The greatest invention in/for Audio (Lush^2)

[PeterSt]

So here we go ...

Day before yesterday I thought to change my as of then config A: B-W-Y-W, B: B-W because no matter how greatly surprising it could be at times, I felt it had to be "wrong" but also and merely, the highs were a that too smeared for my liking. I mean, I know of better situations (regardless Lush^2) with the highs, and then also the conig prior to the just mentioned did that, but too much of it (too white).

So in I went with a fairly random but "just another" A: A: B-W & Y-R, B: B-W-Y-R. Thus at the source (A) Inner connected to connector, and at the target (B) all connected to the connector. Well ...
No.
Maybe I am wrong. but from the few similar permutations I tried, I recall that everything which connects at the target end but not on the source end, is odd for sound. Thus, something like : what is connected at the target's end but is not at the source end, kind of literally backfires towards the source end. Mind you, this is a line of thinking I adopt now, hoping for some logical reasoning.
The sound of this is super short and super dry and possibly it could have something, weren't it that the basses become unrecognizable of it and the highs show raspiness (like interrupted 200 times per second). My notes (and you should keep notes too !!) tell that there's also a whole lacking "lower highs" area. And oh, it is the first time on this forum that I am compelled to talk about "lower highs" (whereever that exactly is).

Then a next one came in soon, A: A: B-R, B: B-R. Aha, look, you can see that I now start to think from mere logic reasoning. Thus, instead of working with the Inner connected to the connector(s) I now thought to for a first time use an other - the Outer. Thus, at both ends the Outer connected to the Connector and that's all. It showed.
This should be the most similar to the original Lush, at least to my ears and remembrance. Maybe a tad less special than what I heard from my original Lush, and/but for me outside of the Mach III Audio PC (but I am using the Mach III). Anyway, better than the proposed and supposedly theoretically best Lush^1 resemblance - using the Inner to connect to both connectors. Theoretically because nothing much physically changed to the Lush^1 now, except for all the additional layers of Shield and Isolation.
After hearing this - nothing wrong with this and people should start out with this (read : we should ship the Lush^2 with this, perhaps), I can reason that the setup of the cable could resemble the Lush^1 because the Outermost shield is the one which is connected. So indeed, for the Lush^1 this would be true too (because there is only one shield it would be the Outermost, right ?).
I listened to this config for the next two hours, before the say was over. My idea about it : nothing wrong with it, but most certainly also nothing special with it.

Then yesterday came. Long before the playback session of the evening I had already written down a new A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: B-Y & W-R. And with this, I forced nyself to find configs "with reason". And well, this one is about the thought of balance, and how the Middle shield connects to the both connectors, that shield in itself protected by and surrounded with the two other shields. The "protected by" is quite explicit, because if those two, Inner and Outer would also connect to the connectors, it wouldn't be protective (in my electrical view and thinking). Thus, both the Inner and Outer shields just open ended at both sides, BUT connected to each other and thus not to the Middle shield.
And really, at the first hit (I am serious !) you can hear it is right.

This one, so far, has it all. It shows superb bass which also sings (see earlier post). It has highs which are "normal", but which somehow manage to squeeze out even more detail all over (read : actually continuously and not only "occasionally"). All, really all contains new sounds while at the same time music as such is playing (this latter is THE task). The electric butterflies are there, meaning that the spookiness is all over there again, but this time never in a way that you'd think : right, nice, but this has to be wrong.

What is completely new is what I think exactly lacked at the first config I wrote about in this post : an area of lower highs which now is profound. It makes electric guitars show a super steadiness, opposed to flanger (hopefully it is clear what I mean here). It is also the area where leannes could happen - as I now learned. Something like : if there's a profound top end but right under that there's a relative nothing, we might experience this as lean. Make that the other way around and the sound becomes full, with as key the top end still being there as much as before (or otherwise the stuffed ears feeling becomes profound).

Somehow this config not only comes across as correct all over and balanced all over (which would be the same thing) but also as technically behaving consistently over the whole (audible) frequency range. This in itself would be the same as "balanced" but this latter is only the expression of the behavior (and how we perceive it). Thus, while this shielding is somehow attacking frequency areas, this config attacks all areas similarly, or, does not inluence them similarly (this is about what actually is the culprit in there - which we or at least I don't know yet).

If there is one thing that could be improved upon - after my observation of 3-4 hours of listening to this - it is mentioned now more profound lower highs. I mean, I like that very much, but the toilet test shows that exactly these frequencies are heard best being in the toilet, behind two closed doors down the road.

I will listen to this for several days now (unless something starts to annoy) and for those who like to experiment faster than me, my next one undoubtedly will be this one : A: A: B-Y & W-R, B: W-R. This disconnected the Middle from the target (B) connector and leave it open. The "protection" of the other two shields remain as they were.

Peter

[PeterSt]

....

[PeterSt]

All,

Everybody who was in last Friday's (Sept 14) shipment, received a config where the A and B connectors were swapped against what was promised on the withgoing paper (which latter also lacked in one (?) occcasion). The config was meant to be like what you see below. Please adjust accordingly because what was delivered was untested and has unknown result.

Apologies for the inconvenience !
Peter

[PeterSt]

Hi all,

I am contemplating not to post here any more, because I seem to be the only one sharing.

Good idea ?

Regards,
Peter

[Gerard]

Hi all,

I am contemplating not to post here any more, because I seem to be the only one sharing.

Good idea ?

Regards,
Peter

No

Not a good idea!

