[dibber]

I'm making the jump to computer/digital audio ... and couldn't be happier about it.  Just ordered the new Emerald Physics CS2.3 system with the Prism Orpheus firewire interface through spatial computer ... and will post the complete review soon.

For those of you that aren't aware of this new system, Walter Underwood of Underwood HiFi recently bought Emerald Physics and is collaberating with Clayton Shaw to incorporate high quality 24bit/96khz computer audio into the CS2.3 system using iMacs and using professional recording studio quality firewire DAC/Preamps in lieu of the Behrenger equipment (clearly the weak link in the system).  This system utilizes the same emerald physics open baffle/bi-amped/active cross-over approach, but then connects it to an iMac with firewire allowing complete spacial software and timing control.  And the system is fully compatible with 24 bit digital audio files up to 196khz.

By way of background, since the late 1970s, I have spent ridiculous sums of money in a futile effort to recreate music exactly to the original recordings.  I've always focused on analog.  I love the sound of analog ... zyx cartridges, SET amps, horn speakers, reel-to-reel ... you name it.  I actually loath digital sounding music.  Actually "loath" is an understatement.  I can't even listen to a car stereo for more than 15 minutes without suffering severe fatigue.  Friends think I'm a bit nuts for always telling them to turn down the radio.

So why on earth would I invest in a highly manipulated digital system like the orpheus/emerald physcis CS2.3?  Here's why.  I believe this system is better at replicating the original recording than any system on the market at any price right now.  It, for the first time, allows lovers of analog an even superior experience to what they can enjoy with a $100,000 plus state-of-the-art analog system. 

I get that I just made a ridiculously bold statement.  But here's the thing.  Virtually all high quality original recordings made in the last 5 years or so are digital and reside on a hard drive in the data libraries of the studios and are saved in 24 bit files.  This is to say that 24 bit .wav digital audio files are the modern master recordings.  The time of analog reel tapes is long gone.  24 bit digital files are generally what is used for the subsequent vinyl pressings that all of us audiophiles are told are master/original records.  So, if your goal is to be as close as possible to the original recording, then you have to play 24 bit .wav files.  If all you fellow analogers don't believe me on this point, just go out and listen to digital master files in a modern recording studio and then compare that to the vinyl pressing on your system at home.  There is absolutely no comparison. Vinyl sounds thin and tinny in comparison

I believe this orpheus/CS2.3 system is the best system on the market for playing 24 bit .wav files.  It is, more-or-less, what is used (hardware wise) in modern recording studios for music playback.  On top of that, it uses quite sophisticated software to eliminate room and timing distortion, allowing for musical presentation very similar to that in the sound-proofed recording studio even if your room is big and/or odd shaped without sound dampening.  If that offends the purist in you ... you'll be relieved to know that I was a non-believer too.  But here's the thing.  When you set aside the analog religion and really listen a top-quality digital 24 bit system with your ears and eyes closed, you too will have the revelation.  It is simply superior to the best analog systems.  It shouldn't be, from the purist point of view.  But it is.

This system also has other huge improvements over traditional analog or digital systems.  Since the system and files are all computerized, no more flipping records or CDs.  No more cleaning cartridges.  No more replacing tubes.  This is quality equipment that won't fall apart ... unlike so much of the mom-and-pop audio equipment on the market.   No more $10k amplifiers that go on the fritz because there's limited quality control given only 75 have been produced in the history of the company.  Now we can join the computer age and actually download files or incorporate streaming audio.  Kids love that sh*t.  The Orpheus is also upgradable to 5.1 or 7.1 and compatible with highest quality blueray files. 

Downsides of the system are the complexity of set-up, which actually requires remote computer access by the engineers at spatial.  Also chasing down 24 bit files is a pain in the a*s, but probably no more difficult than finding any other truly great recording.  Probably the toughest thing though is getting your head around the seemingly ridiculous concept that maybe just maybe digital can be better.  But once you're there ... it's awesome.  Release the shackles people!

For those of you wondering, I don't have any affiliation with Emerald Physics, Orpheus  or any other manufacturer/reseller of audio equipment.  I'm just one guy with some perfectionist tendencies that happens to really enjoy listening to music.

[aljordan]

Hi,

I am interested to read your review after you have the system set up.  I also own the Orpheus, and I use the same digital room correction software that is used in the Spatial system, but I run on Windows and I do not use digital crossover software with my current speakers.

