XXHighEnd

Hey all you out there in the US,

I think Phasure organized a few great seminars and panel discussions for the upcoming Show on August 9, 10, 11 (San Francisco, CA). If you are going there, these shouldn't be missed. Of course the seminar room is limited in size so be careful to not miss out once you intend to visit.


The Music on Mind session on Saturday 12:00 -1:00 pm

This one hour session will appear way too short to discover how our brain processes audio. We will reason out how the speed of brain processing needs to match the speed hence resolution of our audio systems to make somehing out of it all and what actually happens when it does not. Or what needs to happen to let it work.
I will attend the session as a real life case, used by Mr Vijendra Rao (MD) who is specialized in radiology and (functional) imaging of the brain. Hope Vijendra doesn't bring his PET scan.

Computer Audio Playback session on Sunday 10:30 - 11:30 am

This should be fun; Auraliti's Damien Martin and Ray Burnham, Sonic Studio's (Amarra) Jon Reichbach and me myself will try to sort out what actually makes good Computer Playback. It will be an open discussion where we all stay out of competitor's fights but learn from eachother instead. Each his own, one for all (does this fit ?, I just made it up).
Dan Rubin will be moderating, taking care each will have his share sufficiently.
And Matan (Arazi, Matan Server), it is your fault I show up in CA in the first place. So sad to hear you can't make it after all. But don't hesitate ...

RECORDING & MASTERING – The Making of a Great Hi-Rez Recording on Sunday 2:00 - 3:00 pm

Jack Kenny, Sean Martin, Jeffrey Norman, John Nowland, Jon Reichbach, Michael Romanowski and Paul Stubblebine will be having a group hug about this great subject. Who wouldn't want to miss this ? Question is why I didn't invite myself here. Well, we know ... :-)
Do notice that this not a digital session per se, where Paul Stubblebine otherwise wouldn't have been left in (nah, he would have bailed out in advance).


Then there's two more sessions which were not organized by Phasure, but which should be as great :

Ask the Editors on Saturday 10:30 - 11:30 am

Frank Berryman (Ultra), Neil Gader (TAS), Michael Mercer (PFO), Jack Roberts (DAGOGO), and Jason Serinus (Stereophile) will be working out how reviews should be objectively done and how to stay out of subtjectiveness for any reason. Piles of questions may be fired upon them, depending on the audience. So feel free and let your heart out !
Small problem, I personally made up this text myself. No idea what is going to happen really in this session. But might they not know themselves, now *you* do ...

DSD AUDIO – Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow on Saturday 5:00 - 6:00 pm

This couldn't be left out of course. Marc Finer, Andreas Koch, Cookie Marenco, Patrick O’Connor, and Gus Skinas will undoubtedly be telling us about how DSD is going to be for the better for all of us. Well, they better be, me ordering the parts right now for our Phasure's DSD proto (should have been showcasing on CAS but we really couldn't make it).

See you there,
Peter

A Phasure DSD prototype ? :oops:

Hey Peter, greetings from Rio! (Yeah I know, I travel too much...)

It's phenomenal that Phasure has managed to organise such great sessions for CAS2013. Wish I could be there, especially for the Sunday 10:30am session... (I'm actually working in the US towards the end of next week and am sorely tempted, but getting back home to the family takes precedence.)

I know people on CA have suggested that the sessions be video-taped and then put online. Could you get this organised? I think it'd be massively appreciated if you could.

Cheers, Mani.

Thank you Mani. But someone who writes California as Californa is doubtful to begin with, right ? So I just edited the posts of you and Alain because it looked a tad too stupid to me.

Peter

Well, tourists in California buy t-shirts that say "Cali," so that should aid with spelling.

Peter is, of course, "infamous," if you will, for dropping little teasers as an "oh by the way" for game changers on the drawing board. All that the rest of can do, then, is to wait patiently for the next project to be released.

The Phasure DSD prototype is obviously past the initial design stage which means that Peter is already in the process of working out changes to XXHE to incorporate playback of DSD. That's a win win for DSD listeners everywhere(I can picture Jud salivating as I write this!).

Peter's announcement, of course, begs the question of whether currently existing NOS1's would be upgradeable to NOS1 DSD. I expect the answer is yes(there were, after all, such plans when the new and improved NOS1 was first announced a few years ago) but that is largely dependent on how Peter is able to work things out first for the prototype(s).

