[shmau]

It seems like a reasonable conclusion after five years, which is beyond the normal lifecycle for most electronics. I'm pre-order number 29 and have no expectation of ever receiving the product.

The Realiser is still relevant and people today are buying the same thing you preordered. Doesn't excuse their behavior but it's still the #1 product.

 

[Jonesing4A16]

I too am a preorder loser. Can anyone please clarify the financial and/or retail role to date that the Heavenly Sound Company Ltd. has contributed towards saving Smyth Research? Shouldn't their clout in the industry have helped us customers receive our A16's after all this time? Thanks in advance.

 

[Got the Shakes]

I wanted to give my thoughts on John's Omega PRIR. The tl;dr is that if his other PRIRs work for you, then you absolutely should give the Omega a go. To my ears, it is his best PRIR and that is saying something considering how great his previous ones have been.

I have been messing with both the 65 and 96 for maybe three weeks or so. I have tried every type of content with them including: movies with an Atmos track, non-atoms movies that I upmixed using Auro3D, Atmos music, unmixed non-Atmos music, and PC/console games. The Omega handles all of those exceptionally well. I honestly can't really find a flaw in anything I tried. The bass is great, the channel separation is spot on, and the clarity of everything is very good. I think that in the way of generic PRIRs, the Omega is truly endgame. For reference I also have purchased the Focal and Dutch & Dutch previously, both of which have also been great, but I think that the Omega is going to be the one that I use for everything from now on. I am someone who seems to be lucky enough to have a similar HRTF to John as I hear an amazing surround effect from his generic files. I find myself preferring the 96, but the 65 is a very close second. Would very much suggest at least trying the available demos, because it is I believe the best A16 experience you can get without having a custom made PRIR done.

 

[VandyMan]

Has anyone used the A16 USB i/o to connect to a DAC? Does a USB-B male to USB-B male cable work?

 

[Camano]

Has anyone used the A16 USB i/o to connect to a DAC? Does a USB-B male to USB-B male cable work?

The back panel USB "B" connector is input only, so that the A16 itself can be used as a USB DAC.
The front panel USB "A" connector for "digital headphone output" that could potentially be used for a DAC is "not currently operational" according to the V2.0 manual.

 

[shmau]

The back panel USB "B" connector is input only, so that the A16 itself can be used as a USB DAC.
The front panel USB "A" connector for "digital headphone output" that could potentially be used for a DAC is "not currently operational" according to the V2.0 manual.

It should be mentioned that their german partner sells a USB model of the A16 which presumably also outputs via USB. However I doubt anyone in here has one.

 

[VandyMan]

The back panel USB "B" connector is input only, so that the A16 itself can be used as a USB DAC.

Are you sure about that? I was told it is bi-directional.

 

[Camano]

Are you sure about that? I was told it is bi-directional.

I was reporting what the manual says. I haven't used USB myself. Who said it was bidirectional?

 

[VandyMan]

I was reporting what the manual says. I haven't used USB myself. Who said it was bidirectional?

I don't want to call out the two people incase it was a misunderstanding on my part.

 

[sander99]

I also seem to remember that the USB B port on the back was supposed to be bi-directional (but maybe isn't yet). However, only suitable for connection with a pc (or similar host device), not with a USB DAC. The USB A port on the front of the A16 would be for a USB DAC, but as said that has not yet been implemented.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Are you sure about that? I was told it is bi-directional.

I don't think the A16 is a USB host, and there has to be one in there somewhere before an LPCM from a source can be sent to a DAC. I use the USB port in the back as an input for Qobuz from my PC, then run it through the A16 and output it via the SPDIF output to my OCTO. So you could use the SPDIF to output to one of your DACs instead.

 

[VandyMan]

I don't think the A16 is a USB host, and there has to be one in there somewhere before an LPCM from a source can be sent to a DAC. I use the USB port in the back as an input for Qobuz from my PC, then run it through the A16 and output it via the SPDIF output to my OCTO. So you could use the SPDIF to output to one of your DACs instead.

Thanks. I have a DAC that only has USB input that I was hoping to use for a bit while I rework my system. But it is no big deal as I have a few other choices available.

