Latest Thread Images

IMG_20250108_212527.jpg
20250108_195838.jpg
IMG_20250108_123428.jpg
IMG_20250108_121454.jpg
image 33.png
radio pic 3.jpg
LGMA.png UAPP.png Screenshot_20201205-172052.jpg IMG_20201205_172122.jpg Screenshot_20201205-172652.jpg Screenshot_20201027-220746.png Screenshot_20201014-124011.png Screenshot_20200807-074048.png Screenshot_20200513-141331.png Screenshot_20200513-141318.png Capture+_2020-01-10-21-06-10.png terrified.gif Screenshot_20191003-205442.png Screenshot_20191003-205429.png
See full thread gallery...

Featured Sponsor Listings

LG V40 ThinQ

Switching from V30

  • Yes

    Votes: 47 41.6%

  • No

    Votes: 66 58.4%
  • Total voters
    113
Mar 29, 2020 at 12:08 PM Post #677 of 993
bagwell359 said:
I read that LG changed between the v30 and v40. They hired an audiophile outfit (Meridian) to come in and alter the tunings. I've read some that hate it and some that love it. I've never heard any version but mine (v40), so I have no opinion on that. I can drive my: HD-600, HEX v2, MD 4XX fine volume wise. It's the quality of the sonics that can't match my low end DAP's, or my medium/high buck Gumby (not even in the same Continent). There is certainly a troubling lack of bass under 100 Hz, and sort of a nasal fussy tone in the upper mids to my ears. The mids and highs have definition, and the highs have some nice decay to them, but no. I mean if you commute on a train, get your high efficiency closed backs and go for it. I'm retired, my commuting days are over - so that DAC is 99% of my story.

Doesn't bother me, I needed an updated capable cell, and as a streamer that is battery driven and 100% bit perfect from TIDAL - it solves a whole slew of issues that PC/Apple platforms have and I don't have to worry about storage either. It's true that TIDAL has holes (audio labels), but I've been able to put 75% of my CD collection up for sale to help pay the freight.
Click to expand...

I would use it both for commuting with some IEMs and also at home so I guess it's worth the try anyway. I tried the G8 and found the sound very detailed but maybe artificially so? Not sure. The strange thing is that the V30 and the V40 both measured dead flat on gsmarena and share the same DAC so I don't see what kind of tuning Meridian might have done.

Chris Kaoss said:
I don't think so.
It depends on the volume you're listening with your headphones.
The V-Series are capable to drive most headphones well, but not as good as a proper amp.
At higher volumes they tend to raise the higher frequencies bc the lg amp is running out of juice.
At normal volumes (~85db) it sounds quite nice, imo.
Click to expand...
I don't need full volume on the iPhone 6s with the HD600 (75% is usually enough) so I would expect the V30/40 to improve on that. I have no idea how many decibels I need to be honest :ksc75smile: But if it sounds closer to a home rig I'm all for it.
 
Mar 30, 2020 at 12:20 PM Post #678 of 993
The digital filters of this phone apply different pre and post ringing options. I absolutely prefer the Short filter (Minimum Phase) by quite a lot, I think it sound more detailed because it has a lot better imaging and clearer mids and highs. It does sound it has a bit of a low-midrange bump that makes it a tad shouty. But now I read online that the Short filter is not the most realistic filter and is in fact the Sharp filter (Linear Phase). I clearly hear that the Sharp filter smooths or smears the sound by quite a margin and in turn makes the audio seem quite edgy and artificial. This is totally against the Sharp filters description as it describes itself being natural. I feel my hearing has betrayed me, or the that the science gods are not on my side. Can someone explain why I am observing what I am?
 
Last edited:
Mar 30, 2020 at 6:50 PM Post #680 of 993
The Third said:
The digital filters of this phone apply different pre and post ringing options. I absolutely prefer the Short filter (Minimum Phase) by quite a lot, I think it sound more detailed because it has a lot better imaging and clearer mids and highs. It does sound it has a bit of a low-midrange bump that makes it a tad shouty. But now I read online that the Short filter is not the most realistic filter and is in fact the Sharp filter (Linear Phase). I clearly hear that the Sharp filter smooths or smears the sound by quite a margin and in turn makes the audio seem quite edgy and artificial. This is totally against the Sharp filters description as it describes itself being natural. I feel my hearing has betrayed me, or the that the science gods are not on my side. Can someone explain why I am observing what I am?
Click to expand...

On my V30 I ended up preferring the Sharp filter. (Filters are unchanged between V30 and V40 even if tuning is supposed to be different.)

