New ESS and H8S for Unidisk 1.1 and 2.1

Music Lover · Post by **Music Lover** » 2007-06-12 23:28

Wow -221 is superiour!
A lot more musical, but not as detailed.

Tried 221 vs 227 on CD, SACD and DVD - same result.

Post by **lejonklou** » 2007-06-14 14:42

I have something interesting to report. I have changed ESS software on several machines these last few days. The most interesting comparison of sound quality on CD was this:

a) 2007 Unidisk 1.1 (L4 board, H8S 218) versus one from 2006 (L3 board, H8S 217) using ESS 221: The Unidisk from 2007 was slightly better sounding.

b) After upgrading both machines to ESS227: The Unidisk from 2007 was much better sounding than the one from 2006!

c) Comparing ESS221 against ESS227 on the 2007 machine (the winner in a and b above): ESS221 is slightly better.

Conclusion: ESS221 still gives the best sound quality on all 1.1's tested so far.

Older Unidisks (board<L4 and H8S<218) don't seem to like ESS227, while it has less negative effect on the latest 1.1's (with L4 board and H8S 218).

[Whether this depends on board revision or H8S was not tested at this time, but other old 1.1's have had H8S 218 installed and have sounded much better on 221 than 227 - possibly indicating that board revision is what determines how 227 sounds.]

Ceilidh · Post by **Ceilidh** » 2007-06-14 15:57

My apologies for going a little off topic, but I've been wondering something for quite a while:

Q: Why would Linn follow the well-regarded 221 with a long series of sonically inferior revisions? There's presumably some tradeoff somewhere -- perhaps regarding heat, tracking/disc-read tolerance, component reliability, supplier-related board changes, etc., etc. -- but where is it? From the forums, there doesn't seem to be any downside to 221, and yet Linn has not reverted to it. Why is that?

Anyway, I'm glad to hear that 227 is approaching 221 on the latest boards, as it implies that someday, in the dim distant rosy-tinged future when I can actually purchase a 1.1 or Akurate CD, my new CD player will be sounding first rate! :D

Cheers everyone!

-C

paolo · Post by **paolo** » 2007-06-14 17:30

Great work Fredrik these are fantasctic informations!

If from a point of view it's disappointing that Linn is continuing to release worse sw version than the 221 as Ceilidh underlined, it's likewise conforting the fact that the buyer of a new product is still (reasonably) sure to have better sound quality.

Well, I'm actually quite happy to be (reasonably) sure that a new Akurate CD sounds better than my Uni 1.1 with 221 ESS! :mrgreen:

Post by **lejonklou** » 2007-06-15 22:39

A Unidisk 2.1 tested: L3 board, H8S 217: Sound quality on CD is better with ESS 221 than 227. No dramatic difference, just a bit more flow with 221.

I will upgrade this machine to H8S 218 and see if the results differ after that.

Tried input A versus B on my 1.1 and thought B was very slightly better. Both inputs have been used, but I'm not sure which has been used the most.

Keep 'em coming! This may to some seem like an awful lot of attention spent on tiny details, but these observations don't need to take much time. Just make it a habit to write down the results every time you try something! Through the collection of data there are possibilities of expanding our knowledge and improving our systems.

Ceilidh, I can't answer your question. I have so far not found any difference when it comes to heat, tracking/disc-read tolerance or anything else between these different software versions.

EDIT: Not sure about the A versus B output on my 1.1... I will run both in for a while and come back to that question later in a separate topic.

9designs · Post by **9designs** » 2007-06-16 16:40

I'm still holding off updating, I'm a L1 board on my 1.1, with ESS 221 and H8S 217 patches.

So if I read the status so far, I'm best to stay with 221 as I have an older board, but should I apply the 218 patch ?

Post by **lejonklou** » 2007-06-17 22:36

Good question, but I don't have a definite answer. Yet!

So far it seems H8S 218 does nothing for the sound quality or functionality on older boards. But I may be wrong in that assumption.

Hugo · Post by **Hugo** » 2007-06-17 23:17

Hi there!

I have just received my updated Uni1.1 with the new ESS227. Previously I was using ESS224 and H8S 218 on my device which is from late 2006. And here are the results:

The improvement is substancial (to say the least)! I was first uncertain whether I would be able to identify any changes or not. But now I must say that ESS227 is a big step forward with regard to sound quality.
If I have to discribe the difference, I would say that the ESS227 made the sound clearer, more easy to follow and more powerfull.

