[littlej0e]

My comments are also on that linked thread (user yyz). Yesterday I sold my dedicated RAAL SR1a DAC because with the Convolution filters it was no longer needed. I am now using what was the worst possible DAC, the Benchmark DAC3B that I tested with the SR1a. With the filters, it is almost as good as the very best DAC I have, the Gustard X26 Pro. I need the Gustard in another room so I am using the DAC3B now. I can live with this. Without the Convolution filter I was not able too.

Appreciate the input. That's a pretty bold endorsement...

I'm going to take the plunge on the filters (I just emailed Mitch). However, I run a custom audiolinux Roon + HQPlayer from Pareto audio and I wondering what the best path for implementation would be. It would be great to be able to integrate Mitch's filters with HQP in combination with upsampling to 768k, or in stand alone with Roon. Any recommendations?


Edit: after speaking with Mitch, the answer is both. The filters work for both Roon and HQP. For HQP, you would take the highest sample rate filter (i.e. 352.4 kHz) and load that into HQP and then upsample. The regular stereo filters are used natively in Roon. That way you can experiment between the two.

 

[yyzSB]

Appreciate the input. That's a pretty bold endorsement...

I'm going to take the plunge on the filters (I just emailed Mitch). However, I run a custom audiolinux Roon + HQPlayer from Pareto audio and I wondering what the best path for implementation would be. It would be great to be able to integrate Mitch's filters with HQP in combination with upsampling to 768k, or in stand alone with Roon. Any recommendations?


Edit: after speaking with Mitch, the answer is both. The filters work for both Roon and HQP. For HQP, you would take the highest sample rate filter (i.e. 352.4 kHz) and load that into HQP and then upsample. The regular stereo filters are used natively in Roon. That way you can experiment between the two.

I was using a AudioMirror Tubadour III SE tube DAC with many different amps and integrateds for the SR1a. The tube DAC made the SR1a sound excellent though I do not like the idea of using the tube to fix the sound. With the Convolution filter the tube was no longer needed and my 2 more revealing DACs, Benchmark DAC3B and Gustard X26 Pro, both sounded better than the AudiMirror. I sent the AudioMirror to the new owner earlier today.

When I have some free cash I am looking at trying the AudioByte VOX DAC or Rockna Wavelight.

 

[littlej0e]

I was using a AudioMirror Tubadour III SE tube DAC with many different amps and integrateds for the SR1a. The tube DAC made the SR1a sound excellent though I do not like the idea of using the tube to fix the sound. With the Convolution filter the tube was no longer needed and my 2 more revealing DACs, Benchmark DAC3B and Gustard X26 Pro, both sounded better than the AudiMirror. I sent the AudioMirror to the new owner earlier today.

When I have some free cash I am looking at trying the AudioByte VOX DAC or Rockna Wavelight.

Ok, so...wow. I just tried the filters. The musical impact, especially the bass, is so much more visceral and forceful. The "pringles-can bass" is/was my biggest gripe with the SR1a's. Now I understand why you were tubing to "fix" the sound prior to using the filters. These go a long way towards solving the SR1a's biggest shortcomings. Just wow...

I'm quietly afraid of getting my Abyss 1266s Phi TCs now. The bass on the TCs will obviously still be better, but can the overall SQ and musical impact compete with the SR1a's + the AS filters?!? I sure hope so...

@Ciggavelli - yeah, so, you're probably going to want to try these filters. The sound on the SR1a's, namely the bass and treble (but especially the bass), is much more impactful and "triggering". I can actually listen to rock, metal, and EDM on my SR1a's without having to focus so hard and constantly yearn for more bass and visceral impact. I dare say these filters are a game changer for the SR1a. If you are an EQ pro, you might be able to get some (or most) of this performance.

 

[genefruit]

In contrast, has anyone tried the convolver filters located here and compared - https://phones.killdozer.uk/

linked site is an easier way to pull filters from the AutoEq project - https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/AutoEq

 

[yyzSB]

In contrast, has anyone tried the convolver filters located here and compared - https://phones.killdozer.uk/

I installed the "SR1a filter with no ear contact" and played some Judas Priest, mainly because this could be fatiguing and I have been using them to test the SR1a.

First of all the UK one is giving me fatigue even at moderate volume. It also sounds smaller and compacted. Maybe not the best descriptions but it does not sound as good as without any filters. The Accurate Sound filters are better than no filters and much better than this UK filter. I am not going to try the second UK filter.

Crap my ears are really annoyed by this UK filter.