Esau

P.S.

I wonder which recordings Peter will be using for testing his NOS1 DSD and XXHE DSD prototypes...

Surprising, the lack of surprise from some members about the DSD announcement.  Interesting!   :scratching:

Hi Jud-I posted a question a few days ago about SACD and you know how many responses I received?. Please take a look http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=2658.msg27408#msg27408 (http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=2658.msg27408#msg27408)

Best regards,
Juan

PS. Of course nobody knew how to play it, nobody but one person and I guess he wanted to keep the secret until the CAS ;-)

I was surprised, but maybe there is conspiration around  :o

After a few posts by Peter on CA, I was not sure he would prepare something like this :)

Alain

Ha !  :evil:

Hey,

We are only developing DSD to find the real merits of DSD myself, through a device which we developed ourselves so it is better to see how DSD behaves.

The ever planned upgrade to the NOS1 with some expansion board turned out into a "prestige" project, where all was done for lowest noise and lowest jitter. All. And I don't think anything like it exists.
For me it is only about those technical aspects and when that all worked out we will see further.

But let me be clear : I don't see DSD to be better. If it is, it should be because of this crazy design. Prosperous thinking.

Peter

Hey Peter, if your travels to California bring you to the east coast, there's plenty of room at the Inn in Philly. As I just ended vacation last week, there's no chance I can head west.

For me it's a case of being content with PCM already. So I'm not that interested in DSD... for the time being.

But I can see some (potentially vast) value in pursuing DSD. And it all lies at the ADC stage, not so much the DAC stage. It's my contention that the only way to do PCM properly is to use 'pure multi-bit' ADCs, with no oversampling filters or delta-sigma modulators (and then use 'pure multi-bit DACs, such as the NOS1, for replay). And this is simply no longer possible with today's PCM ADCs (even the top-end Lavry uses an oversampling filter). In fact the only currently available 'pure multi-bit' ADC that I'm aware of is the Altmann ADC, but it's only 16/44.1 (not good for mixing, level-matching, etc) and only has an RCA spdif output AFAIK. And why is this the case? IMO, simply because of cost issues. Pure multi-bit ADCs are expensive to get right. It's much easier to get good measurements (not sure they're the 'right' measurements though) from multi-bit (nowadays 5-6 bits) delta-sigma ADCs. Whether we like it or not, this is probably the future of high-end ADCs. And this being the case, it may be better focus efforts on optimizing these for best SQ.

Just a word of warning: I'm very much an 'armchair engineer' when it comes to the theory of how digital systems work. However, I currently own and have played around with three different types of ADC: a 'pure multi-bit' (the Pacific Microsonics Model Two @24/192 rates), a 'pure DSD' (the Korg MR1000) and a 'multi-bit DSD' (the Tascam DV1000HD). My thinking really stems from what I've learned playing around with these.


Juan, sorry I missed this. Had I seen it, I would have responded that the only way I currently know of to play SACD ISO files through XX and the NOS1 is to extract to DFF (I use the 'SACD Extractor 'program) and then to convert to PCM using something like 'Audiogate'. I've done this and quite frankly have generally been underwhelmed with the results. I don't know where things have gone 'wrong' but most of my CD rips sound better...

Mani.

Hi Mani, thanks so much for your help.

This is the extract of a mail that a friend of mine send me trying to lend a hand in this matter:

"If I understood well, XXHighEnd is not able to play directly SACD ISO image, mainly because it is not able to stream DSD files, but only PCM; this is a pity because I think that DSD is really superior to PCM.
As you may know a SACD ISO image is the product of the extraction of the SACD layer of a SACD disc, using a Sony PS3 (only some models) and the program sacd_ripper; the ISO is not a real .iso file but can be burned to an empty DVD-5 and played as a normal SACD disc using some SACD player (only some models); if you burn the ISO this way, you will have a SACD (not hybrid) that should be the exact copy of the SACD layer of the original disc; the ISO contains the DSD data that can be extracted, using the program sacd_extract, to the more common DSD format .dsdiff or .dff.
A software player that is able to stream DSD usually handles those formats as well; JRiver does this and it handles also the ISO image.
If you have a DSD capable soundcard or external dac/receiver, with JRiver (and other players) you can stream the DSD directly, thus obtaining a better sound than the one you can obtain with the same setup but letting the player converting the DSD to PCM first.
More, if you don't have a DSD capable converter (and this is my current setup), you can configure your DSD capable player to convert to PCM on the fly at the higher frequency supported by your converter.
Before knowing of this feature of JRiver, I was converting the SACD ISO image to PCM (FLAC compressed) at a frequency of 88.2kHz; now I can stream the ISO image with JRiver converting it on the fly to PCM at 176.4 kHz (the higher frequency supported by my dac) and I can assure you that the result is really better ! Imagine if one have a dac supporting 352.8 kHz !!
Since I read, on the XXHighEnd forum, that they are committed to enhance the program in every way that can lead to a better Sound Quality, I strongly recommend you to ask them to support DSD streaming (at least of .dsdiff and/or .dff files).
In the meantime, I suggest you to keep the ISO in some place, and to convert them to PCM only for temporary listening; you can do this with the program foobar2000, together with the plug-in foo_input_sacd and the flac library"

