• From: US
  • Registered: 2022-04-07
  • Posts: 4

Topic: EQ question and baseline

Hello- I’m loving my ADI 2 so far, but having some trouble deciphering the manual.  Aside from Sonos, this is my first dive into D/A.  I am normally just a vinyl guy, but really want to have this option as well.  Hoping there is a magic setting or baseline that someone likes that can get me close.

My current set-up

Amp: McIntosh MA352 (has a front panel 5 band EQ) Hybrid tube input and ss output

Streaming Services: Tidal and Qobuz
Streamer: HiFi Rose RS250
DAC: ADI 2 DAC FS
Speakers: Focal Electra 1028 BE’s.

Connections:
Hard wired Ethernet to streamer. 
Streamer to ADI  coax interconnect
ADI to Amp-> Balanced XLR

In closing- I’m interested in filter settings and possible EQ tweaks that might be recommended for my similar set up.  I know it’s subjective and the whole “let your ears decide” lingo, and I get that… but getting a bit lost in the settings and a couple suggestions would be great.  Don’t fully understand the nomenclature in the user manual. I know this unit has the capability… just need some guidance. 

Thanks if you can help… Cheers!

  • KaiS
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: Germany
  • Registered: 2020-02-05
  • Posts: 3,523

Re: EQ question and baseline

As an entry I suggest to try the Loudness function first.

Look here for a setup guide:
https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.ph … 72#p185172

It’s a special kind of Equalizer and much closer to your requested “Magic Setting” than a random Parametric EQ can be.


PEQ can work magic/wonders too, but only with purpose-made settings.

For example, PEQ lifts my Mysphere 3.2 headphones from an outsider position to one of my very best headphones in the collection of TOTL ‘phones, doing things no other can.
But this setup wasn’t made in a minute.


Basically PEQ has two main tasks:

• Correction of faults, like deficiencies or overemphasizes in the frequency response.
To identify those a measurement tool is essential.
I usually suggest AudioTools App for iPhone/iPad, it’s fully self-contained, precise, and the basic function is free:
https://apps.apple.com/de/app/audiotools/id325307477

• Enhancements according to listeners taste, like global bass boosts.
These can be set in an experimental way.

KaiS's Website

3 Reply by Curt962 (edited by Curt962 2022-04-10 02:39:46)

  • Registered: 2019-01-07
  • Posts: 1,463

Re: EQ question and baseline

HLL2000,

Here's an overview of the thoroughly vetted Science behind RME's positively brilliant implementation of Dynamic Loudness: 

https://blog.landr.com/fletcher-munson- … listeners.

This is not HiFi nonsense.  This is Science!   

Dynamic Loudness is the most valuable tool at those times when "Concert Level" volumes are simply not practical.  *It works by applying a Vol.Setting dependent, Compensatory EQ that is consistent with the Fletcher-Munson Loudness Contours, and incrementally applied in a seamlessly smooth, Transitional fashion as we lower Volume.  All of this "Compensatory EQ" is based upon our setting of Low-Vol Reference   of which the User chooses referenced to whatever our typical LOUD listening level may be.    (As recordings vary widely, there is no PERFECT Volume for everything.  Use an average.)  ie:  If things are ROCKIN at -15dbr on your Vol knob, the Manual suggests you set Low-Vol ref -20db beneath that (-35dbr)   There's wiggle room here, but let's not go there right now.

Ex:  My Music varies widely, and my ideal Vol. Setting could vary from -5dbr, to -25dbr.   So?  -15dbr is about right as an average,  so I set my Low-Vol Ref to -35.   That works for me!! 

Regarding the Nomenclature used in the Manual... The User Manual is quite helpful, and written in non-ambiguous terms that DO aid in better understanding of the RME's various Functionalities/Sub-Systems.  Not Surprisingly,  we routinely see here that many Audiophiles are simply not used to TECHNICAL STRAIGHT TALK, and can be at times taken back somewhat by the lack of Poetic BS in the User Manual  wink  It needs to be this way because RME had a lot of info to explain to you, and using proper terminology aids in a better, more consistent understanding of the material.  Many "other" products offer little more than an On/Off switch, so of course their manuals are an easier read.  wink

Don't Worry!!  It'll all come Clear to you, and you'll soon begin to appreciate your improved understanding of Pro terminology, and your newfound ability to apply engineering approved techniques, and other methods of extracting more from all aspects of your HiFi!

Long story short...

RME did it right, and I wouldn't be without it!!