I started out liking the Short filter (default) when I first got the phone, but after a while came to find that its wide soundstage was just a tad too much "bathroom effect". I then decided the Slow filter had to be ideal because of its minimal pre-ringing (how can pre-ringing ever be natural, right?). But it didn't work for me at all: While very detailed, it just sounded synthetic, like an image with too much sharpening. So I ended up with the Sharp filter: Despite its pre- and post-ringing it just sounds more natural to me -- as it is advertised.

I suppose it also depends on which IEMs/cans you use: I listened using a pair of Monoprice closed back monitors (DD) and CCA C10 IEMs (1DD 4BA hybrids). And of course your music: I listened almost entirely to classical (orchestral, symphonic).

I don't know if that was any help :upside_down:
 
Last edited:
Mar 31, 2020 at 5:16 AM Post #681 of 993
Dannemand said:
On my V30 I ended up preferring the Sharp filter. (Filters are unchanged between V30 and V40 even if tuning is supposed to be different.)

I started out liking the Short filter (default) when I first got the phone, but after a while came to find that its wide soundstage was just a tad too much "bathroom effect". I then decided the Slow filter had to be ideal because of its minimal pre-ringing (how can pre-ringing ever be natural, right?). But it didn't work for me at all: While very detailed, it just sounded synthetic, like an image with too much sharpening. So I ended up with the Sharp filter: Despite its pre- and post-ringing it just sounds more natural to me -- as it is advertised.

I suppose it also depends on which IEMs/cans you use: I listened using a pair of Monoprice closed back monitors (DD) and CCA C10 IEMs (1DD 4BA hybrids). And of course your music: I listened almost entirely to classical (orchestral, symphonic).

I don't know if that was any help :upside_down:
Click to expand...
I guess you are right about the fact that different headphones give different results with each filter. The sharp filter does not play well with the X00 PH but is a lot better with the hd25. While I feel the bass does tighten the mids take a back seat and the highs are less focused and textured with the sharp filter. I guess it's also song dependant but thanks for the tip I will keep testing around.
 
Mar 31, 2020 at 8:03 AM Post #682 of 993
Dannemand said:
On my V30 I ended up preferring the Sharp filter. (Filters are unchanged between V30 and V40 even if tuning is supposed to be different.)

I started out liking the Short filter (default) when I first got the phone, but after a while came to find that its wide soundstage was just a tad too much "bathroom effect". I then decided the Slow filter had to be ideal because of its minimal pre-ringing (how can pre-ringing ever be natural, right?). But it didn't work for me at all: While very detailed, it just sounded synthetic, like an image with too much sharpening. So I ended up with the Sharp filter: Despite its pre- and post-ringing it just sounds more natural to me -- as it is advertised.

I suppose it also depends on which IEMs/cans you use: I listened using a pair of Monoprice closed back monitors (DD) and CCA C10 IEMs (1DD 4BA hybrids). And of course your music: I listened almost entirely to classical (orchestral, symphonic).

I don't know if that was any help :upside_down:
Click to expand...
Oke so I think I figured out the problem. I think the sharp filter does not do well with bad source material or the android driver that is coupled with Spotify especially on my X00 PH's. I now installed USB Audio Player Pro which apparently uses a higher resolution driver that doesn't downsample any files. The sound is cleaner and more dynamic on all my .FLAC files, music seperation increases and the highs no longer sound unfocused or artificial, bass also seems to bleed in less to the rest of the spectrum. I doubt this has to do with just the .FLAC lossless format as my X00's do fine on other lesser DACs with spotify. Sharp now does sound more accurate than Short, Short seems to push the mids a bit forward which could be better for vocals or instruments but it still loses the bass tightness. The Short filter I can highly recommend for Spotify usage or compressed music though, it seems to clean up the compressed files and the weaker audio driver it uses. I theorise that has to with the fact that the pre-ringing on compressed files creates too many overlapping artefacts with tracks containing busy passages? Just my observations really, I hope it could help others in choosing their digital filters for the right times.
 
Last edited:
Apr 6, 2020 at 10:40 AM Post #689 of 993
I just found this thread, have a v40. When I look in the sound settings, it's set to short, but greyed out, so it can't be changed. I don't see another setting to adjust it. What an I missing?
 
Apr 6, 2020 at 11:23 AM Post #690 of 993
doctorjazz said:
I just found this thread, have a v40. When I look in the sound settings, it's set to short, but greyed out, so it can't be changed. I don't see another setting to adjust it. What an I missing?
Click to expand...
Do you've a headphone plugged in?
Quad dac has to be enabled with connected headphone to change the filter settings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 7 (members: 0, guests: 7)
Back
Top