Of course my friend never listened XXHE nor the NOS1 so his opinions have this deficiency. The dilemma if with XXHE the PCM files sound better or worse than DSD is open but I post it here just in case it could help in this issue.


Best regards,
Juan

Mani, I agree the fewer (and better) conversions, the better the sound should be.  (This is where DSP and multiple specialized boxen fall down, IMO.)  Would be nice if the ADC end had gravitated toward  PCM, but it didn't happen that way.  And I must say folks like Cookie Marenco and the Channel Classics people, even the makers of many SHM-SACDs seem to do a good careful job.  (Wonder what Peter would think of the DSD files off one of the Stones' SHM-SACDs?)

You've had a better view of the ADC side than many of us, though I'd bet the PM affected your views on format - with something that good, hard for anything else to compare.

I live only 3 hours from San Francisco but I work those days.  What a huge bummer!

Matt

I'm looking forward to meeting Peter and being on a panel with him. This should be interesting.

Demian
Auraliti (and others. . .)

pedal ...

?

PCM versus DSD

I don’t expect any improvement from DSD, because high quality PCM recording already is “perfect” or near-perfect.

The subject can be seen from two sides: The RECORDING phase and the PLAYBACK phase.

RECORDING
Here, we have reliable sources stating that recording at PCM 24/192 or 24/352.8 kHz is identical to listening to the live feed in the studio control room. -Switching back and forth between the live mic feed and the PCM recording, the engineers struggles to hear any difference. That is, when using high quality equipment of course. Not some off-the-shelf $999 gear.

My most reliant source in this matter is world renowned producer and recording engineer, Morten Lindberg at www.2L.no. He records the most demanding music (close miked classical orchestra and choir). Doing most of the job himself, he is at the venue from start to end, and he spends weeks/months in is studio afterwards preparing the various formats and mixes. I have visited his studio facilities and listened to his equipment. -I can assure you the man is 100% serious about State Of The Art sound reproduction.

He uses modern top-level microphones and equipment. Some years ago he chose DXD as his recording and mixing format, because it performs equally well with PCM and SACD post production/releases (the latter being the most relevant format for multichannel releases at that time, back in 2006). Read more here: http://www.sa-cd.net/showthread.php?page=1


PLAYBACK
Here, I don’t trust any listening reports, unless the Phasure playback technology is involved…  :smile:

The Achilles heel of PCM is the inferior impulse response, due to the low pass filtering. This area is where DSD excels, due to its much higher sampling frequency. 

However this area is exactly where I see NOS1/XX as a game changer. Utilizing the Arc Prediction function + NoOverSampling, restores the high frequency square waves! Achilles heel is healed, in other words. -Rather than chase DSD, people should adopt the Phasure technology already working with PCM.  

--------------

Apart from this, I do wish for DSD playback functionality within XX, in order to rip and play ISO images from certain treasured (remastered) SACD titles not available as PCM.  
 

Hi pedal,  :good:

Juan

I think this whole issue is really blurred today. Most commercial recording are made with delta sigma ADC's (have been for over 10 years now) and the current generation of ADC's have better measured conventional performance that anything before.

What makes this interesting is that the delta sigma processor is the same one that generates the DSD stream out a different set of pins on the chip. I can argue (with lots of had waving) that DSD and PCM are just different transports of the same captured data between the same ADC and DAC (also delta sigma).