 

[Dixter]

I just installed the 3d sound shop Omega PRIR files and performed the setup... first reaction is wow... I think John outdid himself .... thats one thing I love about the A16 is to be able to just choose a different PRIR with different speakers and its just like your in a different listening room.... fantastic job John

 

[Richter Di]

I fully agree that the 3Dsoundshop Omega PRIRs of John are incredible. I keep switching between the two versions now and then. But for the most part the enjoyment listening to stereo with the Auro 3D upmixer is just to good to become analytical. I never switch back to my personal PRIR done at MSM.

 

[Richter Di]

PS: Although the German distributor offered a new measurement for my obviously faulty PRIRs, they never cared to respond to my list of requests to make sure everything is handled more professional next time. I still have not received any answer to my second mail from October 6th. Please be aware that my message to him was in German and that this just a quick translation using deepl.

Hello Mr. xxx,

unfortunately, I have not yet received a reply to my message of August 18.

I have once again summarized the most important points with the request to comment on whether we can arrange an appointment for a second measurement on this basis?

Problem 1: Asynchronous measurement with msm without headtracker

Solution for 1: Perform the whole calibration as a synchronous measurement with the use of the headtracker. I am very sure that this makes a big difference qualitatively. In my own calibration, in my Pilates studio optimized for audio on the day using diffusers and absorbers, it often took a very long time for my perceived line of sight to match the actual line of sight measured by the headtracker. During the measurement in Paris with Smyth, a head tracker was also used. This also allows a direct comparison between headphones and speakers after the calibration.

Problem 2: Short 4 second sweeps during calibration at msm Studios Munich and thus poor signal to noise ratio. Maybe okay for a demo calibration but not for a calibration for 1200 EUR.

Solution for 2: 12 seconds sweeps instead of 4 seconds sweeps with thus clearly higher signal to noise ratio. Especially with the sensitivity of the inEar microphones of the Realiser very important. In the telephone conversation with Mike Smyth it became clear that he also considers this to be a possible cause of the problems with my calibration. He also confirmed that he can also deliver correspondingly long asynchronous tones, if a synchronous measurement would be excluded.

Problem 3: Only 3 viewing angles at msm studios Munich and thus lower coherence of the sound image when turning the head.

Solution for 3: More viewing angles: In a telephone conversation with Mike Smyth, he was very surprised that only three viewing directions were measured in my measurement. He recommends at least 5 and better 7 viewing angles. Again, the quality of the measurement increases with more viewing angles. Without the use of the head tracker, however, very difficult.

Problem 4: During the calibration, the measurement results were not checked with the tool built into the A16. Only after a complete calibration could we determine, for example, that the inear microphone provided by msm Studios was defective. Any other sources of error could not be found because the cause for the unsatisfactory quality of the calibration is still unclear.

Solution for 4: Check the quality of the respective calibration steps with the method given in the manual and built into the A16. A company in the USA that offers calibration for the A16 uses this as a standard.

Problem 5: The inEar microphone from msm Studios Munich was defective, For-Tune did not have a replacement microphone. Fortunately I had my own with me, whereas I was told beforehand I only had to bring my headphones. But since another calibration was to take place after me, I then left my inEar microphone for this calibration. After I had received my inEar microphone pair again, I could not yet check whether this is still fully functional.

Solution for 5: Since the effort and cost factor for me to come to Munich for a measurement (500 km plus overnight stay) are very high, I consider it absolutely necessary that a new or tested microphone set is available as a backup at msm Studios Munich

Problem 6: For Tune and msm have allowed only two hours for the entire calibration. In my case, after a failed first calibration due to a defective microphone and incorrectly entered room parameters, and suboptimal second calibration, there was no time for a third calibration because the next customer was waiting.

Solution for problem 6: Allow more time for the calibration: I had discussed this with a provider of realiser measurements in America and he plans 4 hours for a measurement. I consider this to be quite realistic.

Problem 7: Discrepancy between advertising statement and actual procedure. In the phone call, I was assured that I would not receive an invoice until I was 100% satisfied with the results. I already made it clear in Munich on site and also afterwards in writing that I was not satisfied with the result. Nevertheless, I received the invoice for the measurement and also paid it.

Solution for 7: Either exercise more restraint in their own statements on the part of For-Tune or actually invest the time while the customer is on site to come to a satisfactory result. I think the elements described above could certainly help to achieve a higher quality measurement result.