When I mentioned this to the company, this is what they replied...
. Unfortunately keeping a product that has 4 high end DAC channels (loaded with all the high end parts to reach such low level of THD+N and High Dynamic range along with 1 x network streamer + 1 x Dirac Live license + 1 x UMIk-1 doesn’t come for cheap. Such platform (even at stereo level actually, not even with a DSP) comes at much higher price in similar offerings… A similar platform as a preamp + Digital Room correction would be a DEQX… We provide it at 1/4 of that price..
So while we do keep our target to make product affordable, there is a cost to everything I’m afraid.. :-(
I think the only product in their current lineup that manages to catch my attention, is the OpenDRC-DA8. It seems to be a selection of reasonably good products in a well thought out package.
The only thing missing is an analog input, but this can be solved in other ways.
The 2x4HD utilizes that same silly format as the regular 2x4, and therefore the 2x4HD but also the DDRC-24 is not relevant, at least for me. Get the connectors mounted on the back, and add a simple volume knob, that's all I need personally.
The only thing missing is an analog input, but this can be solved in other ways.
The 2x4HD utilizes that same silly format as the regular 2x4, and therefore the 2x4HD but also the DDRC-24 is not relevant, at least for me. Get the connectors mounted on the back, and add a simple volume knob, that's all I need personally.
Last edited:
FWIW, the SHD appears to measure extremely well. It seems to be oriented towards sub/sat style 2-way setups and I agree that a bit more flexitility might be nice, but considering the all-in-one capabilities and analog performance, it still seems rather interesting. The Studio all-digital version is only $300 cheaper, and there's no way you can get 4 channels of DAC at this level of performance for that price.
Review and Measurements of miniDSP SHD DAC, DSP And Streamer | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum
Review and Measurements of miniDSP SHD DAC, DSP And Streamer | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum
Don't forget there is an equally capable 2 channel ADC as well as lots of digital I/O as well.
The primary justification for this thing in my system is the combination of Dirac and PEQ.
I will probably experiment with Volumio (streamer) at some point.
The crossovers are quite flexible if you need them. Note that each of the 4 channels is fully independently configurable for both high and low pass. Outputs can be assigned to either right or left input as desired. BW 6dB - 48dB in 6dB steps is supported, LR12/24/48dB is supported as is Bessel. (2nd order only IIRC)
The PEQ in basic mode is quite useful for my purposes, advanced is a lot more flexible and gives you direct access to 10 biquad filters per channel.
I have uploaded some screen shots from mine.
The only other game in town with this level of performance is a DEQX which will run 3 - 4 x the cost of an SHD.
This unit does not sound particularly digital although to sound its best it does need to "warm up"
The system it lives in is quite outside of the normal environment for a device like this.
Six channels of DHT amplification driven by 24dB/oct LR4 electronic crossovers, line stage is transformer coupled DHT, and lots of transformers. Connections between amps, crossovers, SHD, and line stage are all balanced. Speakers are horns and Onken bass cabinets - very efficient. The SHD is quiet enough to work unobtrusively in the system.
It's not particularly cheap as others have commented, but it is well made and sounds pretty good.
The primary justification for this thing in my system is the combination of Dirac and PEQ.
I will probably experiment with Volumio (streamer) at some point.
The crossovers are quite flexible if you need them. Note that each of the 4 channels is fully independently configurable for both high and low pass. Outputs can be assigned to either right or left input as desired. BW 6dB - 48dB in 6dB steps is supported, LR12/24/48dB is supported as is Bessel. (2nd order only IIRC)
The PEQ in basic mode is quite useful for my purposes, advanced is a lot more flexible and gives you direct access to 10 biquad filters per channel.
I have uploaded some screen shots from mine.
The only other game in town with this level of performance is a DEQX which will run 3 - 4 x the cost of an SHD.
This unit does not sound particularly digital although to sound its best it does need to "warm up"
The system it lives in is quite outside of the normal environment for a device like this.