In the obscure niche that is the audiophile world there may be better alternatives but once commercial content is mixed in then PCM vs. DSD may not be too meaningful. DXD for example is PCM at 384 KHz sampling. The Pyrimix DSD editor converts the DSD to DXD (384 PCM) and edits it using PCM algorithms and then converts back to DSD (just like the ADC/DAC).  In the end what is it? What happens if a DSD low pass filter (50 KHz) is added to a PCM 192KHz stream? Would it sound like DSD?

Execution of the original recording and the boxes at each end is far more important that whether is DSD or PCM.

Sony/Philips launched DSD way back in the 90s, at a time when PCM still was in a “low-rez” state. (At that time most PCs featured an Intel 486 processor and homes didn’t even have an Internet connection).

But 20 years is an eternity in digital technology, and PCM recording/playback has developed enormously. And it will continue to develop rapidly, due to its huge momentum. Studios started out recording at 48kHz sampling frequency. Then doubled to 96kHz. Then they doubled again, to 192kHz. Now, some have moved on to 24/384. Here at Phasure.com, PeterSt has pushed his PCM playback technology as high as 768kHz sampling frequency.

To my eyes, the original deed of DSD – the extra bandwidth – has now been accomplished by PCM, too.

I never heard a 100% pure DSD record/playback system, so I can’t comment on its absolute SQ. But like its cousin PCM, it comes with theoretical handicaps; the waste amount of noise shaping and high frequency noise. Probably neither DSD nor PCM are 100% perfect/transparent medium, but when utilized through the best present/future technology, I guess the differences in SQ will be of academic nature.

What’s left is the fact that DSD occupies one third the storage space of PCM 24/352.8, which might be a practical factor for online distribution. On the other side Bytes are cheap and PCM is light years ahead in market share, functionality and price.

To me, it seems like DSD is a waste of time.

I am also of the opinion that DSD is a waste of time.  There seems to be a lot of energy being wasted on this format within audiophile circles but where are the new recordings going to come from?  If you believe Charles Hansen DSD was nothing more than a tool for Sony to make up for lost income when CD patents expired and was not about advancing sound quality, and that is especially true now that PCM has matured as Pedal stated above.

When I started to read about the "fantastic DSD sound" I did some research and could not make myself a case to go down the DSD path.

Cheers,

Anthony

I have a DAC that can stream and convert DSD (DoP). At the moment I have no good sounding software that can stream DSD. I use JRiver to do so but the problem is, it still sounds like JRiver. Plus, I do not have much records because I just started to show interest in DSD and to be honest, I already lost interest because of the player problem. PCM over a decend software player still sounds better than DSD over JRiver. So XXHE supporting DSD (DoP) would be very welcome indeed.

PS.: I think DSD is worth playing with. It could be a way out of the reclocking and oversampling problem for a lot more people than just the NOS1 owners.
One could use XXHE to convert PCM to DSD in realt ime, much better than JRiver does and so provide high quality music playback without ringing and so on for everyone having a DSD DAC.
JRiver can convert PCM to DSD but the improvement doesn't compensate the loss in quality by using JRiver. I gues this could be done much better...

Any reports from people who managed to visit the show in person?

I'm especially interested in the discussions Phasure helped to organise...

Mani.

Hmmm... not exactly a glowing report: http://www.stereophile.com/content/cas-2013-day-one-scaling-heights

I suppose this is the risk one takes when exhibiting in a show environment. It'd be interesting to hear back from others who attended as to whether they agree with Jason Victor Serinus's description of the sound. (Jason seems to blame the speakers.)

In any event, Peter looks pretty happy with himself :)

Mani.

"Output to the Phasure NOS1 DAC was via an active USB cable provided by Synergistic Research."

Mmmmmm... :scratching:

Juan

Hi,

I think the way Jason put things as he did was very fair to us. Actually I finally found a partner in him and the end of day one, who confirmed what I said the whole day long. As a matter of fact *still* many people visiting the room said that it was one of the better, while I myself regularly just did not want to be in there.
All is a matter of what we are used to and what is our reference; In my opinion there is one way only to do this right and this is bringing your own speakers and amps and everything. So this is what will happen the next time ...

But no worries; It was to be expected, although you try your best to have it arranged the best at the distance.
Anyway, Jason described it just how it was, and nothing is more worthwhile for the audience, right ?

