[jlbrach]

Thanks Rob. I think your insights into the critical nature of timing and depth perception, and the psychology of hearing more generally, represent a crucial breakthrough in achieving better sound.

I have listened to hi-fi for 50 years now and what strikes me is the propensity of enthusiasts to upgrade their systems regularly. I do think a contributing factor is that, with each new system, their brains learn to distinguish the reproduced sound from the real thing and the thrill gradually disappears. When they change to a new system, the brain is fooled all over again, it sounds so "realistic", until the brain once more learns to make the distinction. I guess being able to detect the sound of an unexpected presence nearby was (is) critical for survival, so the brain works quite hard to do it. All this is mere supposition of course -- I have no scientific data to support it. But it does explain why we are amazed all over again with each new upgrade. I have heard it said that original listeners to Edison's wax roll recordings were as amazed as we are today with your DACs -- it sounded to them like the person speaking was actually in the room. That must be where the upgrade process began.

Now, if we can eliminate all clues the brain can use to distinguish reproduced sound from the real thing, will we constantly be amazed because the brain cannot do this trick any more? ... will the final upgrade ever arrive?

there is no final upgrade,thats the good and the bad

 

[gnomen]

x

 

[gnomen]

there is no final upgrade,thats the good and the bad

Evidently, that is the case so far. My proposition was only theoretical. If we could match all of the information the brain uses to distinguish real from artificial, then the brain could no longer learn to make that distinction.

It might be quite discombobulating however. Like when you use a VR headset to ride a big dipper and feel decidely unwell afterwards because none of your other senses are registering the movement.

 

[Christer]

This may be the most fascinating thing I've ever read about audio reproduction.

But it's been borne out in my experience. I have been dealing with a terrible problem trying to get my DAVE headphone output to work with a balanced 4.4mm headphone. The adaptor makes everything limited frequency response and mono. AND YET, because the transients (it's m-scaled) and midrange are still there, it still sounds incredibly engaging.

Hmm. while I agree with Rob that those aspects definitely matter a lot, I have to add that one of the most disappointing audio experiences I have had was at Canjam Singapore 2018 when I had my first chance to audition Mscaling via Dave.
My expectations were high.
But for some reason Dave had been connected to the Mscaler wrongly and the first track I got to hear was in pretty BAD mono sound.
Yes a lot of music tends to be in the midrange but that does not make me want to hear it only smack in the middle with no spatial cues audible.
And when I made the young boy in attendance aware that it was mono his first response was a firm no and that everything was ok. It was not until Rob arrived that things were sorted out properly.
But even then I was not overly impressed by the actual SQ of most of the music Rob had on his laptop ,which partly seemed to be old analogue Decca recordings in a random order playlist.
I have since then heard Dave mscaler under MUCH better conditions and also with my own reference masterfiles via some of the most resolving headphones . And unless something magical has happened during these Covid years during which I have not even once been to a Canjam or any other show or even a HFI shop, Dave/Mscaler remain one of the best most realistic sounding combos I have heard.
But I still find it GROSSLY overpriced and settled for a not quite as resolving Qutest/Mscaler combo that although also VERY expensive was stlll good enough to justify spending my hard earned money on it.
And to my ears most of the Chord/Rob magic is in the Mscaler anyway.
Sure Q/HMS lacks some of the resolution of Dave/Mscaler ,but I do not have to listen in mono unless the actual recording is in mono.
It is after all 2023 not 1923 and I do know very well how a symphony orchestra sounds live in many good halls.
I have said so more than once much more width than depth from most seats anyway.
And since this is still HEADFI and most here seem to listen only via headphones I also have to add again , there's nothing that comes as close to how acoustic music generally tends to sound live in a good venue than to record it and play it back binaurally.
It is really a shame so few labels take this most realistic way of recording music for headphone listening.
Cheers Christer

 

[ChrisGB]

I've always found binaural recordings interesting, not only for giving a good sense of reality with purely acoustic recordings, but also for expanding sonically beyond recording the "real world". While we focus heavily on trying to recreate the realism of a live concert with unamplified instruments and voices, heavily processed electronic music can utilise the binaural system to great effect too. My feeling on this is that a system capable of recreating a great reproduction of naturally occurring sounds should, by virtue of it's accuracy, also be great at managing the more surreal world of complex electronic music, even though it was not necessarily the original performance target. This certainly seems to be the case with the Hugo 2. Check out a series of albums released under the titles 3D Reworks 001 / 002 / 003. Not remotely real in many ways, but sonically fascinating.

 

[Uberding]

I've always found binaural recordings interesting, not only for giving a good sense of reality with purely acoustic recordings, but also for expanding sonically beyond recording the "real world". While we focus heavily on trying to recreate the realism of a live concert with unamplified instruments and voices, heavily processed electronic music can utilise the binaural system to great effect too. My feeling on this is that a system capable of recreating a great reproduction of naturally occurring sounds should, by virtue of it's accuracy, also be great at managing the more surreal world of complex electronic music, even though it was not necessarily the original performance target. This certainly seems to be the case with the Hugo 2. Check out a series of albums released under the titles 3D Reworks 001 / 002 / 003. Not remotely real in many ways, but sonically fascinating.

And that’s today‘s listening over-choice sorted!
Thanks for this.

 

[Uberding]

Hugo2 can power a pair of 90db sensitivity speakers! That's great! This makes me thinking getting a pair of these e-audio b406a as my computer speakers, but they are closed to $100 in US. May be I should pay more for Auratone 5C Super Sound Cube or Avantone Mixcube.

Rob, do you think if hugo2 can drive these single driver speakers?