Six channels of DHT amplification driven by 24dB/oct LR4 electronic crossovers, line stage is transformer coupled DHT, and lots of transformers. Connections between amps, crossovers, SHD, and line stage are all balanced. Speakers are horns and Onken bass cabinets - very efficient. The SHD is quiet enough to work unobtrusively in the system.
It's not particularly cheap as others have commented, but it is well made and sounds pretty good.
Attachments
Nice to hear about the perceived quality, the unit may be well worth the money if the performance is good.
TBH I am still sort of evaluating this unit, the specs seem quite good, and there are few products that really compete. But the cost is somewhat prohibitive, and I have no desire to chase after the DIRAC rainbow fable.
Now they have the option to omit the Umik-1 as well, but for a 50$ price reduction, while they charge 75$ extra to bundle it with other comparable products. Not that the Umik isn't worth the money, but it's almost better to just get the bundled mike and sell it to someone for 75$ instead.
Edit:
Have you tried with a turntable on the analog in using internal filters for RIAA compensation?
I have some few LP's that I really enjoy listening to.
TBH I am still sort of evaluating this unit, the specs seem quite good, and there are few products that really compete. But the cost is somewhat prohibitive, and I have no desire to chase after the DIRAC rainbow fable.
Now they have the option to omit the Umik-1 as well, but for a 50$ price reduction, while they charge 75$ extra to bundle it with other comparable products. Not that the Umik isn't worth the money, but it's almost better to just get the bundled mike and sell it to someone for 75$ instead.
Edit:
Have you tried with a turntable on the analog in using internal filters for RIAA compensation?
I have some few LP's that I really enjoy listening to.
Last edited:
I use strain gauge cartridges which require power, gain and EQ (not much like RIAA tbh) but have not yet listened to any vinyl through it. It would be possible I think to implement the EQ in a PEQ but since I have all of these phono pre-amps I have no plans to do so at the moment.
I'm pretty happy with the unit at this point. I have reconfigured my system a bit an rerun the calibration today.
I've read commentary here and elsewhere about how flawed Dirac is, but the difference I hear actually isn't particularly subtle..
It seems to work quite well and I'd rate it as pretty effective. I have done manual measurements and equalized things manually using REW and parametric EQ in the past and I'm quite happy to let my laptop do the heavy lifting for me.Attachments
A further comment..
It's pretty transparent, and quiet enough there are unlikely to be many if any systems that it could degrade from an SNR standpoint in any meaningful way.
It does what it is advertised to do, and quite well.
I stepped out on a limb when I bought this thing, turns out to be a pretty substantial limb.
I am going to experiment with some of the other features, it offers a lot more than just room correction processing. It would make a pretty good control center for a pretty high end set up.
It's pretty transparent, and quiet enough there are unlikely to be many if any systems that it could degrade from an SNR standpoint in any meaningful way.
It does what it is advertised to do, and quite well.
I stepped out on a limb when I bought this thing, turns out to be a pretty substantial limb.
I am going to experiment with some of the other features, it offers a lot more than just room correction processing. It would make a pretty good control center for a pretty high end set up.
The only review I found was very limited in that it only dealt with its D/A converters which it remarked are more than respectable. The reviewer had none of the proprietary software and couldn't test the performance of any of the features which are the primary reason for my purchase.
I was more than a little queasy jumping into the deep end of the pond with essentially no information not gleaned from the rather comprehensive user's manual. (Not an easy read for anyone with ADD )
Fundamentally I relied on MiniDSP accurately representing the merits of their product, and if anything I'd say they slightly understated the case. Rather refreshing difference from the typical hyperbole in high end audio where they promise you the moon and deliver something considerably short of the goal. This device by the way is most definitely high end. Does its job pretty unobtrusively compared to the analog EQ it replaced and does things that unit could never do.
The remote interface is clearly buggy, but that will likely get sorted out over time.
The only other processor I am currently familiar with is the Accuphase DG-58 but I have no way to directly compare the two.
Long ago I had a DEQX 2.6A but the system while sharing some common components was less "evolved" [ over-complicated ] Given the march of time I would expect the SHD to better it in a number of respects.