Regards,
Peter

Btw, I don't recognize a thing about that Zalman box driving the NOS1. The Zalman just provided the music as a (music) data server and the XXHighEnd PC drove the NOS1.

Peter

Well, I for one attended the Audio Show on Friday, getting to the show hotel just a few minutes after 10 AM.  I zipped up to the Phasure room, as I wanted to meet Peter before he got sucked out of the room to attend to other responsibilities (or, as we now know, left the room because he didn’t want to be there!).  I found Peter, along with Lee Mincy (North American distributor for Phasure), feverishly stuffing foam padding into the tweeter of the Surreal speakers!  They clearly knew that they had a problem on their hands, but Peter was pretty cool about the whole thing. 

Peter and Lee were amiable hosts, and Peter was happy to chat with me about how to get this whole Phasure NOS1 DAC and XXHighEnd computer and software conglomeration working together (I got my NOS1 just a couple of weeks ago, and the computer was waiting for me on my doorstep when I got home from the show—wish me luck).

Yes, the tweeters in the Surreal speakers were pretty aggressive, and I think Jason Serinus was fair in his assessment and didn’t blame the Phasure products.  The hotel room acoustics were a problem too, of course, and I really didn’t find a system/room that sounded as good to me as what I have at home.  This brings up a question:  how is the typical Audio Show listener to tease out the relative contributions to the sound from more esoteric components such as DACs and computer software, in an unfamiliar room with unfamiliar speakers, amps, etc.?  As Peter suggests, everyone could bring their own speakers, amps etc. to the show, but this seems a bit, uh, cumbersome (Peter, what the heck did you mean when you wrote “…this is what will happen next time”?).

Perhaps a better assessment of Phasure products in a Show setting would be to use generally-accepted-as-excellent speakers (such as Magico, Raidho, TAD, one of the usual suspects) , amps, cables, and so on, with A/B comparisons between a computer playing music through a well-regarded software player such as JRiver, and a high-end DAC such as the Berkeley Alpha, then play the same track through the same exact system, but played through XXHIghEnd software and the Phasure NOS1.  I love to hear comparisons like this at audio shows! The folks at JRiver and Berkeley would not love it, I suppose.  But if the Phasure products are as good as everyone on this forum says they are (and I should find out for myself soon, once I get it all set up in my own system), such a demo should make reviewers like Jason really sit up and take notice of this little company in the Netherlands.

Lurking behind and between the computer and Phasure NOS1 was not the $1, el-cheapo USB cable previously recommended by Peter, but instead a fancy-pants, wallet-slimming USB cable provided by Synergistics.  Oh no, must we now be tempted to upgrade?!  I should have asked Peter about this, but didn’t.  Perhaps Peter can explain the relative merits of a USB cable “upgrade”.  But I don’t expect much in the way of lengthy replies from Peter for the next week and a half or so, as Peter was just beginning a 2-week vacation here in the States—let the man get some rest!

Mark
Santa Cruz, California

Hi Mark,

So ... Yesterday we stayed the night in Santa Cruz and stupid me was seriously thinking where I heard that name recently. Now I now, UPS forms ...  :smirk: :smirk: Oh boy ...

All right. Thank you for your kind words.
And hey, on that USB cable ... I knew it was there because I saw it the first night. But I guess I was too dizzy after a 16.5 hr flight and 9 hours behind to even try thinking about that should be a wrong thing. Really. :swoon:

Mark, it has been a great pleasure meeting you and chat a bit. And you really were the first visitor !

All the best from Carmel today, with the notice that I have never seen so many Ferrari's, Lamborghini's and so many other beautiful (old) cars, many worth more than a million (great auction and show here the upcoming days). Drooling !

Thank you Mark,
Peter

Hey Peter, great to see you are vacationing in the area.  I got to help  prep cars for the Gooding auction this week, which was lots of fun since normally you cannot get close or touch anything.  Some very unique and irrereplaceable cars in that lot, although even the streets contain a lot of rare machinery right now, as I'm sure you've noticed. Sadly I will be working the rest of the week in Big Sur.  Do you plan on making it down there?

Matt
(Ferrari NOS1)

Oh and hello Mark as well! Nice to see another local here.  I grew up and lived in Santa Cruz area until I moved to Big Sur a couple years ago.  I still visit often, usually several times a month.  Might be a good thing to know another NOS1 owner so nearby.  Mine isn't completed yet, but once things get settled it might be nice to compare notes.

