Enhancers

Snilsen

Audionot
I'd like to open a discussion on psychoacoustic enhancers, as I've just added the Behringer Edison EX-1 to my chain. (found it for just over $100 on fleabay) It's a cool, quiet little tool, based on op-amp technology. The best intro to it would be Vince's review, so here's a link:

http://www.audioproz.com/AP.php?Article=15&Tab=Educational

An interesting read if you have the patience, but more interesting to have on in house. I really like that this unit works without digitizing the signal. All the rich details of my LPs are piping through the circuits and I can fiddle with them a very low-noise floor. It really works as Vince advertises.

Last night I brought the center forward and was able to listen very quietly to a piano concerto. I could had never done that before without bothering the sleepier peoples here.

There aren't too many recordings I've come across yet that don't get some benefit to my ears by a little tweak. So, my question is, have you ever used something like this? What was you're experience?
 
I've not used the Edison EX1. But it sounds interesting.

I have used the Hafler circuit which is an ambience circuit which extracts information from 2-channel recordings and places this information in the rear speakers. During the recording process, depending on the numbers of microphones used, each mic picks up audio info from the other instruments, besides the one it is positioned to pick up. This "extra" info is there in the recording. The Hafler circuit (also known as the Dynaquad, Quadaptor, Quatravox, etc.) extracts this extra info and sends it to a pair of rear speakers. On many recordings, there is an increased spatial sense as well as depth/fullness of sound. This isn't a gimmick, it doesn't subtract anything from the recording. It was the forerunner of today's surround sound (which can be "gimmicky" sounding).

It is very different from the Edison EX1, but similar in that it enhances what's already in the recording.

FWIW....
 
Rob... thanks for the link. After reading it, my comment about the Hafler circuit seems even more relevant. The Edison appears to be something like the Hafler circuit... on steroids... with a few more features thrown in.

I'll keep my eye out for an Edison cheap.
 
I wonder how two Edisons could work together to make some very non-gimmicky surround sound? They come cheap, BTW, and they're built tough.
 
I"m using an iFi iTube with the 3D Holographic Sound setting switched in, liking the effect very much. Is this something similar to what the Behringer does? Most reviews state that it effects bass playback the most, but in my system, the whole soundstage seems to be larger and more 3D.

http://ifi-audio.com/portfolio-view/micro-itube/
 
Last edited:
wOw ... seven posts and no one chiming in about how any "enhancers" just add noise and detract from the engineer's intent ... the standard reply is that they didn't adjust it properly to give it a fair chance ... <G>

Can't live without my holography and range expansion, not to mention bass synth AND a hafler courtesy of a Dynaco Quadraptor. I've also got a Hughes AK100, but it doesn't play well with the Carver stuff.

That's one I haven't tried though. Have to keep an ear out for a deal on an EX-1 ...
 
I"m using an iFi iTube with the 3D Holographic Sound setting switched in, liking the effect very much. Is this something similar to what the Behringer does? Most reviews state that it effects bass playback the most, but in my system, the whole soundstage seems to be larger and more 3D.

http://ifi-audio.com/portfolio-view/micro-itube/
I have the same ifi unit..handy little doodad. I used it post phono pre for a little extra gain and the 3d was cool, using it in my desktop system now. The Carver holography stuff is fun too, not using the carver now but when I did it didn't seem as enjoyable with the holography off.
 
I have the same ifi unit..handy little doodad. I used it post phono pre for a little extra gain and the 3d was cool, using it in my desktop system now. The Carver holography stuff is fun too, not using the carver now but when I did it didn't seem as enjoyable with the holography off.

Cool. I have tried other tube buffers, this one seems to be the cleanest sounding of the bunch.

The only concern I have is that single vent hole on top. Hopefully won't be an issue, guess when it is out of warranty I can swiss cheese it. :)

I definitely have an open mind concerning these "enhancers". If it sounds good...go for it. :)
 
Last edited:
've also got a Hughes AK100, but it doesn't play well with the Carver stuff.

So, is the Hughes AK100 is a little too noisy, or what?

That Dynaco Quadraptor seems interesting - I saw that one sold on the bay for less than $40, shipped. That's not surprising to me at all, but I would expect it to have more value, but I can't even locate another sale.

The iFi, at $250+, that seems relatively steep.

So, on the four channel set up with a Quadraptor or iFi, what sort of speakers do you like on the ambient channels? I presume they should play deep or maybe be paired to subs.
 
So, is the Hughes AK100 is a little too noisy, or what?

