Linn announcements 9/2018, Selekt, etc.

[Jumanji]

Well,
once you know the filters you could at least tweak an existing V1 profile by adding custom filters and adjusting filters within the given boundaries.

What I find surprising is the shape of the new filters. Less cut but much broader. Sound is impacted across a wider area of frequencies. No longer just a limited, precise cut at specific frequencies. Seems to be a very different thinking behind it.
I would have expected the opposite actually...

J.

[timster]

Not really the right place for this, but as there is nowhere else for now (thanks Linn), and certainly not going to start a new thread. Thanks again to Frederik for hosting us refugees!
But I found this discussion on an (unnamed) £9000 turntable.... either amusing, or frustrating. Or both!

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1_c6TA ... hwGwEXf000

[Moomintroll]

Oh dear, oh dear...

‘troll

[Defender]

Looks pretty radical to me?

ps. Wow - adding pictures is tons easier than on the Linn forum!!!

Yes looks radical. Linn seems to have a tendency to prefer thinning of the sound for more transparency.
Not my cup of tea. Paul helped me a lot in getting the bass back into my system.

[Tendaberry]

Actually, the new SO sounds "fuller" untweaked than SO v.1. At least in my system it does...

[Peter@57m]

...
I'm referring to the Konfig manual - see section 3.3 and the bit about Selekt in particular:
http://docs.linn.co.uk/wiki/index.php/K ... l#Advanced

Hmm, thanks for the pointer. Explains why there is no package for the Selekt if there's no way to load it!
I somehow doubt they'll do the same for existing products. There are still some on pre Davaar 50 because they want non-Exakt surround support, or Jukebox etc.

I think we'll have to wait and see.

Konfig allows you to load new Davaar releases as well as old ones and do Space Opt V1. We know it cannot do Space Opt V2 but we don't yet know whether it will be able to do Davaar updates in future.

Currently the web interface allows you to settings on a DS/DSM and do Space Opt but there is no way currently to update Davaar

PS: as per my previous post, the Konfig manual section 3.3 mentions Sekrit but not Selekt

[timster]

phino was referring to the new part of that section:
"On some of the Linn Products, such as the Selekt DSM, the software is directly loaded into to Linn DS/DSM from the Internet. "

[Peter@57m]

phino was referring to the new part of that section:
"On some of the Linn Products, such as the Selekt DSM, the software is directly loaded into to Linn DS/DSM from the Internet. "

Ah thank you Timster and Phino

[phino]

PS: as per my previous post, the Konfig manual section 3.3 mentions Sekrit but not Selekt

Are you seeing a cached page perhaps? I was updated on Friday. Just above the 'Restore Factory Settings' header there's a Konfig screenshot for Selekt showing a 'Recover' button instead of Restore and then the following text:

On some of the Linn Products, such as the Selekt DSM, the software is directly loaded into to Linn DS/DSM from the Internet.

edit: Didn't spot that Timster had replied, probably did it whilst I was typing mine!

[phino]

Well,
once you know the filters you could at least tweak an existing V1 profile by adding custom filters and adjusting filters within the given boundaries.

What I find surprising is the shape of the new filters. Less cut but much broader. Sound is impacted across a wider area of frequencies. No longer just a limited, precise cut at specific frequencies. Seems to be a very different thinking behind it.
I would have expected the opposite actually...

J.

Well that example is for my room, which is quite small. The 'preference' slider is near the left hand end by default, I believe if you have a bigger room the slider will default more towards the right, which I think will produce deeper and narrower cuts.
I suspect that on the whole though the preference now will be for generally shallower and wider.

[phino]

I may be talking rubbish but is there not a way of making a modified SO2 file look like an SO1 file and go into Konfig, space, open, inport and then load it into the new browser software as if it were a genuine "old" configuration?

Donuk

Good idea, unfortunately Linn have already thought of that. It seems to do a recalculation whenever you open an SO file and rewrites all the calculated values, so you can't fool it by putting modified values in. You can adjust the 'modified' versions of the calculated values, but even then konfig compares these to the predefined limits and will modify them to fit within those limitations, so you can never exceed +-2Hz, 100% change in the depth or 10% of the bandwidth.
If they didn't check this and someone decided to add a +50db bass shelf or something like that, or simply made a typo when editing the file there'd be a possibility of causing actual damage.

[fredrik]

Looks pretty radical to me?

ps. Wow - adding pictures is tons easier than on the Linn forum!!!

Yes looks radical. Linn seems to have a tendency to prefer thinning of the sound for more transparency.
Not my cup of tea. Paul helped me a lot in getting the bass back into my system.

Try the basic setting of the new SO and tell us what you think. It is easy to switch between your old profile and new. It is a non destructive process. I think you will be surprised.

[Spannko]

With the new SO is it still possible to load earlier firmware versions in Konfig?

[phino]

With the new SO is it still possible to load earlier firmware versions in Konfig?

No, I think you have to have Davaar 65 (or whatever the current version numer is) to be able to apply the new style SO from the web.

[ThomasOK]

Not really the right place for this, but as there is nowhere else for now (thanks Linn), and certainly not going to start a new thread. Thanks again to Frederik for hosting us refugees!
But I found this discussion on an (unnamed) £9000 turntable.... either amusing, or frustrating. Or both!

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1_c6TA ... hwGwEXf000

And who were the numbnuts who were promulgating this idiocy?