So I would really recommend this update to all Uni1.1 owners with L4 boards (as I cant speak for any other/older version).

I have not tested the ESS221 on my machine and therefore cannot comment on the differences between these versions.

From the release notes there is one improvement to ESS227 which is quite important to me: There are fixes in the handling of HDCP output included. That could solve issues that I had with connecting my Uni1.1 to a Philips LCD TV. So appart from the sound improvements there are also other areas (i.e. bug fixes) covered with the newest ESS.

paolo · Post by **paolo** » 2007-06-20 16:21

About H8S 218 version, I've noticed that the package available since a few days is different from the very first released by Linn. A binary comparison of the .exe files shows that they are different. I don't know what kind of modifications have been produced though, nor there's evidence of this on the release notes, which are unmodified. The ESS 227 sw .rom file is unchanged.

Paolo

Post by **lejonklou** » 2007-06-20 23:22

Really? Does this mean that previously upgraded machines need to get H8S again? Or is it something totally unimportant?

If you install H8S again in your 1.1, Paolo, please tell us if there is any effect on sound quality or anything else.

Thanks in advance!

sommerfee · Post by **sommerfee** » 2007-06-21 08:32

paolo wrote:A binary comparison of the .exe files shows that they are different.

Maybe they have changed the Windows application, but not the firmware itself? Does the "new" H8S 218 firmware report a different "H8S DATE/TIME" on the Unidisk than the "old" H8S 218 firmware?

paolo · Post by **paolo** » 2007-06-21 15:03

sommerfee wrote: Maybe they have changed the Windows application, but not the firmware itself? Does the "new" H8S 218 firmware report a different "H8S DATE/TIME" on the Unidisk than the "old" H8S 218 firmware?

You may well be right here!

Unfortunately I cannot verify this for some time because my Unidisk is away for service now and (fortunately :P ) I'll be on vacation next week....

So I'll probably reinstall and try the "new" H8S in a couple of weeks. Anyone else?

sommerfee · Post by **sommerfee** » 2008-01-16 11:20

lejonklou wrote: Older Unidisks (board<L4 and H8S<218) don't seem to like ESS227, while it has less negative effect on the latest 1.1's (with L4 board and H8S 218).

[Whether this depends on board revision or H8S was not tested at this time, but other old 1.1's have had H8S 218 installed and have sounded much better on 221 than 227 - possibly indicating that board revision is what determines how 227 sounds.]

We have updated a L3 Unidisk 1.1 on the last week-end from H8S217/ESS223 to H8S218/ESS227. It seems to be a clear improvement, so maybe ESS227 is working well for L3, too (at least better than H8S217/ESS223), but not for L1 & L2?

Maybe of interest: The combination H8S217/ESS227 sounded a little bit strange, I would call it "clumsy". So a combined H8S update seems to be necessary.

BTW: Do you know if H8S 218 alone would be an improvement for older Unidisks over H8S 217?

sommerfee · Post by **sommerfee** » 2008-01-16 11:26

paolo wrote: So I'll probably reinstall and try the "new" H8S in a couple of weeks.

This would be very kind! Here are the details of the "old" H8S 218 software:

May 10 2006, 10:13:52, Checksum C9AA

But since it would be foolish from Linn to release a new software version without changing the version number, I assume they have only changed the upload application and/or the PDF. AFAIK they have done things like this in the past, AFAIK they have changed the PDF of the MECH software update without changing the MECH software itself.

Music Lover · Post by **Music Lover** » 2008-01-16 14:52

sommerfee wrote:We have updated a L3 Unidisk 1.1 on the last week-end from H8S217/ESS223 to H8S218/ESS227. It seems to be a clear improvement, so maybe ESS227 is working well for L3, too (at least better than H8S217/ESS223), but not for L1 & L2?

Have you tried ESS221, normally the best SW?

sommerfee · Post by **sommerfee** » 2008-01-16 22:22

Music Lover wrote:
sommerfee wrote:We have updated a L3 Unidisk 1.1 on the last week-end from H8S217/ESS223 to H8S218/ESS227. It seems to be a clear improvement, so maybe ESS227 is working well for L3, too (at least better than H8S217/ESS223), but not for L1 & L2?
Have you tried ESS221, normally the best SW?