That Dynaco Quadraptor seems interesting - I saw that one sold on the bay for less than $40, shipped. That's not surprising to me at all, but I would expect it to have more value, but I can't even locate another sale.

So, on the four channel set up with a Quadraptor or iFi, what sort of speakers do you like on the ambient channels? I presume they should play deep or maybe be paired to subs.

There are several Quadaptors (make sure you spell it right doing an eBay search) for sale right now on eBay.

I like having a somewhat more sensitive set of rear speakers when using my Quadaptor. More sensitive, that is, than the main/front speakers. My front speakers have 89dB sensitivity and my rears have 91dB sensitivity. The Quadaptor also has a volume knob to adjust the rear speakers... a very nice feature.

Dolby surround sound is a "souped-up" Hafler circuit. David Hafler developed this in the late '60s I think. Again, as I mentioned previously in this thread, this circuit is not a gimmick. Hafler reasoned that there was additional sonic information in typical 2-channel recordings, and found a way to capture that info and distribute it to a rear set of speakers. It indeed does create a genuine, believable ambience with a wider and deeper sound stage.

This circuit, however, does not approach the effects of the Carver Holography or the Edison devices... but then again, the Hafler circuit is much simpler (more pure?) than those devices.
 
Yup ... the Dynaco Quadraptor does play with phase, but it's a fixed effect and completely passive. Carver holographic and similar devices also play with phasing, but that's just a start, main difference being that the effect is adaptive and dynamic based on the music material ...

Worth mentioning, I don't use mine the "right" way. Using a Sansui QRX 9001 quad as a source, my Quadraptor is hooked up to the rear channel outputs and drives TWO sets of rear bookshelf speakers, one set high and overhead behind the listening position, and another set ear level and directly to the sides. I use the balance control to adjust the "height" of what's now effectively a phased array. The front channels are line out to an external amp to a pair of big boxes, and also get the C9 holography and dbx expansion and bass treatments.

Oh. Did I mention the rear speakers are Bose? We all know how they love to play around with reflections. Added to the rest, it makes for a very unique stage that (for me anyway) never fails to satisfy. 30 some odd years now, and I think I got it just about right ... <G>


Originally Posted by sKiZo
I've also got a Hughes AK100, but it doesn't play well with the Carver stuff.
So, is the Hughes AK100 is a little too noisy, or what?

No ... it works fine by itself, but not so much with the C9 engaged as well. I prefer the sound of the C9, but as with most any post processing, I suppose that's a subjective thing. You'll also find folk who swear the exact opposite to be true, and that the AK100 is the best thing since sliced bread ...
 
Oh. Did I mention the rear speakers are Bose? We all know how they love to play around with reflections. Added to the rest, it makes for a very unique stage that (for me anyway) never fails to satisfy. 30 some odd years now, and I think I got it just about right ... <G>

That's BRILLIANT! So easy and inexpensive, yet promising. I have to ask, what sort of Bose speakers? Satellites?

I should say, about the Edison - none of its effects are ridiculously over powering. That is to say, you can fiddle with the three effect knobs, adjust the volume knob to return the relative gain to where it was and then punch in in/out of the loop to see how you like it with the bypass button. So far, I haven't been able to really destroy the sound very badly. What is does can be very subtle without a significant compromise fidelity and THAT is why I like it.
 
I'm using the Quadaptor to give me back a bit of the "quad" sound that I've given up. By "given up" I mean that I've gone from using a vintage quad receiver (Sanyo DCX3300KA) to a modern Yamaha 2-channel network receiver. I've really been wanting to have modern connectivity (coax & optical inputs) and be able to stream Pandora and Spotify and control it all with my smartphone... and I've got that now.. but gave up the quad sound. The Quadaptor gives me a little of that back. But I know what I'm missing.

So, here's a question for you all: Is there a way to integrate an Edison or Carver or Hughes into my modern setup and get the quad sound back... or at least something comparable?

Also, I've read that using the Carver Holography gives a great effect but it's difficult to get it just right and that the "sweet spot" is narrow and small. I really want to learn about this to be able to sort of get back to the quad sound I enjoyed so much.

Thanks for any suggestions you can make. Oh... and what about the NuReality Vivid 3D?
 
Last edited:
That's BRILLIANT! So easy and inexpensive, yet promising. I have to ask, what sort of Bose speakers? Satellites?

