XXHighEnd

I have a few dacs at the house now and have been playing with all of them, and getting far more bass detail from my system than I ever heard with my usual setup (XX+NOS1). Here I was thinking the problem was my room, or perhaps an impedance mismatch. But for example, with the use of a borrowed QB-9 and JRiver, with a default installation on a win machine (nothing tweaked or minimized), I get a huge increase in bass and even mid bass. This is compared with my normal setup of XX with the NOS1 on the same machine. With the XX setup, the sound has always been smooth with a clean high end, but the bass has always been non-existent for me. Now I am scratching my head. What is the cause— I know this can't be correct and I need to correct.

One issue I find is that with the NOS1 (I use a preamp), the preamp vol needs to be turned way up, as the gain from the NOS1 seems low. But with the QB-9 driving the preamp, I have the vol set to the smallest increment, otherwise it will be too loud. But bass can be felt through the floor with QB-9. With the NOS1 sound, there is no bass.

Can anyone shed some light on what I am doing wrong? Would it help if I had the gain adjusted on the NOS1? Is there an impedance mismatch (which the QB-9 doesn't have)?

Thanks anyone.
/LM

This is a tough one Lee...

I normally have a NOS1 here in my home office/study, but it's currently with Paul (Scroobius). In its place, I'm using an Audioquest Dragon for now. And I can say that I'm getting 'a lot more' bass than I normally do with the NOS1.

But it seems to me that its a typical 'quantity' vs. 'quality' situation. The bass sounds deep and makes the room reverberate... but I wouldn't say it's particularly tuneful.

Having said this, I've heard a stock NOS1 vs. a Nick/Paul-modded NOS1 and I have to say the latter made the former sound thin and lacking in bass.

As I said, it's tough...

Mani.

Hey Lee,

Sit back and think. I just did that.
Now, of course I don't know what you exactly regard a lack of bass, but what about the Show we ran ? Was there a lack of bass ? I don't think so. Of course you can blame the speakers used there, but even if so ... (then blame your speakers).
It was your NOS1 we used.

So both feet on the ground, don't fool yourself with something else which only needs a fraction of the volume to blast the room and now *that* suddenly being good. How can it ?
But maybe it tells something;

I didn't sort it out, but wasn't the QB-9 the one with a virtual 0 Ohm output impedance ? if so, it can be that you use such poor interlinks that even the 33 Oms of the NOS1 don't do the job needed (but the QB-9 just does).

So you use a pre-amp. Why ? well, no need to answer, but try it without. Just to see whether that's the one with a too low or failing input impedance. Your power amp(s) should be okay always.

If something is "too hot" it will be very bassy from it. All overblown. You may like the bass you always lack, but that kind of bass can't be right.

Again all feet on the ground ... Your NOS1 just shows the standardized output level (actually a bit more, 2,25VRMS). This is for XLR and for RCA it is 6dB less. 6dB is not all that much, or at least not so that any other DAC only requires a first smallest volume step to blast while this standard minus 6dB remains quiet. So better investigate the QB-9 and what you have set "wrong" there (like +4dBu or whatever (Pro) output level).

All 'n all I am afraid that it is as it is, with one option only :
Very poor interlinks (or way too long, but I don't think yours are really long).

And a question : I feel you have this lacking bass issue only lately. IOW, why didn't you make any remarks during the show like "hey, NOW I hear bass !". And a suggestion : Might your answer be "but over there there also was no bass showing" then ... we have subjective ears.

So ... something is not right; you are correct on that one.

??
Peter

Yes Mani, it is tough. It is also a bit tough for me to read that you bring this up again. So I know it is quite offtopic in here, but in my own defense, what you listen to there is all over wrong. And without quoting, there is no single way that such a setup is for the better just because I too have ears and I listen for quite some more things than others do, possibly because my situation already is quite different here. And it sure is of no use to try to correct things in aftermath and again claim that all is right now. I hope we all know what I am talking about.
The chance has been there and it failed miserably in something like 24 hours of working time (really).