Best,

Curt

Vintage 2018 ADI-2 DAC. "Classic AKM4490 Edition"
Cables:  Red, and White Ones.
Speakers:  Yes
  • From: US
  • Registered: 2022-04-07
  • Posts: 4

Re: EQ question and baseline

Thanks… that is a comprehensive description and explanation.  Appreciate the time and the link.  I’m having fun with it and have enough understanding to make me a tad dangerous… I’m playing with the filters now… I played it with NOS for awhile and now switching between SD Sharp and sharp. 

Curious about brickwall also.  Really looking for the most natural output going into the 352.  Also on the Focal speaker, the tweeter is beryllium and does a nice job with treble.  On occasion it gets bright, and when I saw the slower roll offs, I keep reading about having to compensate or increase the treble gain.   Also trying to learn if I’m better making small detail changes from the RME, keeping it neutral and using the amp EQ or both

  • From: US
  • Registered: 2022-04-07
  • Posts: 4

Re: EQ question and baseline

Thanks… that is a comprehensive description and explanation.  Appreciate the time and the link.  I’m having fun with it and have enough understanding to make me a tad dangerous… I’m playing with the filters now… I played it with NOS for awhile and now switching between SD Sharp and sharp. 

Curious about brickwall also.  Really looking for the most natural output going into the 352.  Also on the Focal speaker, the tweeter is beryllium and does a nice job with treble.  On occasion it gets bright, and when I saw the slower roll offs, I keep reading about having to compensate or increase the treble gain.   Also trying to learn if I’m better making small detail changes from the RME, keeping it neutral and using the amp EQ or both

  • Registered: 2020-06-13
  • Posts: 72

Re: EQ question and baseline

Curt962 wrote:

HLL2000,

Here's an overview of the thoroughly vetted Science behind RME's positively brilliant implementation of Dynamic Loudness: 

https://blog.landr.com/fletcher-munson- … listeners.

This is not HiFi nonsense.  This is Science!   

Dynamic Loudness is the most valuable tool at those times when "Concert Level" volumes are simply not practical.  *It works by applying a Vol.Setting dependent, Compensatory EQ that is consistent with the Fletcher-Munson Loudness Contours, and incrementally applied in a seamlessly smooth, Transitional fashion as we lower Volume.  All of this "Compensatory EQ" is based upon our setting of Low-Vol Reference   of which the User chooses referenced to whatever our typical LOUD listening level may be.    (As recordings vary widely, there is no PERFECT Volume for everything.  Use an average.)  ie:  If things are ROCKIN at -15dbr on your Vol knob, the Manual suggests you set Low-Vol ref -20db beneath that (-35dbr)   There's wiggle room here, but let's not go there right now.

Ex:  My Music varies widely, and my ideal Vol. Setting could vary from -5dbr, to -25dbr.   So?  -15dbr is about right as an average,  so I set my Low-Vol Ref to -35.   That works for me!! 

Regarding the Nomenclature used in the Manual... The User Manual is quite helpful, and written in non-ambiguous terms that DO aid in better understanding of the RME's various Functionalities/Sub-Systems.  Not Surprisingly,  we routinely see here that many Audiophiles are simply not used to TECHNICAL STRAIGHT TALK, and can be at times taken back somewhat by the lack of Poetic BS in the User Manual  wink  It needs to be this way because RME had a lot of info to explain to you, and using proper terminology aids in a better, more consistent understanding of the material.  Many "other" products offer little more than an On/Off switch, so of course their manuals are an easier read.  wink

Don't Worry!!  It'll all come Clear to you, and you'll soon begin to appreciate your improved understanding of Pro terminology, and your newfound ability to apply engineering approved techniques, and other methods of extracting more from all aspects of your HiFi!

Long story short...

RME did it right, and I wouldn't be without it!!

Best,

Curt

Excellent post on a thorny topic for many to understand technically(including myself). Thanks for the clarity.

WY

CD Transport>optical>RME ADI-2 DAC FS(AKM)>XLR balanced >GLM software>Genelec Monitors 8340A

7 Reply by Curt962 (edited by Curt962 2022-04-10 16:27:09)

  • Registered: 2019-01-07
  • Posts: 1,463

Re: EQ question and baseline

Yuhasz, HLL,

Thanks for your nice comments.   That's what some of us attempt to do here.  It should be no surprise to anyone in this forum that "Curt" really likes Dynamic Loudness, and if we can explain this, or another functionality in such a manner that your understanding is bettered? 

That's a Win for All!

Enjoy!!

