The Lush

[lateboomer]

I will try it at bank's counter to do wire transfer instead of online.

[PeterSt]

Hi lateboomer,

I tried to order 1 m Lush from the webshop but it didn't able to log in to Paypal to complete the payment.

That is something I never heard of. Can't it be just on your side ?

For wire transfer it needs additional details like person's name, email address and passport id.

All these details are shown on the page where you can select the wire transfer. However, when you are one step further, that data is not showing any more and you will be at a loss of what to do.

I will try it at bank's counter to do wire transfer instead of online.

Nah, that would be non-sensical. Besides you will still need the data you think you don't have.

I will send you and email (to the address you registered with the forum) and you can pay to PayPal from there. OK ?

Kind regards and thanks,
Peter

[lateboomer]

Ok. I got your email. I will try to do it tonight. Thank you.

[badgerline]

Hey, Peter - I just found your new recommendation for configuration on the audiolifestyle forum. I like it. For me, it is a more exciting sound than the consensus config, with greater definition across the whole frequency range. However, some solidity is lost and the increased detail in the upper mids sounds a little 'etched'. For me, it is a little like changing from a tube amp to solid state, to keep with your amplifier analogy. I like tubes :-)

[badgerline]

Try this: the consensus, but B:YR instead of B:WBR.

Just as solid, but a different type of midrange (more transparent/cleaner?)

It's what I'm using for now, though I don't think it sounds better than the consensus, which is richer in the low mids.

[briefremarks]

Hi Badger,

Two questions:
- Is the new configuration from Audiolifestyle that you refer to: A: B-W & Y-R; B: B-W;

- Is the suggested configuration B:Y-R with Y on pin 1?

Thanks,

Ramesh

[badgerline]

Hi there,

Yes, that's the config I meant from Audiolifestyle: A: B-W & Y-R; B: B-W;

And also yes, I set my config up with Y on pin 1 on B. I haven't tried reversing Y/R, but I would be amazed if it made a difference. Still, I have been amazed many times in the past

One other config I like in a dark-sounding system is A: B-W-Y-R, B: nothing connected! Everything jumps out, though there is not much refinement. Fun, though.

After a lot of testing last night, however, I went back to the consensus and toed in my speakers a bit more to reduce the low-mid bloom and I +think+ I prefer that overall.

[PeterSt]

Hey Badger,

By pure coincidence yesterday I got fed-up with that setting I proposed on A/S - for quite exactly the reasons you now mention. However :

After trying some other XXHighEnd settings for worse or even better (which is of course what "we" do as well ), nothing satisfied me at all any more (but I did not go back to the "Consensus"). In the end - and now for those with the Mach III Audio PC, I found that the way more "sharp" (as in pinpointed) 24 core setting instead of an also quite consensus 20 core setting (for the 28 core processor), ... that this did all the bad tricks. Thus, while the 24 core setting shows way better attack on everything, this may just be the thing that the "consensus" setting can bear. But the setting proposed on A/S is ... well ... too edgy;
My wife complained within minutes, but I held on for a month or so (she had to hold on too ;-).

I am now thus trying yet an other setting I ever back found and liked and just like I never could tell about the "A/S" setting in here yet because I was not sure, I will take as much time as needed to express my ideas if for the better at all.
Meanwhile I could also try your and Ramesh' setting.

Thank you very much for your feedback !
Peter