But you honestly said it, it's tough. So of course everybody can do anything he likes to squeeze out more bass from e.g. speakers which inherently can't. Using Windows 7 will also help. But with decent listening it is not for the better. Some things don't even need decent listening at all but not everybody can do that. So when I claim in 5 seconds "ok, this does not work any more" the other guy may claim a "better because more bass". We can all suit ourselves. But this is different from claiming a "better" while no absolute sense exists about what better is. Let me put it more straight or more easy to understand :

"You" can fuzzy up matters by being in whatever space with tuned clocks etc. Fine. But when that's left out of the equation and your modded NOS1 (though it wasn't exactly yours) is put in my system with at the PC end nothing done but a Silverstone card, that modded NOS1 sounds the most poor of all. And with poor I mean really poor. If someone *then* thinks that any tuned crystal at the other end is going to help that, well, then maybe that someone does not understand. But it really won't help - ever.

Hey, all what I'm heading at is that -thus- everybody can do what he likes, but which is different from not quite understanding what is happening but next propose it as "generally better". So it is that part I don't like about it, and what clearly steams me up. In the end it is so simple (about bass) : when you find a tweak that let a 10" woofer (or two of them, just saying) blast out some more bass, then it only can be so that this will not work out the same for an 18" woofer. So mind you, that 10" is just totally underrated which doesn't mean that equalizing won't help; it will (to some extend). But apply the same equalizing to that 18" and ... do I need to explain ?
Similarly works jitter; jitter is audible in the lowest frequencies the best, and applying more of it will imply lower (freq.) sound but worse bass. And now don't let me start *again* about those super poor Dexa's.

So Mani, out of all this was not addressed to you of course; you only stirred my pot a little. But it should be addressed to all who so easily make the mistake of thinking something got better while actually it got worse. And this "bass" subject seemed a good one to make it clear somewhat (I mean with already proven not-working-concepts, no matter some have difficulties with that).

Things ARE mighty difficult and not everybody has the experience yet to see through all while listening, let alone that we now try to talk about it. And I too obviously learn more each single day. Really so. But anyway - and back to Lee - ...
Lee, you will recall everybody happy at the first setup in that Show room, right ? That stopped within the one minute that I was in there. But why exactly ? well, I only pointed out something, and next everybody was disturbed right away. You will never forget that any more because it can't get out of your brains any more. It only needed pointing out - done. The problem was not solved, but still the speaker owners/builders cried literally (from sheer joy) because of the sound they perceived. They probably were not used to much. Then the reviewer came in. You know, the guy that *is* used to much. That didn't last long ...

Yes, so tough.
I hope this is all taken well.
Peter

Not sure who this is directed at, but on my side, yes of course.

Maybe I should have qualified my listening to Paul's modded NOS1 with "... in his system"...

Once I have the Orelos here, of course I will try them with both my totally standard NOS1 and my 'Nick/Paul-modded' NOS1 and will simply use whichever NOS1 I prefer the sound of. I trust no-one's ears more than my own... including yours Peter. Do you remember the first time I came around to your place and was able to identify the hires track from the 16/44.1 one (that you couldn't)? Haha...

Mani.

See ?

But that wasn't about identifying; It was about which one was better and you could convince me (yes it was Yes).
However, in the end it actually was not about that at all, but about the experience and knowledge on your side what all could be from a same recording/mix and thus would be comparable. And I think I can still count that on one hand only, and THIS in itself is because I refuse to try all the sh*t out there.

But it is good you reminded me, because it is one of the situations I won't forget easily which is because I like my theories to be right, and I was not right there.

Thanks ...
Peter

Since I came back to this hobby in 2010, I never really attached much importance to the bass. I could immediately tell that the bass coming from the Tannoy speakers were "shy" compared to what I was used to listen to, but I have always felt that the bass was "fat" before, up to a point where I had trouble hearing the details of the rest of the spectrum.

While it bugged me (with the Tannoy), at the time I had (and still have) my Bryston dac, what I really discovered with XXHE is that the bass has different tones ! This has been a revelation for me.