Does the Spatial room correction software work at sampling rates greater than 96 kHz?  That would be interesting if so, as the only version released for Windows (IK Multimedia ARC) tops out at 96k. 

You might consider ensuring that the Spatial engineers teach you how to configure the software, just in case the company doesn't do well in the long run.

One thing that is special about the Orpheus is a complete lack of glare in the upper frequencies.

I hope you enjoy your new system.

Alan

[Rocket_Ronny]

Hi Dibber:

Nice post.

Can you share what Dac you are talking about and is the crossover being done in the Mac via software?


Thanks,


Rocket_Ronny

[roscoeiii]

The DAC in the system is the Orpheus Prism. But Spatial also offers more affordable Firewire DAC options with their software and room calibration services. Or you can use the DAC of your choice and just get the software and calibration services.

[roscoeiii]

Alan and dibber,

I look forward to hearing more of your thoughts on the systems that you have. I'm especially curious about the effects of removing the preamp from your system. I've never been much of a source straight to the amp kind of guy or passive pre type, because I've found an active pre important for giving me the dynamics and oomph I was looking for in my system.

Alan, how have you found the IK Multimedia ARC software to implement on your own?

I'm unclear on whether Spatial is offering mostly a service of implementing the ARC software (for which it seems an expert installer may well be worth the money spent) or if they are using their own entirely unique software or if they have improved on and added to the ARC software in some ways in addition to perfecting its settings for home audio environments.

Very exciting stuff overall. Look forward to hearing more about it.

[Geardaddy]

roscoeiii, I believe the Spatial is an amalgam of software with ARC as a centerpiece.  You have the option of inserting little DSP type apps that would create a particular tube sound for example.  It should be interesting.  I am actively researching this but have not made the formal plunge yet.

For the record, I too have concerns about removing a dedicated pre-amp, but according to some recording engineer types I have spoken with, its a non-issue.  We will see.  The digital interfaces that Spatial is packaging all seem to have pre-amp functionality...

[Gizmo]

Dibber,

Do you have the system in place?

How does it sound?

Thanks,

David

[aljordan]

Alan and dibber,

I look forward to hearing more of your thoughts on the systems that you have. I'm especially curious about the effects of removing the preamp from your system. I've never been much of a source straight to the amp kind of guy or passive pre type, because I've found an active pre important for giving me the dynamics and oomph I was looking for in my system.

Alan, how have you found the IK Multimedia ARC software to implement on your own?

Hi,

Sorry, I had lost track of this thread for a while...

I generally don't drive my amps directly without a preamp.  However, the Orpheus will drive even very low input impedance amps very nicely.  I don't need the midrange bloom of a tube preamp when using the Orpheus because it already has midrange presence and doesn't need the tubes to mask any shortcomings.  A solid state preamp seems redundant because the Orpheus will drive my amps without issue.

Regarding ARC, I ultimately stopped using it because it did not offer enough control over the correction curve and correction strength.  It would tame the room nodes nicely, but did so at the expense of warmth.  I've since gone back to the latest version of DRC and am having better results.  I actually scripted together a bunch of packages that will allow people to try DRC on Windows in an easier manner.  Once you get everything set up, you can measure and generate correction filters with a single command.  I need to add more to the directions for explanatory purposes, but you can see the following link for details:

http://www.alanjordan.org/RoomCorrection/Directions.html

Alan

[neobop]

So why on earth would I invest in a highly manipulated digital system like the orpheus/emerald physcis CS2.3?  Here's why.  I believe this system is better at replicating the original recording than any system on the market at any price right now.  It, for the first time, allows lovers of analog an even superior experience to what they can enjoy with a $100,000 plus state-of-the-art analog system. 

I get that I just made a ridiculously bold statement.  But here's the thing.  I believe this orpheus/CS2.3 system is the best system on the market for playing 24 bit .wav files.  It is, more-or-less, what is used (hardware wise) in modern recording studios for music playback.  On top of that, it uses quite sophisticated software to eliminate room and timing distortion, allowing for musical presentation very similar to that in the sound-proofed recording studio even if your room is big and/or odd shaped without sound dampening.  If that offends the purist in you ... you'll be relieved to know that I was a non-believer too.  But here's the thing.  When you set aside the analog religion and really listen a top-quality digital 24 bit system with your ears and eyes closed, you too will have the revelation.  It is simply superior to the best analog systems.  It shouldn't be, from the purist point of view.  But it is.