[timster]

Not really the right place for this, but as there is nowhere else for now (thanks Linn), and certainly not going to start a new thread. Thanks again to Frederik for hosting us refugees!
But I found this discussion on an (unnamed) £9000 turntable.... either amusing, or frustrating. Or both!

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1_c6TA ... hwGwEXf000

And who were the numbnuts who were promulgating this idiocy?

Kermode & Mayo's Film Review on 5 Live! Which is brilliant. But they obviously have no idea about HiFi!

[timster]

With the new SO is it still possible to load earlier firmware versions in Konfig?

No, I think you have to have Davaar 65 (or whatever the current version numer is) to be able to apply the new style SO from the web.

Davaar 65 is only available for Selekt. Currentl Davaar for everything else is 64.
Not sure if that means anything.

[phino]

Today I've made an approximation (in mono, obviously) of the SO v2 profile to try out on my Exakt system, making it a bit... Approksimate. Initial impressions are promising, but I doubt it's very close to the real thing.

I made custom filters based on the ones extracted from the SO v2 profile and then fettled them by hand so that the result was somewhere inbetween the left & right.

SO-Cobbled.jpg

The red line is my new SOv1 profile made entirely from custom filters.

[Music Lover]

What I find surprising is the shape of the new filters. Less cut but much broader. Sound is impacted across a wider area of frequencies. No longer just a limited, precise cut at specific frequencies. Seems to be a very different thinking behind it.
I would have expected the opposite actually...

J.

Well, The basic idea to use room dimensions to calculate compensation is not working, as there are way too many parameters affecting the end result.
Hence the need to tweak the result quite a lot.

Then, if you as Linn did originally, apply very precise cuts at specific frequencies you only make it worse.

I know Linn has the goal to remove the tweaking, so I’m not surpriced that the v2 ”online calculation” is modified.
But the basic idea is still wrong - compensating is always bad. It’s better to address the issue.
However, the tool can be used for those unable to add absorbers etc in the room.

[timster]

I'm sorry Music Lover, but you are either missing the point or not understanding it. If you're suggesting prevention is better than cure then of course no one can argue with that. In principle. But hey, it's not a perfect world, and no room is ever perfect. Compensating for room modes is the only answer.
Room treatments are just as part of the cure for that as SO is. Dismissing this "compensation" as you call it as the "wrong idea" when talking about SO, while accepting the other as if it wasn't also compensating for the same thing has no basis in reality or logic, other than an innate resistance to it.
If the room treatments you espouse as the only cure are really that, I would argue that prevention of having to use them is better than curing them. Hence SO.

[Spannko]

Surely, the best approach is to stay open to all options until hard evidence draws us one way or the other.

I haven’t tried the new SO+, but a change from amplitude to time based filtering sounds really interesting and I look forward to giving it a try. No fuss, no drama, if it doesn’t work for me I can turn it off.

[Music Lover]

I'm sorry Music Lover, but you are either missing the point or not understanding it. If you're suggesting prevention is better than cure then of course no one can argue with that. In principle. But hey, it's not a perfect world, and no room is ever perfect. Compensating for room modes is the only answer.
Room treatments are just as part of the cure for that as SO is. Dismissing this "compensation" as you call it as the "wrong idea" when talking about SO, while accepting the other as if it wasn't also compensating for the same thing has no basis in reality or logic, other than an innate resistance to it.
If the room treatments you espouse as the only cure are really that, I would argue that prevention of having to use them is better than curing them. Hence SO.

Of course, when I write "avoid compensation"...I refer to the musical signal.
Preserving the musical signal is key.
If you have an issue with room nodes, address these (=origin) instead of manipulating the musical signal.

[phino]

I'm sorry Music Lover, but you are either missing the point or not understanding it. If you're suggesting prevention is better than cure then of course no one can argue with that. In principle. But hey, it's not a perfect world, and no room is ever perfect. Compensating for room modes is the only answer.
Room treatments are just as part of the cure for that as SO is. Dismissing this "compensation" as you call it as the "wrong idea" when talking about SO, while accepting the other as if it wasn't also compensating for the same thing has no basis in reality or logic, other than an innate resistance to it.
If the room treatments you espouse as the only cure are really that, I would argue that prevention of having to use them is better than curing them. Hence SO.

Of course, when I write "avoid compensation"...I refer to the musical signal.
Preserving the musical signal is key.
If you have an issue with room nodes, address these (=origin) instead of manipulating the musical signal.

...and if you don't want (or aren't allowed) to live in a space dominated by bass traps and absorption panels?

[Music Lover]

You can read what I wrote "2018-10-06 19:32" (last sentence)

Besides, furnitures and mats are normally fine, together with careful tuning of the system.

[timster]

We can all agree that preserving the original is the intention, because reproduction is never perfect. But that's not preserving it is it? So you say "preserving the musical signal" is key, then which signal? That created in the recording studio? By each instrument? How it was recorded - or what comes out of the mixing desk - are they the original signal or a manipulation too? Or is the musical signal just whatever the source happens to be?

In any event, whether you are manipulating "the signal" in the digital domain with SO before the analogue reproduction, or in the analogue domain with room treatments afterwards, you are manipulating something. Whether doing it in the digital domain is less destructive to the original recording, and more precise and targeted, than room treatments is open to question. Or is it. Do you get room treatments for a specific frequency, bandwidth and that can be honed to a particular absorption level? Or is it more... blunderbuss and sledgehammer?