The "subs" I got were a move I did because some friends told me they were surprised by the lack of bass. But this is how we tend to appreciate SQ or should I mention what one thinks about SQ.

With the replacement of my Bryston dac (with the NOS1), apart from the other qualities I noted, the bass is simply even more startling with the tones and the "fine canvas" it reveals.

And yes at some point I was fooled by the higher output of the Bryston (I insist on the word "fooled").

Alain

Unfortunately, yes.

I'm currently using a pair of old Celestion SL600 speakers powered by a pair of Bert's mono amps, and man, these speakers can sing (never heard them sounding so musical until I tried them with these amps). And yet I'd bet my house that most people would comment on their lack of bass. High-passing them at around 100KHz and using a sub or two might help, but it would have to be so carefully done that I think it's more effort than is worthwhile.

Mani.

Poor Lee.

Lee, nobody is neglecting your problem, and most certainly not me. I can only hope that this all brings you some insight and don't hesitate to share your thoughts. Ok ?

Peter

I've seen this issue with the older version of W8, while sequentially comparing 2 pairs of speakers with a particular pair of speaker cables (this was used because of convenience) a while back. I know both demonstrate that same low frequency on a pair of different cables, surprisingly one did, and the other didn't with this new cable. Of note, DAC and XXHE was not rebooted when switching speakers.

Hey, thanks all for responses.

So, here's the thing. I had a BAAS event here a few weeks ago where several people brought dacs (Chord Hugo, Chord QuteHD, QB-9, iFi Dac to name a few). The sounds all of course varied. But what was most strange for me was the bass—in all other dacs (using Jriver and also Amarra on the Mac for comparison). The room was filled with it, not bloated bass but tight, appropriate bass and a tonal richness which I was not used to.

To me, low level detail is crucial. When you listen to a church organ or double bass for example, there is nothing like low level detail to get your foot tapping. And all of these dacs were providing significantly more bass than my NOS 1/XX setup, which tells me something is wrong with my configuration. I am talking about bass that you can feel (like the bass we heard Peter, from that recording when your son was playing drums) vs no bass detail at all.

There is one exception: when I play higher rez material, I get much better bass and don't need to turn the vol up so much to hear it.

You mentioned the sound at the CAL show, Peter. TBH, I noticed a brightness almost immediately, but kept quiet. If you remember, the bass was very dynamic in this room, from the Surreal Sound speakers, as the bass enclosure was actively powered by a Crown amp (with gain controls turned way up as if to EQ the bass a bit).

And if you remember, the Venture setup? What have I always said about Didi's sound? So bright and forward that I need to leave the room. This for both trade shows I witnessed. My guess is this is the way Didi likes his sound, because he sat there quite happy with it. And there were of course many strengths to his system, just not in the bass, IMO.

What should bass sound like? Ideally it should sound live. When you stand to the side of a live band and listen to kick drums, you feel them in the chest. I think this feeling should be evident in any hifi system as well, along with crystal clear but smooth highs, analog sound mids, vivid transients, etc. But like Robert Harley said once in his book, the kick drum is what gets your foot a tappin' (or something like that).

My XX setup has gone through many variations over the last two years and I've always assumed my room has significant suck out. Now I think the problem is not so much with the room, as with some lack of synergy with my system.

Will keep experimenting, but something tells me the problem lies with a low output impedance from the Dac?

One last note. I remember ripping music from HDAD discs a few years ago (to 24-192k) and getting very flat, poor dynamics from these rips. Could it be that up sampling music from XX to 768k somehow softens the dynamics a bit?

/Lee

Lee, if I were you, I'd try a single HDD in your PC, so essentially you'd only have a single SATA connection.  I would install the OS and XX in a separate 100GB partition on the HDD. There would then be two options for where to store the music:

1. On the rest of the HDD, assuming it's a big one and can accommodate all your music. (This is what I do.)

2. On a NAS or other network drive. You would then need to have the 'Keep LAN services' button active, and the adjacent 'Persist' button inactive, in order for XX to shut down the LAN in Unattended playback.

Yeah, a bloody PITA I know, but it made a big difference here, I'd say especially in the bass.