Curt

Vintage 2018 ADI-2 DAC. "Classic AKM4490 Edition"
Cables:  Red, and White Ones.
Speakers:  Yes

8 Reply by Curt962 (edited by Curt962 2022-04-10 17:12:02)

  • Registered: 2019-01-07
  • Posts: 1,463

Re: EQ question and baseline

HLL,

Late note on DAC filters:

They're there for your experimentation pleasure.   In my use case, a clear majority of my listening is done at 44/48khz, and the Sharp/SD Sharp suit my needs best.   At these modest sample rates, the Slow/NOS filters WILL yield a treble "roll-off" within the audible range.  Some users really dig that "Analog" sound, but I'm not amongst them.   I COULD simply create an EQ that would easily remedy this.   Well, I could...but a more "Universal" filter better suits my wishes.    Thus, Sharp/SD Sharp are more my style.  They need no EQ at any Sample Rate, and make my life so much easier.  My Listening Space is quite well treated, thus I'm not making Filter choices based upon a Room-Full of Screechy HF reflections that might lead one to choose a rolled-off filter to make things seem better.

I said my piece, so feel free to see which Filter suits you best!  There's NO Committment!   You can't top that. wink

Good Listening!

Curt

Vintage 2018 ADI-2 DAC. "Classic AKM4490 Edition"
Cables:  Red, and White Ones.
Speakers:  Yes

9 Reply by jltbalt1 (edited by jltbalt1 2022-04-10 18:48:59)

  • Registered: 2022-02-06
  • Posts: 42

Re: EQ question and baseline

hll2000 wrote:

Thanks… that is a comprehensive description and explanation.  Appreciate the time and the link.  I’m having fun with it and have enough understanding to make me a tad dangerous… I’m playing with the filters now… I played it with NOS for awhile and now switching between SD Sharp and sharp. 

Curious about brickwall also.  Really looking for the most natural output going into the 352.  Also on the Focal speaker, the tweeter is beryllium and does a nice job with treble.  On occasion it gets bright, and when I saw the slower roll offs, I keep reading about having to compensate or increase the treble gain.   Also trying to learn if I’m better making small detail changes from the RME, keeping it neutral and using the amp EQ or both

Hi. FWIW regarding filters. I stream Qobuz to a Bluesound Node, to the ADI-2 FS, then to a McIntosh MA252, and out to a pair of Totem Acoustic Sky bookshelf speakers. I finally settled on the Brickwall filter because for my ears it does a good job of taming high end sharpness, and also presents solid mid range and bass. Others will differ, of course...

I'm curious. Did you compare the internal DAC of the RS250 vs the ADI-2? I've thought about getting the RS250, or perhaps waiting  for the successor to the Lumin U1 Mini to replace the Node. Thanks!

10 Reply by Curt962 (edited by Curt962 2022-04-10 23:45:58)

  • Registered: 2019-01-07
  • Posts: 1,463

Re: EQ question and baseline

Jeff (JT)

My RME is of a Vintage that didn't offer a "Brickwall" option as does later released devices.  Therefore, I have no Valid opinion.

No matter.  Neither My Opinion, nor anyone else's matters to you until you've done a Blind, Level Matched ABX comparison.  Man!   Those Comparisons reveal much, and quite often illustrate the "expectation bias" that so often leads us astray.

Suggestion:    Create several different "Set-Ups" that differ ONLY in the Choice of DAC filter.    Using your Wife as a Test Administrator, do a BLIND A/B/X test of the filters.   Wives are mischievious by nature, and WILL try, by any means to call yours/mine Golden Eared - Audiophile credentials into a doubtful state.  So!   Enlist the aid of your Wife, Girlfriend (or Both) and have them document on Paper indicating your filter choices vs those selected. 

This Technique will indeed lead you to the Truth, and you'll need an 80%+ rating before you've proven that you have a definite preference! 

You can't truly be wrong, but...you can also have a Clear, Definite preference of one filter, vs another when in fact, you heard the same filter TWICE?  Such tests as I've described are intended to determine that which YOU can reliably detect with Scientific Consistency, and nothing more.

Embarrassingly Fun!

Curt

Vintage 2018 ADI-2 DAC. "Classic AKM4490 Edition"
Cables:  Red, and White Ones.
Speakers:  Yes
  • Registered: 2022-02-06
  • Posts: 42

Re: EQ question and baseline

Curt962 wrote:

Jeff (JT)

My RME is of a Vintage that didn't offer a "Brickwall" option as does later released devices.  Therefore, I have no Valid opinion.

No matter.  Neither My Opinion, nor anyone else's matters to you until you've done a Blind, Level Matched ABX comparison.  Man!   Those Comparisons reveal much, and quite often illustrate the "expectation bias" that so often leads us astray.

