a powerful Crown amp does the bass. The speakers are massive PMC professional monitors (34mm treble, 75mm mid, 2 * 15" bass in massive transmission line enclosures).
This system is ultra clean to the point that a lot of people dislike it - they can’t accept that you don’t need to listen to room resonance - I’ve even had the comment that big speakers should sound like big speakers - ridiculous nonsense!). It took me ages to set the parametric equalisers to get the best sound. I can alter a parametric equaliser by .1 db and hear the difference, or change any cable and hear the difference. I can hear right into the mix and determine individual background singers. I can clearly hear the digital distortion that’s sometimes recorded which is undetectable on a lot of systems. A loud track such as Angie Stone’s 20 Dollars is so alive (unfortunately it’s one of the tracks with digital distortion which may or may not be intentional).
So, I think that any system that doesn’t facilitate EQ is unlikely to perform really well, so, if you need to do that digitally why not keep the whole signal digital right to the final dac - that’s what I can do and I have control over every stage of the process. It’s been great fun getting to where I am and I’ve had accolades from industry professionals such as:
what a great system, or
I should be very proud of what I’ve achieved.
I’ll just add one more thing - because it’s a big room I also have a 7.1.4 HT system using a Sony 4k projector onto a 10’ screen. I’d made my own subwoofers but decided to add a Velodyne DD18 Plus. I think Paul’s 100% right in going for servo control - the Velodyne is astonishing.
Many active monitors use a digital crossover to afford on-board DSP functions, so the analog signal coming out of your DAC would go through a A/D conversion and eventually another D/A conversion before going to the drivers. Quality of those conversions is an unknown, but extra conversions no matter how good can’t be a positive.
The idea of running a nice dac into a digital crossover makes no sense, when said dac costs $6000 or more, in my estimation. Even if it sounds great, I couldn’t justify the price of a high end dac in that scenario. To each his own.
Does an active crossover have to be digital though? I thought they could be analogue too which would get round the problem of doing a second digital conversion.
Yes, an active cross-over can be analog or digital (or even hybrid).
I have active, fully analog 3-way speakers. Out of curiosity I recently attended a lengthy demonstration of active, fully digital Backes und Müller. They sounded fantastic (the big ones). But I also struggled with the concept of feeding my precious DSD analog signal to another microchip… It’s our believe systems and investments that limit us
In the 1980s some people couldn’t get over the idea that a digital source could sound better than an analogue source. Some cave-dwellers still hold that view.
Then some could not get over an active speaker sounding better than a passive speaker, even though most professionals use active speakers.
Now people can’t get over that a signal can remain digital all the way to the drivers. I don’t see what Paul’s D/A conversion in the DSD DAC can add other than some form of distortion. At best it adds nothing and takes away nothing.
By this point, the cave is bursting at the seams.
When in the digital domain you have all the options. You don’t have to use DSP. You can use a little, like the Kii Three adjustment for proximity to the wall behind the speaker, or do the whole Genelec thing. You have the choice, with analog you don’t.
Starting fro scratch today - I’d have the Kii on demo - and try and work out how to get my turntable to play through them.
I like Darko more than any other reviewers put together. He’s non-technical, clear as a bell, gives you the information but doesn’t make up your mind for you. He doesn’t rabbit on about ancient products most people under 70 have never heard of or try and impress you with his record collection, or go on much about favourite music. He’s also aware that people have limited funds and mostly want value for money. He has an accent I understand, doesn’t use subsidiary clauses or pregnant pauses. He is not self-satisfied or smug, which is fairly common. He lives in a normal room with a view and natural light, not in a cellar (or cave) cut off from humanity. He is unlikely to be nocturnal, like most audiophiles, bats and a significant proportion of domestic vermin. I imagine he has a girlfriend/wife and she’s probably reasonably good-looking.
I also agree that active speakers with internal DACs is the future. Linn went that way years ago with their Exakt systems.
Not sure what this is supposed to mean? The DSD happens to be an incredible sounding DAC. Why would I want to use someones dac chip in an active speaker, as opposed to the DSD?
Paul said above that the magic cause is in the analogue stage, so if you use a speaker with internal DACs you lose the benefit of the analogue output stage of the DSD DAC.
Not sure how you compare a traditional DAC/pre-amp/amplifier/passive speaker with an active speaker with internal DACs and DSP because they are different beasts. That said, the latter is an integrated unit and whereas standalone DACs were all the rage 5 years ago with new models coming out all the time (I bought a PSA DAC before the DSD DAC came out), they seem to be much less popular these days in the more mainstream market.
When I started with streaming about 10 years ago there was a prediction that it would reach a practical level of perfection that subsequent progress would simply be reduction in cost, basically what happened with computers and 10 years earlier. I think that has happened, but limited to the ridiculously expensive distribution costs that still persist for quite a lot of audio equipment.
I’ve been around audio for 40 years. I’ve seen the evolution. Every dac, whether inside a speaker, or stand alone has an analog output. All the best dacs are stand alone imo.
If your speaker has to do A/D/A again, you lose a major benefit of a high end DAD where output stage in analogue makes all the difference
Darko reviews are awesome, I have yet to see him being biased, he never trashes any product like Zeos, which is more of a Brit/EU attitude vs. American. I don’t care if he gets his gear from companies, sometimes he doesn’t, but what I find is that he’s never come across and said this is the best ever product, etc…
DSP is awesome, but room treatment is even better! I’ve heard Navis and it sounded amazing in a treated room! What I love about it, is that you can skip the Digital part and IMPROVE the sound with better DAC, better input, etc… while that’s not possible on Genelec, or Ki3, or Kef.
Best DSP right now is ARC from Anthem and Direc Live… more tailored towards home theatre, but they’re absolutely the state of the art. I am actually going to upgrade my pre-amp/HT gear to either Anthem or NAD with one of these to also help with the stereo sound
At the end of the day, buy what sounds the best to your ears IN YOUR HOME!