 

[number1sixerfan]

This is not at all a dig at the filters, I'm just a bit intrigued as $250 is pretty low hanging fruit. When you all look at EQ filter changes like this, are you thinking about what gaps the SR1a has for yourself and reviewing the info on the EQ and then purchasing based on how it will fill those gaps? I guess that's somewhat of a remedial question as I'm sure you all have considered that.

I guess the thing I question with EQ is.. is the change better because it's better or is it better because it's a change? Kind of like every rabbit whole with this hobby. But again, trying to be as clear as I can be, I'm not knocking it at all, it looks interesting based on all of the good feedback and very low cost point! I see the point on it being less shouty (assuming in the highs) and removing 'digital edge', anything more specific or anything else that it corrected specifically for anyone?

 

[yyzSB]

This is not at all a dig at the filters, I'm just a bit intrigued as $250 is pretty low hanging fruit. When you all look at EQ filter changes like this, are you thinking about what gaps the SR1a has for yourself and reviewing the info on the EQ and then purchasing based on how it will fill those gaps? I guess that's somewhat of a remedial question as I'm sure you all have considered that.

I guess the thing I question with EQ is.. is the change better because it's better or is it better because it's a change? Kind of like every rabbit whole with this hobby. But again, trying to be as clear as I can be, I'm not knocking it at all, it looks interesting based on all of the good feedback and very low cost point! I see the point on it being less shouty (assuming in the highs) and removing 'digital edge', anything more specific or anything else that it corrected specifically for anyone?

I made $1800 with this filter today by selling my tube DAC for $2060. The tube DAC was solely used with the SR1a, nothing else. I am also able to happily use 2 DACs that I previously did not like with my SR1a, the Benchmark DAC3B and Gustard X26 Pro. I always considered both of these DACs better than the tube DAC but on the SR1a the tube was always preferred.

 

[yyzSB]

I made $1800 with this filter today by selling my tube DAC for $2060. The tube DAC was solely used with the SR1a, nothing else. I am also able to happily use 2 DACs that I previously did not like with my SR1a, the Benchmark DAC3B and Gustard X26 Pro. I always considered both of these DACs better than the tube DAC but on the SR1a the tube was always preferred.

I should add that I already had Accurate Sound transform my very small office to fit my Thiel CS3.7's speaker with Convolution filters. The results were incredible. I actually bought the Theil CS3.7 (used) after some convincing by Accurate Sound that they could make them work great in my space. I even sit off centre and they adjusted for that in the filter.

Small room big speakers
https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/7605

 

[number1sixerfan]

I made $1800 with this filter today by selling my tube DAC for $2060. The tube DAC was solely used with the SR1a, nothing else. I am also able to happily use 2 DACs that I previously did not like with my SR1a, the Benchmark DAC3B and Gustard X26 Pro. I always considered both of these DACs better than the tube DAC but on the SR1a the tube was always preferred.

That's definitely cool! I'm not questioning whether the value is 'real' or not. More so interested in what the value is specifically for each person given their preferences and what they do and don't like about the Raal. If you don't mind me asking, what were some of the areas you were looking to improve for the Raal? Were you mainly using the tube Dac to give it more body/warmth via tubes? I think you mentioned the digital glare, does that essentially refer to sharpness or something else?

I'm not doubting the impact, just trying to understand what improvements people were looking to make and what the improvements are to account for the subjectivity of it all. I.E. if I have different things I want to improve or different preferences it may no be for me . (But honestly, at $250, like why not try lol)

 

[littlej0e]

This is not at all a dig at the filters, I'm just a bit intrigued as $250 is pretty low hanging fruit. When you all look at EQ filter changes like this, are you thinking about what gaps the SR1a has for yourself and reviewing the info on the EQ and then purchasing based on how it will fill those gaps? I guess that's somewhat of a remedial question as I'm sure you all have considered that.

I guess the thing I question with EQ is.. is the change better because it's better or is it better because it's a change? Kind of like every rabbit whole with this hobby. But again, trying to be as clear as I can be, I'm not knocking it at all, it looks interesting based on all of the good feedback and very low cost point! I see the point on it being less shouty (assuming in the highs) and removing 'digital edge', anything more specific or anything else that it corrected specifically for anyone?

Extremely relevant and important questions if you ask me.

In my opinion, the truth is like nearly everything in this hobby - subjective. Believe it or not, I still found myself slapping on the Ether C Flows every now and then because I missed bass and impact so much (still waiting on the 1266’s to arrive). These are/were my main gripes against the SR1a’s and the filters really help solve those problems. Not completely, mind you, but very noticeably better than stock. Will it be worth it for everyone? Highly doubtful. To be clear, the filters don’t completely solve my longing for more bass and better impact from the SR1a’s, but they go a heck of a long way towards doing so. So much so that it is doubtful I’ll ever pick up my Ether C’s again. I can totally see why @yyzSB sold some of his gear.