Suggestion:    Create several different "Set-Ups" that differ ONLY in the Choice of DAC filter.   
Curt

Thanks. I like your suggestion of using different setups and blind testing, although my wife says "everything sounds good" to her. (I suspect she's right.) The biggest factor for me is that I have fairly normal age-related hearing loss and I use a low-level hearing aid in one ear. This tends to make treble sound a bit sharp, so my challenge is finding a setting that reveals enough high-end detail while reducing the sharpness of the treble. I think that's why I settled on the Brickwall filter. I also have 3 different EQ settings programmed into the remote for fast changes. That REALLY helps! Thanks again! Jeff

  • From: US
  • Registered: 2022-04-07
  • Posts: 4

Re: EQ question and baseline

This was a helpful late add-on and explains a lot.  As a predominantly vinyl/tube guy, I lean towards that analog sound, hence me seeming to enjoy the slow style filters.  I get the clarity of having super clean vinyl and the warmth and detail, if that makes sense?   I may keep pestering you guys for awhile, but have a setting I will test for a few days at least.   Right now it’s on slow with some of the roll off correction settings I’ve seen on the forum.  Thanks again. 

Curt962 wrote:

HLL,

Late note on DAC filters:

They're there for your experimentation pleasure.   In my use case, a clear majority of my listening is done at 44/48khz, and the Sharp/SD Sharp suit my needs best.   At these modest sample rates, the Slow/NOS filters WILL yield a treble "roll-off" within the audible range.  Some users really dig that "Analog" sound, but I'm not amongst them.   I COULD simply create an EQ that would easily remedy this.   Well, I could...but a more "Universal" filter better suits my wishes.    Thus, Sharp/SD Sharp are more my style.  They need no EQ at any Sample Rate, and make my life so much easier.  My Listening Space is quite well treated, thus I'm not making Filter choices based upon a Room-Full of Screechy HF reflections that might lead one to choose a rolled-off filter to make things seem better.

I said my piece, so feel free to see which Filter suits you best!  There's NO Committment!   You can't top that. wink

Good Listening!

Curt

  • From: US
  • Registered: 2022-04-07
  • Posts: 4

Re: EQ question and baseline

I really like the RS250 and it is a great performer.  I did feel the RME as a stand alone DAC enhanced the sound experience… and I think I’m just scratching the surface.  The internal DAC on the 250 sounded decent and I could have likely just continued to use it.  But many seem to say that they use it as a streamer and have a delegate DAC… so I wanted to give that a whirl.  I do believe the RME from a DAC standpoint is a better performer and in conjunction with the ROSE as a streamer, I have the best of both worlds.  I also like having the balanced XLR’s, which is a short run to the 352, but does cross behind my SONOS and close to a lower cable… so having the XLR gives me the confidence that I’m not getting interference or noise.  It could be placebo effect, but I think I am also getting better sound with the XLR’s also… seems clearer.  Not sure my answer helped you, but I do believe the Rose/RME is a great combo.  I wasn't willing to spend the money for the RS150… this technology changes too quickly and it’s hard to be sure how long this type of equipment will be relevant as new technology will get introduced.  But that’s a personal opinion.  Hope you enjoy your system. 

jltbalt1 wrote:
hll2000 wrote:

Thanks… that is a comprehensive description and explanation.  Appreciate the time and the link.  I’m having fun with it and have enough understanding to make me a tad dangerous… I’m playing with the filters now… I played it with NOS for awhile and now switching between SD Sharp and sharp. 

Curious about brickwall also.  Really looking for the most natural output going into the 352.  Also on the Focal speaker, the tweeter is beryllium and does a nice job with treble.  On occasion it gets bright, and when I saw the slower roll offs, I keep reading about having to compensate or increase the treble gain.   Also trying to learn if I’m better making small detail changes from the RME, keeping it neutral and using the amp EQ or both

Hi. FWIW regarding filters. I stream Qobuz to a Bluesound Node, to the ADI-2 FS, then to a McIntosh MA252, and out to a pair of Totem Acoustic Sky bookshelf speakers. I finally settled on the Brickwall filter because for my ears it does a good job of taming high end sharpness, and also presents solid mid range and bass. Others will differ, of course...

I'm curious. Did you compare the internal DAC of the RS250 vs the ADI-2? I've thought about getting the RS250, or perhaps waiting  for the successor to the Lumin U1 Mini to replace the Node. Thanks!

14 Reply by Curt962 (edited by Curt962 2022-04-12 04:17:23)

  • Registered: 2019-01-07
  • Posts: 1,463

Re: EQ question and baseline

HLL2000, JT, et al...