Excuse me for being skeptical, but what if you listen to mostly analogue recordings, made before 5 yrs ago? Nothing religious about my skepticism, but I've heard a few "high tech" digital re-masters of old analogue, and they suck. Maybe the new media storage accounts for the poor quality of modern recordings? I guess it depends on what you listen to. Maybe you're lucky and kept your analogue stuff. I understand these speakers can be used with a "normal" set-up.

[roscoeiii]

Just noticed that the Orpheus/Spatial/Emerald System is due to be reviewed on 6moons. Looking forward to hearing those impressions....

[jwes]

Dibber,

Do you have the system in place?

How does it sound?

Thanks,

David

2nd that - any views on how it sounds?

[dibber]

Greetings patient readers,

It has taken me a bit of time to learn how the system works and break it in, but am now ready to offer some preliminary thoughts.

Before discussing the sound itself, I'll take a small diversion and walk through the signal path architecture of this system, so please bear with me.  The music is formatted and downloaded to the hard drive and library archived by PureVinyl and/or itunes, whether it's from a turntable, CD or off the internet.  To play the music PureVinyl pulls the music file from the hard drive and saves it to RAM.  The PC then takes the file out of RAM, sends it through a crossover and splits the 2 channels into 4 channels (2 HPF, 2 LPF).  The 4 channels then go through room correction software (ARC) that modifies the files to exhibit a near flat response based on microphone room frequency measurements.  The 4 channels then travel cross the firewire to the Prism Orpheus DAC and then out through the stereo amps to the dipoles.  In a nutshell, the system analyzes the music file as data, re-saves it, adjusts it to sound as it was intended in the room it’s being played in then sends it out through a very clean/dynamic front end.  One would think that this type of complicated architecture would introduce distortions.  And it may.  But none that are audible to me.  However, the benefits of the ARC software are so significant, the complexity of the signal path is totally worth it.  In fact, I would go on to say that room correction software is so transformative, I'm surprised there isn't more buzz about it.

The ARC room control system measures the audio frequency response in the principal listening area in the room, which it uses as the basis for its adjustments.  When sitting within a 3 foot radius or so of the measurement area, quality recordings sound truly remarkable in several respects. 

First, the sound is nearly flat across all frequencies.  I don't care how expensive your system is or how perfect the accustics are in your listening room, you're not listening to a frequency response that is flat like this system is flat, and you will immediately notice the difference.  I really doubt flat can be achieved without room correction software.  Why is flat so key?  Well my ears mistake flat for reality.  Non-flat sounds like a stereo system.

Second, the dipole speakers coupled with perhaps the highest quality DAC on the market create a sound that is cleaner than anything I've heard.  Whether it be speaker box harmonics, extra bass kick, stereo warmth, filtered high end, every other system I've heard introduces a layer of something on top of the music that isn't actually there.  That stuff is often pleasant, but what I never fully appreciated is how much it gets between the listener and the music.  This system has none of that.  The recording is just laid bare right before you. 

Third, the bi-amped dipoles are insanely responsive.  No sound on the recording escapes their notice, and when there is no sound on the recording, they are dead silent.  Spittle hitting the microphone will be heard for what it is, accidental tapping of a microphone or guitar string are all there, background whispers, chairs scraping in the symphony.  Non-audiophiles are mesmerized by this. 

The sum effect of these things is remarkable.  Quality recordings no longer sound like recordings.  They sound like an archive of a music moment.  Like that moment in time is captured.  They give the sensation of being pulled into a time vortex and becoming part of the musical moment.  The speakers and room cannot be heard, only the listener and the sounds floating in space. 
 
Any issues or concerns?  A few actually.  The system does require a lot of learning about computer software, which takes some time to master.  Second, the system sounds a bit on the bright side until it breaks in, which has taken several months, but it definitely does break in nicely.  This is apparently true with a lot of pro gear.  The ARC software may exacerbate that a bit.  Last, you will want to toss a lot of your recordings that you used to really like.  The system is definitely changing my musical preferences to some degree.  Any recording that is overly produced, layered or mastered just sounds dull and ordinary.   You will never again think the Pink Floyd helicopter effect sound like an actual helicopter.  It just sounds like a lame studio imitation of a helicopter through this system, because, well, that's what it is.

Live recordings often sounds better than studio recordings.  Recordings where the music is just laid down without studio manipulation or filters sound wonderful and pure and yes warm.  Chamber music, opera and classic jazz allow the system to really shine.  Some old Beatles recordings actually sound really good…I wouldn’t have necessarily thought that. 