Regards,
Matt

Hey Matt !

We will be in Big Sur tonight for sure. If you think it could be nice to meet somewhere, send me an email about a place. Could be a restaurant of course. Or just a beer earlier. Or anything. Name a time too.

Last night we were looking right on top of one of those Ferrari's and I said "look son, one with this color will be going out shortly". A Wow was the response.

Looking forward, if possible at all of course.
Peter & Gang

Hi Peter,

Gee, I wish I'd known you were in town last night, Roberta and I could have taken you and yours out to dinner, or Roberta would have enjoyed cooking something yummy for you at our house.  Of course, then I would have put you to work helping set up my new toys in the listening room, turning your trip into more of a working vacation--not what you need right now!

If you're in Big Sur for lunch today (it's almost lunchtime as I write), go to Nepenthe; what a view!  Matt might suggest the restaurant at Post Ranch Inn for dinner, but that would set you back some serious money; but, like Nepenthe, a killer view.  Less spectacular a view but equally fine food (for less money) can be had at Ventana Inn.  Matt will surely have some great input on this.  Enjoy!

Hi Matt, great to hear of another (relatively) close Phasure Phan!  Maybe after you and I finally get our systems settled in we can meet for some listening/tweaking.

Peter, have fun...you're hitting some great weather here on the coast!

Mark

Hey Mark, We enjoyed having you visit the room. Thanks for the comments above and please let the forum know how the NOS1 is settling in.

Here we are almost a week after the show and I think overall the event was very good for Phasure. First, Peter was able to introduce his personal brand to the West Coast and meet/chat in depth with a number of Bay Area based engineers in the field. Second, although the room sound wasn't perfect by any means, the SQL was extremely smooth and extended out into the room nicely. After fighting with the very bright Heil tweeter for half a day, we decided to cover them with a sock (literally) and stick with songs that emphasized the speaker's strong points: dynamics, low-level detail, ambience.

The speakers were Surreal Audio Fifth Row speakers, an interesting design that consisted of the ESS Heil AMT tweeter on top, a 7" mid range driver hand made by David Chaffey of DC Gold Audio, and six 10" bass drivers in a separate bass enclosure. We used a Crown Xti 4002 amp to power the bass and a beautiful Wells Audio Innamurata SS amp to power mid and tweeters. The speakers can be seen here:
http://www.surreal-sound.net

I first heard the Surreal speakers at Newport and thought they sounded great. What happened unfortunately was the speakers were altered after the Newport show, for what reason we know not. The mid range driver was pulled and swapped for the DC Gold Audio 7" cone, and the Heil tweeter was installed with no resistors in the line to attenuate it's brightness. I am told the crossover point for the new mid range cone was never adjusted properly and there was a resulting mid-bass hole in a crucial area, along with extremely bright sound from the Heil. The room sound really emphasized the upper mid and treble of music. Peter was the first to notice on day one that things weren't right.

The crucial mistake for me was in keying up a track by Lorraine Hunt Lieberson for Jason, Lorraine is one of his favorite sopranos. At low volumes, Lorraine's voice was sweet and smooth. But as the song climaxed, her voice began to break up at top and Jason's well-tuned ears saw it coming.

In retrospect, anyone of the relatively unknown components we brought together could have gone wrong and I think Peter's point from above is that we may use his equipment/speakers for any further shows. Overall, the room sound had strengths and weaknesses, but the smooth and harmonically rich sound we encountered, and deep extended soundstage, were noted by all who listened.

Per Peter's comments above about the Zalman, he is correct. We used two computers connected via x-over cable, my Zalman fabless (Zuma) design used as storage and his XXHighend/Silverstone pc as the player pc running a RAMdrive.

/LM

Hi All,
Slight correction to the comment about the mid-range in the Fifth-Row speaker. The speaker was built for the Newport Show where we were using the Atma-Sphere OTL amp - it has a reverse impedance power curve, so the speaker was designed to be more efficient in the mid-range with a slightly higher impedance mid-range driver than the tweeter. Because of time limitations and spacing out a bit, I did not have time to swap out the mid-range before the California Audio Show as I should have, to balance the sound. The highs were a bit "forward" - my mistake.
David

Hi there David,

Don't feel bad about this. Worse things in life exist, right ?
And hey, we better thank you for all of your help !

Best regards,
Peter