"Set-Ups" are in fact a wonderful tool that allows us to conduct such things as DAC FILTER comparisons in a Scientifically Valid manner.

*Please note, and DO take the time to verify that your Set-Ups are IDENTICAL in every respect aside from the DAC Filter selected.  This is important if our comparison is to be truly meaningful.

The Manual States that saving a set-up saves the ENTIRE State of the Unit.  So, taking a few extra moments to ensure that your set-ups share IDENTICAL VOL.settings, BT, LD, BAL, etc will guarantee the only change you will hear when changing set up choices is the DAC Filter selection itself, and Nothing Else!

This technique works superbly!

Beyond this, a pervasive "Treble issue" might possibly be better rectified by your PEQ, and a Low-Q, Broad "Shading" (+/-) of the higher frequencies, could just be the answer you're looking for.  RME's 5 Band PEQ simply has capabilities considerably  beyond that which many have ever experienced.  The "Five Band" Label sells it short!

MAN!  It's a Workhorse!

Let's not go on a Divergent Course however, so I now return to you to our DAC Filter Comparison  discussion.

Have Fun Guys,

Enjoy!

Curt

Vintage 2018 ADI-2 DAC. "Classic AKM4490 Edition"
Cables:  Red, and White Ones.
Speakers:  Yes

15 Reply by KaiS (edited by KaiS 2022-04-12 06:50:57)

  • KaiS
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: Germany
  • Registered: 2020-02-05
  • Posts: 3,523

Re: EQ question and baseline

Curt962 wrote:

...a pervasive "Treble issue" might possibly be better rectified by your PEQ, and a Low-Q, Broad "Shading" (+/-) of the higher frequencies, ...
Let's not go on a Divergent Course however, so I now return to you to our DAC Filter Comparison  discussion.

smile
The Slow Filter might just be the best remedy for the Beryllium Tweeter’s treble hotness.

The Focal BE tweeters sound exceptional clean, and the very good and natural transient response of the Slow Filter partners well with it’s clean+hot treble, in my experience.


Watch out for separation of treble instruments like hihat, cymbals, shakers, vocal sibilants and such.

For me the Slow Filter does the best job making this type of sounds individually audible, instead of a slight smear the other filters have.
The Slow Filter can sound a bit darker at times, but the above effect of better definition counteracts this.


Anyway it happens with CD format 44.1 kHz (already less at 48 kHz) sample rate only.
With sample rates above I can‘t find any differences between the filters.

This all is not night and day, one has to listen closely to find it.


It‘s like MP3:
In the first place 320 kBit MP3 sounds totally OK, but once you learned what artifacts to watch out for, the downsides become obvious when listening closer.

KaiS's Website

  • From: US
  • Registered: 2022-04-07
  • Posts: 4

Re: EQ question and baseline

Thank you for all the good info.  It’s very helpful and filling in the blanks where I have thoughts or questions.  You guys are great.

Curt962 wrote:

HLL2000, JT, et al...

"Set-Ups" are in fact a wonderful tool that allows us to conduct such things as DAC FILTER comparisons in a Scientifically Valid manner.

*Please note, and DO take the time to verify that your Set-Ups are IDENTICAL in every respect aside from the DAC Filter selected.  This is important if our comparison is to be truly meaningful.

The Manual States that saving a set-up saves the ENTIRE State of the Unit.  So, taking a few extra moments to ensure that your set-ups share IDENTICAL VOL.settings, BT, LD, BAL, etc will guarantee the only change you will hear when changing set up choices is the DAC Filter selection itself, and Nothing Else!

This technique works superbly!

Beyond this, a pervasive "Treble issue" might possibly be better rectified by your PEQ, and a Low-Q, Broad "Shading" (+/-) of the higher frequencies, could just be the answer you're looking for.  RME's 5 Band PEQ simply has capabilities considerably  beyond that which many have ever experienced.  The "Five Band" Label sells it short!

MAN!  It's a Workhorse!

Let's not go on a Divergent Course however, so I now return to you to our DAC Filter Comparison  discussion.

Have Fun Guys,

Enjoy!

Curt

  • Registered: 2019-01-07
  • Posts: 1,463

Re: EQ question and baseline

HLL,

Seems we forgot to formally Welcome You to the Group!

Let me be the first, and know that this Forum shines a bit brighter with each new Cheerful Soul added!

Welcome!

Curt

Vintage 2018 ADI-2 DAC. "Classic AKM4490 Edition"
Cables:  Red, and White Ones.
Speakers:  Yes