 

[briefremarks]

Definitely not a good idea.  I've just got everything set up again to try the various Lush^2 configurations.

[PeterSt]

A: B-W-Y-R, B: B-W-R

Maybe I was in a hallucinative mood yesterday, but I can't imagine that it can be better than this. Sound it out-ra-ge-ous-ly good.
OK, what is "good" ... maybe I deceive myself ...

The best I could describe it, is that it is about the experience. This is how "hallucinative" comes in. It feels like I put up some musicians in the room, they see my mood (like a DJ does that) and start playing for me the exact way I want it.
All right, this can't be described. It must be felt. Experienced.

Especilly the bass is like never before. It has a power ... unheard. And the strange thing : still of the best quality. Very articulate. More strange : no disco like bass. I mean, something which isn't supposed to sound like disco, should not suddenly be disco (I made such a remark on one of the other configurations).

In the midst of all this power is the somehow excelling highs. Nothing muffled because of too much bass. All superbly expressing. Possibly this is because those "lower highs" (upper mid) seems to be less profound with this config. It creates a more black distance to the highs, as it seems.

The most noticable is the palpability this now shows. As if each hit - no matter how transient and subsequently fast - received the room to add large envelope and decay.

Actually it is a bit crazy (again that word, I see ); we'd say that even the largest DSP would not be able to change the sound like this does now. What ever happened to PeterSt's "the USB cable won't matter much, if anything". Yeah, those good old days of the $1 cable.
Today we toy with shields. Say again ? yea, shields. Kirk is dead but USS Enterprise's shielding start to be under our control. The Trek continues.

Chekov: "Shields up, Captain?"

Peter

[Nick]

Peter,

Definatly keep posting here.
The CA thread is interesting but can be fustrating sometimes.

A lot of folks here use NOSs so here there are more likley to be relevant observations for NOS systems here.

Having said this, I cannot contribute for a week or so as Im half way through a PC power supply build  but will be back to this topic when the PC is running again.

Cheers Nick.

[dsm]

Peter,

Even though I haven't purchased the Lush^2 yet, all these posts will be valuable to look though again once I have one.

Please keep up with your posts and observations on the changes in sound with each different configuration.

Best,

David

[manisandher]

I tried a few configs today.

1. A: B-W-Y-R, B: open

Wow, what a crazy sound. Almost holographic. Very appealing for first few seconds, but then sort of disorientating. A bit vague - not anchored.

(It's a similar feeling I have when I'm sitting in the aisle on a plane - I really don't like not having a reference (being able to look outside the window and see the ground) when taking off and landing especially.)

2. A: B-W-Y-R, B: B-W

More solid. But still slightly unnaturally holographic.

3. A: B-W-Y-R, B: B-R

I think similar to 2, but I need to go back and check.

4. A: B-W-Y-R, B: B-Y

I had a slight preference for this over 2 and 3, but I really need to go back and check.

5. A: B-W-Y-R, B: B-W-Y-R

This is giving me the most pleasant sound. All traces of an 'unnaturally holographic' sound have gone. Just a really nice, balanced and anchored sound. So this is what I'll stick with for now.

I really need to do a lot more listening. But for now, it seems to me that having any shields connected at A but floating at B introduces an unnaturalness to the sound. This seems to become progressively more pronounced the more shields you connect in this way.

When I have more time I'll try some other configs.

Mani.

[briefremarks]

Mani,

Did you try Peter's last config: A:B,W,R,Y  B: B,W,R?  I've been listening to this for a couple of days, and the sound is mesmerizing, and not at all unnatural.  At least two friends who have listened recently have looked around while the music is playing to essentially ask: where did that come from? 

More soon...

Ramesh

[manisandher]

Hi Ramesh, yes I had been using A: B-W-Y-R  B: B-W-R for quite a few days before yesterday and was very happy with it.

If you think about it, my current A: B-W-Y-R  B: B-W-Y-R is very close to Peter's config - it just 'closes' the Y shield too. Yes, this seems to take away some of the magic from the sound, but replaces it with even more solidity.

I'm trying to figure out what effect having a shield connected at A but floating at B has on the sound, and whether this sounds natural or artificial. What I'm finding (I think) is that if you start with A: B-W-Y-R  B: B-W-Y-R, and then progressively float W, W&Y, W&Y&R at the B end, you will hear a progressive increase in this 'unnaturally holographic sound' that I mentioned earlier. Having just one floating, as in Peter's config, seems to provide just enough of the effect for it to sound interesting and not to bother.

This is all conjecture at this point. Lots more playing around and listening required.

Mani.

[briefremarks]

Mani,

There might be a difference experimenting with the Mach II vs Mach III. My experience is that despite the big difference the Lush^2 can make, the most astounding improvement I've had is with the upgrade to the Mach III. There is no way to overstate how much the Mach III transforms the quality of SQ.

Ramesh

[manisandher]

There is no way to overstate how much the Mach III transforms the quality of SQ.

I don't doubt this for a second Ramesh, and I'll no doubt get hold of a Mach III at some point. But for now, the Mach II is fine... especially considering that my Mach II is no ordinary Mach II (see signature )

Mani.

[manisandher]

I'm back to A: B-W-Y-R  B: B-W-R.

My previous A: B-W-Y-R  B: B-W-Y-R sounds too 'dense', too 'thick', and as a result, just too uninteresting.

I can't believe what a difference floating the Y shield at the B connector makes. I hope someone can figure out exactly what's going on because this simple change changes the sound completely.

Mani.