1. Auratone 5C Super Sound Cube, 90db sensitivity​

2. Avantone Mixcube, 93 sensitivity​

​

Thank you

I have the Avantone Mixcubes.
They are remarkable speakers.
It didn’t even occur to me to try them straight into the Hugo2
Finally found suitable speaker cable.
https://a.co/d/1LAzSYI
Not only can the Hugo2 drive them it can drive them to near uncomfortably loud levels.
With a low end frequency response of 90kHz they’re not going to give you body slamming bass but the bass in reggae and electro tracks is sufficiently audible.
With Hugo2 some might find them excessively bright but the midrange clarity, imaging,…. everything they’re known for is there in spades.
Build and finish is lovely. A bargain really.
Beware though: They are much heavier than you might expect.
So like Hugo2/2Go transportable but not really portable.
Mr. Peepers approves.

 

[Somafunk]

I don’t understand how you can listen satisfactorily to the mixcubes, they’re intended use is to check the midrange of a mix in the studio to see how well it would translate when played back on crappy consumer audio speakers. I’ve listened to them being used for that purpose and you’d have to drug and zip tie me to a chair before I’d like to repeat that experience

 

[Jawed]

I have the Avantone Mixcubes.
They are remarkable speakers.
It didn’t even occur to me to try them straight into the Hugo2

In my opinion you've stumbled into a magical setup that's far better than conventional thinking says it should be

Some thoughts:

• It looks like you've got about 5 feet/1.5m of space behind the front of each speaker, this frees the speakers' sound from a hell of a lot of confusion. The TV will compromise that a bit, but it's not that large in surface area
• Bed as a listening position cuts out a lot of "hard" sounding room problems
• Nearfield listening, about 5 feet from the drivers, puts you inside the recorded space, with wonderful soundstage depth as a reward, far past the wall that's in front of you
• If your head is about 1 foot/30cm from the wall behind you, you will be enjoying a substantial boost to the bass, and so will probably be getting a fair amount of bass below 90hz

If your head is closer than 1 foot from the wall behind you, you will be getting some midrange oddities and stereo imaging will be a bit fuzzier left-right - some thick cushions/pillows to space you off the wall should solve that problem.

Play with toe-in and spread the speakers wider than you would normally dare. A conventional equilateral triangle is not the best for nearfield listening in my opinion, much wider suddenly brings about a feeling of realistic scale.

I'm assuming you've just started with these and are learning how to get the best from them. If not, I hope you don't mind my suggestions.

 

[Uberding]

In my opinion you've stumbled into a magical setup that's far better than conventional thinking says it should be

Some thoughts:

• It looks like you've got about 5 feet/1.5m of space behind the front of each speaker, this frees the speakers' sound from a hell of a lot of confusion. The TV will compromise that a bit, but it's not that large in surface area
• Bed as a listening position cuts out a lot of "hard" sounding room problems
• Nearfield listening, about 5 feet from the drivers, puts you inside the recorded space, with wonderful soundstage depth as a reward, far past the wall that's in front of you
• If your head is about 1 foot/30cm from the wall behind you, you will be enjoying a substantial boost to the bass, and so will probably be getting a fair amount of bass below 90hz

If your head is closer than 1 foot from the wall behind you, you will be getting some midrange oddities and stereo imaging will be a bit fuzzier left-right - some thick cushions/pillows to space you off the wall should solve that problem.

Play with toe-in and spread the speakers wider than you would normally dare. A conventional equilateral triangle is not the best for nearfield listening in my opinion, much wider suddenly brings about a feeling of realistic scale.

I'm assuming you've just started with these and are learning how to get the best from them. If not, I hope you don't mind my suggestions.

-Checks for hidden camera-
You described my setup almost exactly!
Just missed the cushy headboard behind me to address just what you said.
Thanks for taking the time to do that I appreciate it and agree equilateral triangle isn’t always best nearfield.
I just set these up like this today when using with Hugo2 for the first time.
They’re usually alternate mix monitors elsewhere and the bedroom has KEF LSX II.
I also tried them here with a 100 watt Marantz amp and a subwoofer for fun and indeed it was.
It was almost like different speakers and seemed impossibly loud for a tiny 5 inch box.

But I’m pretty stoked they play well with Hugo2, if a bit bright and chilly, as I live in a rural area and the electricity goes out fairly often in bad weather so I now have a passable system for when there’s no hydro and headphones aren’t feasible.

 

[Reactcore]

Im also fascinated by the single driver concept for best depth and stage production.

I think if the driver is placed in a big enough cabinet the low end does improve.

I would therefore like to hear these Omega high efficiency speaker type direct on Dave once.. Anybody has experience with these?

Brand website

 

[jarnopp]

Im also fascinated by the single driver concept for best depth and stage production.

I think if the driver is placed in a big enough cabinet the low end does improve.

I would therefore like to hear these Omega high efficiency speaker type direct on Dave once.. Anybody has experience with these?



Brand website

I have the Omega SAMs and drive them from the TT2. In a nearfield setup as @Jawed described above (was perfect for working from home during Covid) the imaging and transparency is great. I did add an active subwoofer which I drive from the 2nd outputs of TT2. I haven’t heard any other Omegas and they may work in your setup without a sub.

 

[Jawed]

I think there's a long history of connecting Omega speakers to Chord DACs.

https://www.head-fi.org/search/12163589/?q=omega&t=post&c[thread]=766517&o=relevance

 

[Reactcore]

I think there's a long history of connecting Omega speakers to Chord DACs.

https://www.head-fi.org/search/12163589/?q=omega&t=post&c[thread]=766517&o=relevance

Thats why im curious

 

[Jawed]

@Rob Watts do the SPICE models for op amps have the precision you're used to with other parts of your designs, where you say that SPICE modelling is extremely accurate?

Is there a point where it becomes simpler to use a discrete amplifier instead, because the SPICE model can be made more accurate?