I guess the point is, try them for yourself and see if they fit your tastes and desires for the SR1a. They just happen to fit mine extremely well. Truth is, you could probably EQ similar effects yourself, but that is currently beyond my level of skill. I am also personally constrained by the fact I run the SR1a’s on the HSA-1B and not a powerful speaker amp or other super fancy set up that might yield significantly better performance.

 

[yyzSB]

That's definitely cool! I'm not questioning whether the value is 'real' or not. More so interested in what the value is specifically for each person given their preferences and what they do and don't like about the Raal. If you don't mind me asking, what were some of the areas you were looking to improve for the Raal? Were you mainly using the tube Dac to give it more body/warmth via tubes? I think you mentioned the digital glare, does that essentially refer to sharpness or something else?

I'm not doubting the impact, just trying to understand what improvements people were looking to make and what the improvements are to account for the subjectivity of it all. I.E. if I have different things I want to improve or different preferences it may no be for me . (But honestly, at $250, like why not try lol)

The reason I used the tube DAC was because the SR1a was giving me fatigue with many combinations of gear, so the headphones were not enjoyable. The tube DAC made me love the SR1a but I knew I was not hearing everything the SR1a was capable off. In the AudiophileStyle.com thread I posted a few comments as "yyz" all the different combos of gear I tried with the SR1a and my rankings. The tube DAC and Class A amps were amazing. I will now say that my Benchmark AHB2 is great with the SR1a using the filter. I disliked the AHB2 with theSR1a prior to the filter. I also think it is my best amp.

So with these filters I am able to use what I consider my best gear with the Sr1a and not get fatigue. I am referring to sharpness and a hardness on the sound. I am very easily fatigued by this type of sound.


BTW - I like the neutral filter the best

 

[littlej0e]

BTW - I like the neutral filter the best

lol…and there you have it @number1sixerfan! The embodiment of subjectivity. I personally didn’t like the neutral filter at all and preferred the neutral + bass extension or neutral + bass + treble extension more. Yet strangely, we both found almost exactly what we were looking for.

 

[number1sixerfan]

The reason I used the tube DAC was because the SR1a was giving me fatigue with many combinations of gear, so the headphones were not enjoyable. The tube DAC made me love the SR1a but I knew I was not hearing everything the SR1a was capable off. In the AudiophileStyle.com thread I posted a few comments as "yyz" all the different combos of gear I tried with the SR1a and my rankings. The tube DAC and Class A amps were amazing. I will now say that my Benchmark AHB2 is great with the SR1a using the filter. I disliked the AHB2 with theSR1a prior to the filter. I also think it is my best amp.

So with these filters I am able to use what I consider my best gear with the Sr1a and not get fatigue. I am referring to sharpness and a hardness on the sound. I am very easily fatigued by this type of sound.


BTW - I like the neutral filter the best

Really appreciate the response and also for confirming the sharpness part. Thank you!

lol…and there you have it @number1sixerfan! The embodiment of subjectivity. I personally didn’t like the neutral filter at all and preferred the neutral + bass extension or neutral + bass + treble extension more. Yet strangely, we both found almost exactly what we were looking for.

And that's exactly why I asked lol. But really good to hear that you both enjoyed it in each case.

 

[jlbrach]

https://musicalhead.de/2021/06/08/test-raal-requisite-hsa1b/

a review of the hsa-1b...for those interested

The RAAL REQUISITE SR1a, together with the brilliant HSA1b, once again climbs the sound olympic on Musicalhead and displaces the ABYSS AB1266 PHI TC from the throne after many years of reign.

The RAAL REQUISITE HSA1b receives my unconditional recommendation to all knights of the grail of fine tones, who primarily prefer audiophile reproduction properties and an absolute maximum of authenticity in combination with the SR1a and can conciliatly do without the ultimate depth.

 

[yyzSB]

I sold my Meze Empy headphones today because the Accurate Sound filter made me realize I would not listen to the Meze anymore. So that freed up a WyWire Platinum XLR headphone cable that I was using with the Meze. Last week, I had sent it to Alex at WyWire for a repair. However, today I asked Alex to reconfigure that cable for the RAAL SR1a. I think it should be good pairing. I am currently using the upgraded silver cable from Requisite, which I like a lot.