Good luck.

(Totally OT: what did you think about the Hugo? I'm thinking of getting one later in the year to use during my work travels, and I'd love to hear your views, seeing as you have a good reference with which to compare.)

Mani.

The settings in my signature gives me a more powerful upper bass. Try it!

Mani,

Will play with your suggestions and let you guys know. Thanks also to Pedal.

As for the QuteHD and the Hugo, both sounded very similar, but a tad too resolved and slightly digital sounding for me, much like the Schict Dac, which is much less expensive. The real winner of the day was the QB-9, due to its lushness, expansive sound, and overall analog-like musicality. All were in agreement on this. We used a QB-9 that did not have the dad upgrade, which I am told is very worthwhile.

The Hugo is a nice little box, but a tad too expensive I think, for what you get. The unit we used had recessed rca ports, so I couldn't use any of my cables, a big shame. Same for the tiny micro port for usb input. Talk about PITA. But overall the sound was impressive for this little walkman sized unit. And it comes with a nice analog vol control. Cool lights too.

Also of note, the group unexpectedly came to a universal conclusion about a certain usb cable. We had several cables that we played with at the end of the day, one was data only. By far the best sounding cable was the Synergistics Active SE cable, which just added a sense of lushness and rich harmonic quality to the sound. I am not big on pricey cables, but the difference was clear. And Ted always has great demos at the shows.

Thanks again guys, and Peter, for the tips. My weekend is cut out for me.

/Lee

Can be Lee. But please do notice (and remember) that when something like this is happening, something clearly is very wrong.
Of course you can like it for the better but if any USB cable (same topology assumed - like contains no power etc.) makes a difference on the NOS1 we would have to assume that something is wrong in that area.
This forum is half-full with this subject, and maybe you missed it all.
(and on this matter, we possibly never talked about the big surprise I ran into, seeing you using an active (??) USB cable at that Show)

Peter

Lee,


I have been reading your post(s) over and over, but I can't get any logical sense in my response. But here goes :

If you could only admit that at the Show there was a lacking bass. But you don't and I don't either.
So what's left is that something is broken, which you seem to be hinting at. But by all means I can not imagine how or where. And it probably won't help you that never anything broke anywhere so far (apart from soe tweakers literally blowing things).
I think I do see though that you seem to compare apples with oranges. That is, I see you use different playback software for the other DACs. Do I get this right ?

My quote above is for a reason and I like to stick to my previous suggestion :
If you perceive stumpin' bass etc. from all of those other DACs then that bass is not right. This is not in any defense and certainly not to tell that "thus" all other out there is wrong, but it is the only logical conclusion I have make out of it.
Read your own text again, and now please "know" that no kick drum will be able to spring from your speakers as how you want it / described it, unless the remainder of the bass is not right. And I know, you described that as detailed and stiff and etc., but it doesn't tell me much really. Just as that it won't tell you much when I describe how that bass should be when really stiff and blablblah. Right ?

So think back Lee. How many 10 inchers where there in those Surreal Sound speakers ? I didn't look it up but I'd say 4 at least, but maybe 6 or even 7. Now you count them and count yours too and let me know. But ahead of that :
When I compare my current Orelo MKII speakers containing 3x15" and a sensitivity like hell with my old speaker of 1x15" with also OK sensitivity but less, and I TELL you that no kick drum was able to come from the old speakers ... and which is sheer theory already ...
... then you tell me how any QB-9 can do it in good fashion.

Hey, my old speaker also used subwoofer support (2x) and still it could not work. But it can't because all is too poor and too little woofer surface.

So mind you, what you actually day (but not explicitly of course) is that all the theories (and/or my own findings) are completely wrong and all it takes is another DAC.
So I'd have to ask you : who will have the best chances here ? The one which for sure is able to squeeze out the best superb bass from Bose Milk packs after all, or the one which tells that this really is totally impossible unless you listed to a blurped bass.