Brilliant is my middle name ... but I'm usually too humble to admit it. I suppose, just this once ... :D

And while patting myself on the back here, I realize I rearranged things recently. :nutz:

A pair of Bose 161's overhead and just behind the listening position ...

bose-161-pair-speakers-black.jpg


The Bose 201's have now been replaced with a pair of Gekko flat panels located directly to the sides at ear level, and hooked to the back channel outputs of the Quadraptor.

gekko-flat-panels.jpg


Those are REAL interesting, in that they use the entire front surface as a radiator, with a full 180 degree "dome" of sound dispersion. Interesting tech that never caught on - these originally sold for around $600 a pair. And that IS the full depth of the speaker, so they go pretty much anywhere.

Still using the Bose 201's ...

201ii_product.jpg


Those are now approximately 10 feet behind the listening position and fed direct with the rear "B" speaker outputs of the Sansui quad. I can cut those in and out as well as adjust the depth of the rear channels with the receiver controls. I also added a couple mono load balancing pots in a little DIY box to those speaker wires so I can adjust the rear "A" and "B" volumes (as well as balance) for a good mix as needed. The Quadraptor now adjusts the height of the stage at the back - side to side balance is done with the receiver's rear channel controls.

(I'll never be accused of being a "purist", ok.) :no:

PS ... define "easy"? It took a bunch of little tweaks over 30+ years to get it all "just right", but it was sure fun getting there!
 
Last edited:
So, here's a question for you all: Is there a way to integrate an Edison or Carver or Hughes into my modern setup and get the quad sound back... or at least something comparable?

Have your cake and eat it too. Drive your old quad off a loop on the new setup and plug your effects into that. If you want to go crazy, get a dbx 200 passive switcher that allows you to run three processors off one tape loop as well as add three tape loops to the system.

Also, I've read that using the Carver Holography gives a great effect but it's difficult to get it just right and that the "sweet spot" is narrow and small. I really want to learn about this to be able to sort of get back to the quad sound I enjoyed so much.

Aw ... it's not as bad as some folk make it out to be. You just gotta invest in the right seating to keep your head in the sweet spot ...

listening-chair.jpg


It is truly a challenge to get the imaging just right, but well worth the effort. Read the book, take notes, set it all up the way Carver suggests, then tweak as needed for your particular room, keeping in mind that very minor changes can make for very major differences in what you hear. Took me a while to get what I wanted, but since then it works well with most any musical material or source, but ... only at the primary seating position.

What made a BIG difference is rebuilding my C9 using upgrade caps and Texas Instrument ICs (silverback and red stripe NOS) instead of the Singapore specials it came with ... also added some bypass where needed and went with some super new tech op amps here and there ... the brown dog adapters required to match the unusual pinout of the original ICs are too expensive to do them all.

H9-AV-after02.jpg
 
QUOTE: "Have your cake and eat it too. Drive your old quad off a loop on the new setup and plug your effects into that. If you want to go crazy, get a dbx 200 passive switcher that allows you to run three processors off one tape loop as well as add three tape loops to the system."

Part of the problem is that the network function of my Yamaha modern receiver cannot be "outputted" through any kind of loop... "rec out" or "tape out." In other words, I can't stream Pandora from the Yamaha network receiver thru to the Sanyo quad receiver via the rec out or tape out. Network functions can't be passed that way. And that's my big problem.
 
I might have missed you posting the specific receiver you're using, but does it have an AV OUT or AUDIO OUT? A quick peek at their lineup shows either/or connections available. You don't need to complete the loop for what you're looking to do.

Then again, that only gives you stereo, but you could synth that to quad.

For multichannel, looks like you'd need an HDMI breakout box.

GTV-HDMI-2-HDMIAUD_B.jpg


Gefen GTV-HDMI-2-HDMIAUD Switchable Audio Break-out Box

You'd want to hook that to the HDMI connector marked ARC on your Yamaha ...

I run my SACD into four channels of an old quad, and route the center and sub to a Carver Cube ... that gives me 5.1 anyway.
 
skizo... Hey thanks for trying to help me out.

I've got a Yamaha R-N500 2-channel network receiver. Here's the link to the manual for it: Scroll down a page or so and you'll see what to click on:

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_022RN500/Yamaha-R-N500.html?showAll=N&search=yamaha_r-n500&skipvs=T

As indicated it is 2-channel, but has optical and coax inputs.

It has a subwoofer/pre-out that I'm using for a powered subwoofer.

But it has several "rec out" ports that should work.

With this info, what are my chances?

If I got a Nureality or a Hughes AK or a Edison EX, with my Quadaptor, would this give me something towards a quad sound?

Thanks again for all the help... much appreciated.

Hal
 
Back
Top Bottom