Can it be run without the room correction software?  Definitely yes, but I haven’t been able to get the crazy realism and spatial vortex experience without it.  It sounds good, but not as lively or exciting.  I also put a tube preamp in the mix after the Prism Orpheus to see what effect that had, and it did soften the sound, but it also introduced a layer of film over the realism, which seems pointless to me.  The difference between different digital audio formats matters less than I would have thought.  Playing from RAM rather than the hard drive has a bigger effect.

In the final analysis, I really do think that Spatial Computer deserves a ton of credit for designing this system.  I think they're significantly ahead of the market.  It will be interesting to see how long it is before the competition catches on.  It's also fun to have a system no one else has. 

-Dibber

[neobop]

Dibber,
Thank you. Your post is a real eye opener.
neo

[panomaniac]

Live recordings often sounds better than studio recordings.

Funny about that, isn't it?  The better my speakers get, the more I enjoy live recordings.  So much studio stuff seems a little too "canned."

[neobop]

I brought this thread to the attention of VE readers. One reply is interesting -

Quote dibber:
"If all you fellow analogers don't believe me on this point, just go out and listen to digital master files in a modern recording studio and then compare that to the vinyl pressing on your system at home. There is absolutely no comparison. Vinyl sounds thin and tinny in comparison"
 
I'm in a position to have experienced both digital studios and vinyl replay, and strongly disagree. Over a vast range of material in both media. There are exceptions, but IMO it generally isn't true.
_________________
Yes, time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana 

Luckydog

[D OB G]

I like vinyl.

But I think high def digital really is wonderful.

I obviously can't make a controlled comparison in this instance, but there is a guy who operates as HDTT (high definition tape transfers), who takes commercial tape recordings (analogue of course!) of special performances or recordings (not even master tapes) and uses state of the art digitizing gear to come up with up to 24/192. 

I've downloaded some 24/96 files, which I play from a hard drive, through a Dacmagic (just converts digital spdif to digital RCA- no loss), straight into the digital input of the DEQX.  The only deficiency is that sometimes the original tape recordings saturate.

The result is some of the best recorded music I have heard.

[neobop]

I like vinyl.

But I think high def digital really is wonderful.

I obviously can't make a controlled comparison in this instance, but there is a guy who operates as HDTT (high definition tape transfers), who takes commercial tape recordings (analogue of course!) of special performances or recordings (not even master tapes) and uses state of the art digitizing gear to come up with up to 24/192. 

I've downloaded some 24/96 files, which I play from a hard drive, through a Dacmagic (just converts digital spdif to digital RCA- no loss), straight into the digital input of the DEQX.  The only deficiency is that sometimes the original tape recordings saturate.

The result is some of the best recorded music I have heard.

Have you ever heard a master tape dub on reel to reel?

Think these HDTT performances sound better than the tapes they are copied from?

You say, "The only deficiency is that sometimes the original tape recordings saturate." That may be true, especially in a live venue. Ever hear a digital recording go over 0 dB? It's much worse.

neo

[D OB G]

Hi neobop,

Have you ever heard a master tape dub on reel to reel?

Actually I have. 
And it sounded FANATASTIC.
But it wasn't music.

My uncle, a general electronic and audio whiz (bought a CRT, a circuit diagram, and some parts, and produced a high fashion television in the 50's), used to record steam train sounds!!! (and release them commercially!!!!!!!!!).

I will never forget sitting in front of his speakers (RJ enclosure bass loading) and hearing the train that I had heard not so long ago, absolutely thunder overhead.

I don't remenber any clipping or saturation, but then again, when listening to what is essentially noise, it might be a bit harder to detect than with music.

I also don't remember what recorder he used, except that it was a valve model, ran at 30ips, and "might" have been a Studer.

Think these HDTT performances sound better than the tapes they are copied from?

I don't know, I wouldn't have thought so, but the guy who does them thinks they do.  Noise removal, and speed stabilisation and correction, pitch accuracy (even from 15ips tapes) are cited.

Regards,

David

[Russell Dawkins]

I wonder how he stabilizes the speed - or am I misunderstanding?

I am thinking undoing flutter or even wow from the original recorder would be nigh on impossible.

[D OB G]

I'm the one misunderstanding

Reading his stuff again, it is the digital timing side where the effort seems to have been placed.