You know what I will choose here.
And this now *has* to make any QB-9 the wrong one in my eyes - there's just nothing else to do.
But mind you, it is you who came up with the kick drum as that determing parameter. You *are* right on that you know and it is only that you don't recognize that it can not happen (with your speaker).

It will be too simplified, but think like this :
A kick drum as a surface (square inch). Notice that to my eyes this looks larger than a random "home" woofer.
Still agreed ?
Ok, so the size of it together with the cabinet will create a base frequency (this is around 38Hz bu kick drums too come in sizes). Now watch the kick and observe the amount of "length" the skin is pressed in. What shall we say ? 1 inch ? (could be too much and I can look for real if you want).

So one inch.
This one inch - spread over the surface of the skin - creates the sound pressure (SPL). Let's say that because of this spread the average spread is 0.5 inch.
Now we are getting somewhere because this could be the excursion of your woofer. Notice though that *if* this is the real excursion of the woofer it already heavily distorts. But never mind yet because you will not be able to recognize that (from the kick drum hit). Remember though, it does at this excursion, no matter how good the driver is.

But wait, because we have to incorporate the surface of the kick drum's skin in order to compare;
Do you feel it coming ?
Now you know, I don't need a calculator right away to see that my 3x 15" is larger than this one in itself larger than 15" kick drum skin. So I have a chance of reproducing the kick drum at the same excursion, but of course less because I have a large surface to create the SPL. Maybe it is on the limits of allowed distortion (THD), but I have a chance.
Now you.

So I anticipate 1x 12". Of course I don't know, but you will repeat the math (and in real good fashion might you feel things could be OK - haha). But no, you too don't need a calculator to see that this 12" is way smaller than the kick drum's skin. What shall we say ? 4 times smaller ? maybe it's even 6.

So 4 times smaller.
Now the excursion needed for the same SPL is 4x 0.5 inch and this is 2 inch.
Don't try this.

But Lee, still you virtually try to accomplish this. Just use something which implies a crazy low frequency output and with a lot of too much excursion you will have your kick drum.
And it will sound something like that, but no way for real. Nit the kick in the stomache thing, no matter you think it is OK. And you are allowed to. For a kick drum I mean.

But now the normal bass. The upright one. Also something like 38Hz.
A quite dangerous thing, because when used with a bow it is inherently square and it will be harder to observe for it being right or not. Anyway the same applies although the SPL needed for reality levels could be lower. So excursion could be less. But mind you, less than 2 inch which won't go ever. Now make that bass 6dB less in SPL and only 1 inch will be needed (yes, that simple). Allowed ? still not.
Then make it another 6dB lower and probably this is in the right (reality) direction. Now excursion is 0.5 inch.
Well, we started out with that, and distortion will be as huge as I already told about. But now you think this is a right bass. So if you do, all is fine.
But what is not so fine is that it is not true at all and now you hunt for a problem in a DAC (NOS1) which most 99,99% probably is not there.

Pffff
The only thing really left for me is how any QB-9 et all is able to produce so much more bass. I don't know the answer to that. But some times things are done quite easy and for that you only need to think back about your former Alpha. Now that had a fuzzy bass. So yes, it can be done (of course fuzzy is different from loud but now I claim that too loud = fuzzy for a QB-9).

I say it again : You started with the kick drum - not me. But I think I could proove over that that you can't be listening to any good bass. For that you need different speakers.

Now let's continue your further and original quest because I sure did not try to talk myself out of this. So what about the levels of te QB-9 ? something has to be odd there.

Peter

Hey Peter,

You never said anything about the active usb cable at the show and at the time I had not really been seeing much about them. I would assume that using a data only usb cable would be beneficial to maybe cleaner highs, but bass?

No, the show sound was not lacking for bass at all—it was turned way up on the Crown amp's two gain knobs. Heck no, the bass was pumping.

Peter,

Just working thru your last response, I totally agree with you: if a dac is adding that much more bass detail than another one, something is not right.