Is ESS221 working on this machine? It was shipped with ESS223, so I assume that it needs this software (or newer) to operate correctly?

And I'm sorry, I can't be quiet on this issue, because it shocks me every time again when I read it:

lejonklou wrote: Older Unidisks (board<L4 and H8S<218) don't seem to like ESS227

The new ESS software also contain bug fixes. So in fact this means: If you want to have these bug fixes resp. need them, you need to buy yourself a new Unidisk or have to live with worth sound. And we are talking about a device with has cost 10000 bucks. :roll:

Post by **lejonklou** » 2008-01-16 23:00

I run 221 on a 1.1 from 2007 (with the latest H8S) and it works just fine. I know there are a few bugs in that old software, but I haven't had any problems. Right now I can't even recall what was fixed in the ESS versions post 221...

Regarding my comment that "older Unidisks don't seem to like 227", please don't take that out of its context. It was merely a sound quality comparison where it turned out that the difference between 221 and 227 was greater on old machines than on new machines.

I think 221 sounds best on ALL 1.1's (that is what bothers me - that the latest software is not the best sounding) but the newer the 1.1 is, the smaller the difference is.

sommerfee · Post by **sommerfee** » 2008-01-16 23:12

lejonklou wrote:I run 221 on a 1.1 from 2007 (with the latest H8S) and it works just fine.

Good to know, so I will test it within the next days.

Regarding my comment that "older Unidisks don't seem to like 227", please don't take that out of its context.

I'm sorry, I don't wanted to mis-use your posting. It has just reminded me on my very own experiences with my (old) Unidisk and ESS 227: For me it was simply not listenable, I was glad if the stop button was pressed. So for me personally this is still a sign that Linn is not taking care of old customers in a way I wish for.

(But I only have tested it using H8S 217, not with H8S 218, which maybe was a mistake.)

Axel

Post by **lejonklou** » 2009-02-10 21:02

Time to lift this thread as there has recently been a new Unidisk firmware release!

All three this time: ESS, H8 and Laser software.

Anyone tried it yet?

Or are all you enthusiasts just focused on DS issues these days? :)

sommerfee · Post by **sommerfee** » 2009-02-11 09:34

Since the Tandem 221/217 was the last software released by Linn which is enjoyable for me on my old Unidisk, I think the chance that this software will be a bummer, too, is very high... :mrgreen:

But what are the release notes resp. changes? Why a new MECH software?

Axel

Post by **lejonklou** » 2009-02-11 18:21

sommerfee wrote:...I think the chance that this software will be a bummer, too, is very high... :mrgreen:

Yes, that's what I fear too.

It seems that the ESS changes fix some disc reading problems on 1.1 and 2.1. Unfortunately the lipsynch problem on some Deutsche Grammofon DVD's that was previously fixed is now reported to be back again...

The SC ESS has some details in the surround settings fixed too. The H8 software doesn't have any change that I'm aware of. What the new Laser Mech software does I don't know, but I'm quite certain that updating all of these three will change the musical performance of the machine.

As I don't have any problems with any discs, other than DVD+R (which it won't take at all), I am not too keen to update to this software. Unless someone clearly states that it's better than ESS 221!

Music Lover · Post by **Music Lover** » 2009-02-11 23:07

lejonklou wrote:I am not too keen to update to this software. Unless someone clearly states that it's better than ESS 221!

Just TRY it please!
Not that time consuming and you can always go back...

Post by **lejonklou** » 2009-02-12 00:09

Yes it is. It's three different procedures and taking apart the 1.1 to update the Laser Mech...

Or do you suggest I first try just the ESS? That's easy.

I'd really like to know the advantage of updating the Laser Mech firmware before I start that procedure.

Post by **lejonklou** » 2009-02-14 14:48

I forgot that my current 1.1 doesn't need dismantling to update the Laser Mech! Later Unidisks are updateable at the back through the RS232 port, just like the H8S.

That makes things much easier. I am also better informed now:

ESS and Laser Mech firmware combined fixes some disc reading problems. As expected, they affect the sound quality.

H8S doesn't have any changes, they just updated the version number(?).

monkeydevil · Post by **monkeydevil** » 2009-02-15 11:43

Eagerly awaitng your view of the sound/musicality of the new firmware compared to 221 and 227. 8)

New ESS and H8S for Unidisk 1.1 and 2.1

Why the step backwards?