and STAXUSA has never answered any of my emails and I can't ever reach them on the phone. Maybe they do a better job with their dealers, but their direct customer service and support is a joke.
and STAXUSA has never answered any of my emails and I can't ever reach them on the phone. Maybe they do a better job with their dealers, but their direct customer service and support is a joke.
After all these years I wonder why there has not been more diy with lambda's? I only really seen one other with the idea of adding wood and the result were said to be better than HE90's. With the Grado and Thunderpants craze I wonder why this has not come about with previous generation Lambda's or older. It really would not even be hard. Just a nice block of Oak cut out for the driver and notched out for the cable would easily screw on. I would imagine the deeper the wood the more bass and control like Grados seem to benefit from?
After all these years I wonder why there has not been more diy with lambda's? I only really seen one other with the idea of adding wood and the result were said to be better than HE90's. With the Grado and Thunderpants craze I wonder why this has not come about with previous generation Lambda's or older. It really would not even be hard. Just a nice block of Oak cut out for the driver and notched out for the cable would easily screw on. I would imagine the deeper the wood the more bass and control like Grados seem to benefit from?
I just bought a pair of SR-007 MK1's, with channel imbalance. Lorr explained that the Realiser will adjust channel imbalance, lets hope it's all good with the KGSSHV.
Does everyone think the Smyth Realiser is great? Doesn't it just take away how the artist intended making the recording sound? Most of what I listen to the instruments pop out at you here there and can be fun but it doesn't sound like they made it sound like a band in front of you. Others sound like a band in front of you or in the room with them and meets in the middle with a great soundstage. So is it really just for classical?
Does everyone think the Smyth Realiser is great? Doesn't it just take away how the artist intended making the recording sound? Most of what I listen to the instruments pop out at you here there and can be fun but it doesn't sound like they made it sound like a band in front of you. Others sound like a band in front of you or in the room with them and meets in the middle with a great soundstage. So is it really just for classical?
There are a lot of recordings that just don't work that well on headphones. A lot of my jazz stuff for example has the sax in left channel only, and without any sort of crossfeed it just doesn't sound natural at all - the artist didn't intend for the album to be listened to on headphones. What I wish they would do with the Realiser is make one for two channel audiophiles. The standard version is really designed to emulate home theater - hence the multi-ch analog in/out. I don't want any of that, nor do I want their DACs and ADCs putting their stamp on the sound. The newer one with HDMI is better, at least it can do straight PCM without any analog conversion, but it's still designed with home theater in mind. The HDMI input is really only good with DVD and Blu-ray players, not audiophile transports. And the optical digital out is the worst possible format they could use in terms of jitter.
What I'd like to see is a version with coax and BNC in/out and that's it. That I'd definitely buy.
It is not designed for home theater. It has the flexibility to do multi channel. There's no reason it can't be used for 2 channel. The Realiser isn't as straightforward as most stuff around here but so many of you keep twisting the facts on what it is and how it does what it does.
Agreed w/ n3rdling. For clarification though, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it designed to use a DSP and mic to mimic whatever acoustic profile you store regardless of your location? This sort of thing has been used to fix the issues of automotive acoustics in high-end aftermarket audio for years. Is there something else to the Realizer that differentiates it?
It is not designed for home theater. It has the flexibility to do multi channel. There's no reason it can't be used for 2 channel. The Realiser isn't as straightforward as most stuff around here but so many of you keep twisting the facts on what it is and how it does what it does.
I know there's no reason it can't 2 channel, but it just doesn't seem to be aimed at the high-end 2 channel market. What audiophile is going to want to go D-A, A-D, and then D-A before the sound reaches their ears? The HDMI input on the updated version again seems targeted at the home theater market. Name me an audiophile transport that outputs PCM over HDMI.
Agreed w/ n3rdling. For clarification though, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it designed to use a DSP and mic to mimic whatever acoustic profile you store regardless of your location? This sort of thing has been used to fix the issues of automotive acoustics in high-end aftermarket audio for years. Is there something else to the Realizer that differentiates it?
I'm not really sure how the auto thing works, but the Realiser takes measurements of two environments: the speakers and the room they're located in, and the headphones. Both measurements are taken with your personal HRTF and not a standard dummy head.
I know there's no reason it can't 2 channel, but it just doesn't seem to be aimed at the high-end 2 channel market. What audiophile is going to want to go D-A, A-D, and then D-A before the sound reaches their ears? The HDMI input on the updated version again seems targeted at the home theater market. Name me an audiophile transport that outputs PCM over HDMI.
It's an added benefit. The fact it can be used to simulate up to 7 channels is a feature well worth advertising, especially since you can use a single speaker to perform the measurements if you were ever so limited. It could have literally the same circuitry but be limited to 2 channel simulation only and a group of you would take this to mean that it is some audiophile voodoo box aimed at high end 2 channel users.
As for the conversions, I'm sure Smyth took any added colorations these might have brought about and compensated in the end since the whole thing is essentially about compensation. It wouldn't be difficult for them to do this since it's DSP based.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