Second, bloated, clumsy or too much bass is not the goal. But low-level detail in any song (IMO) is what gets the foot tapping and can make music more emotional, more engaging, as you can actually feel it. I referenced those two live examples, a church organ and the kick drum of a rock band. These are difficult to reproduce by any speaker, but not impossible. So perhaps we agree that there is a balance of bass with other higher frequencies, the ideal of which can be pleasing, engaging and natural to most listeners. Hard to describe in words though.

The Surreal speakers has 6 10" drivers in each speaker enclosure—and yet, the Raven ribbon tweeters still won out! We had to drop a sock over them to attenuate (and keep our ears from frying) as you remember. Personnaly I liked the 6 drivers in the bass enclosures. In so many rooms, bass (seems) harder to reproduce properly, as it is smeared and sucked out. Toole describes it in his book as the one thing (that is so bad in most rooms) that you should attempt to address it. So why not add a few more bass drivers? Seems like a solid approach to me. Or try 3 x 15" drivers.

Next sentence is not correct. I am not suggesting that your theories are wrong in any way, or that all it takes is a Dac to reproduce better bass. You know I am not suggesting this, but rather am just explaining my experience from the BAAS demo event at the house: trying to explain the problem and therefore effect an solution. The only variable we changed was the Dac that day. Then later we started swapping out usb cables as well. So why could this be? That is my point. Could it be the impedance/gain issue from the sac to preamp or amp? Could it be a setting in XX, as Pedal has suggested above? This is what I need to find out.

Your treatise on kick drum skin is logical. No way my single 10" driver can faithfully reproduce the kick drum. However I can get it to make a kick drum-like sound that is tight and gets the house rattling, if I so choose. I do find it pleasing sometimes to actually feel the bass in this way, depending on the track. Our neighbors growing up had a large church organ in their home (lower than kick drum, I know) and you could literally feel the bass vibrate the house (and the entire street). My speakers will pale in comparison, but they can get down to 30hz and can get the house rattling without creating audibly distorted bass. So this can still be pretty cool feeling. Whether it applies or denies your surface area logic or not, I don't know. But I can hear and feel it nonetheless.

So the goal is to find out what changes I need to make to XX and NOS1 to effect this low-level detail. That is the point of my post. My current XX/NOS1 sound seems as though a large room sickout is happening, there is much emphasis on voice and frequencies above this. But there is so much more detail that occurs below this 200-300Hz range that I am just not getting. Does the QB-9 achieve this by turning up the gain?

I need to explore a few other possibilities/configurations before posting back here.

/Lee

Ok Lee. Thank you for the elaboration.
I'll won't bug you until you're back. I hope you will find (out) something. But ask if you have a question.

Best regards,
Peter

Lee, no I won't bug you, but this jumped back into my mind :


because I seemed not to have a real answer to this one from you :


But the answer can easily be in that first quote, with the notice I spend a longer post on that one already. Re: Bass Issue (Lack thereof) (http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=2939.msg30889#msg30889).
More importantly though, by now I forgot what I have been writing about a 100 times and this is how the more poor USB interface make the bass wayyy more "low". Btw this goes together with really attenuated highs, and everybody will appreciate it as for the better. But it is not.

So small information, may you have missed it back at the time :
When I started to work on the USB interface this "super bass" jumped at me but after a couple of days I got a braindamage from the blanketed highs and since I also measure ...
... I found what is all going on which such an asynch interface and determined that it was only bad for jitter etc. blahblah. So, this forum is still full of it, like that small quote from Mani actually is part of it (referring to a huge subject in itself).

All together Lee, I don't know how I missed it, but for way more bass it only needs a common "lousy" USB interface. Common means : I don't think anyone solved that, but it was in the NOS1 and this is how USB cables won't matter (but keep the topology the same when comparing).
The story is way longer again, like what Manu refers to is (and how I responded to that - see given link).

Anyway, I think or hope this can answer the question about the QB-9; just a poor USB interface with the emphasis on that this will be common and not QB-9 specific. And that too explains things you talked about.

Peter

PS: Small disclaimer : When I talk about "solved for the NOS1" then this is to be read is "way better solved for the NOS1" because solving it 100% takes a different approach; this is not important for in here, but I just don't like to speak untruths.