This non-technical use oriented review of the DG-58 in some degree captures the road I have been following for a while and some of the observations parallel mine surprisingly closely: ACCUPHASE DG-58
The user brief for the SHD is here: https://www.minidsp.com/images/documents/Product Brief-SHD.pdf
The user manual is here: https://www.minidsp.com/images/documents/SHD Series User Manual.pdf
For the moment at least this is probably the best source of information for deciding whether this device might be useful.
One of the biggest difficulties I have had has been in reconciling the use of a digital processor in the signal path of an avowedly analog audio system, it was a difficult and uncomfortable decision. (One I might also add has not been universally well received by even those I consider close friends.)
Like any device it has aspects of its performance that may be identifiable since we don't live in a perfect world, it is always a matter of trade offs. In my case it was clear that the room and the less than ideal frequency response characteristics of my mid-range horn and driver were becoming the limiting factors in my enjoyment of music. The SHD resulted in more than satisfactory improvements in those areas and improved a lot of other things I was much less aware of until I heard the change. I imagine there will be many who find it a great asset and a few who won't.
I was more than a little queasy jumping into the deep end of the pond with essentially no information not gleaned from the rather comprehensive user's manual. (Not an easy read for anyone with ADD
)Fundamentally I relied on MiniDSP accurately representing the merits of their product, and if anything I'd say they slightly understated the case. Rather refreshing difference from the typical hyperbole in high end audio where they promise you the moon and deliver something considerably short of the goal. This device by the way is most definitely high end. Does its job pretty unobtrusively compared to the analog EQ it replaced and does things that unit could never do.
The remote interface is clearly buggy, but that will likely get sorted out over time.
The only other processor I am currently familiar with is the Accuphase DG-58 but I have no way to directly compare the two.
Long ago I had a DEQX 2.6A but the system while sharing some common components was less "evolved" [ over-complicated
] Given the march of time I would expect the SHD to better it in a number of respects.This non-technical use oriented review of the DG-58 in some degree captures the road I have been following for a while and some of the observations parallel mine surprisingly closely: ACCUPHASE DG-58
The user brief for the SHD is here: https://www.minidsp.com/images/documents/Product Brief-SHD.pdf
The user manual is here: https://www.minidsp.com/images/documents/SHD Series User Manual.pdf
For the moment at least this is probably the best source of information for deciding whether this device might be useful.
One of the biggest difficulties I have had has been in reconciling the use of a digital processor in the signal path of an avowedly analog audio system, it was a difficult and uncomfortable decision. (One I might also add has not been universally well received by even those I consider close friends.)
Like any device it has aspects of its performance that may be identifiable since we don't live in a perfect world, it is always a matter of trade offs. In my case it was clear that the room and the less than ideal frequency response characteristics of my mid-range horn and driver were becoming the limiting factors in my enjoyment of music. The SHD resulted in more than satisfactory improvements in those areas and improved a lot of other things I was much less aware of until I heard the change. I imagine there will be many who find it a great asset and a few who won't.
Thanks.
I have the miniDSP 2x4 HD here, and the SHD is pretty much that unit on steroids!
Better DACs, lots more configurations, inputs, etc...
I was hoping the price tag would be a little lower, but it does offer a lot, and as mentioned, the competition is priced much higher.
So, your audio path is Analog in- A/D conversion in the SHD- Dirac and XO- D/A conversion to amp?
Doing so in the 2x4 HD (minus the Dirac) degrades the sound noticeably. That's why I use mine with USB input. I stay digital until the last moment, and only one conversion is applied.
Did you test analog vs digital inputs on your SHD?
I have the miniDSP 2x4 HD here, and the SHD is pretty much that unit on steroids!
Better DACs, lots more configurations, inputs, etc...
I was hoping the price tag would be a little lower, but it does offer a lot, and as mentioned, the competition is priced much higher.
So, your audio path is Analog in- A/D conversion in the SHD- Dirac and XO- D/A conversion to amp?
Doing so in the 2x4 HD (minus the Dirac) degrades the sound noticeably. That's why I use mine with USB input. I stay digital until the last moment, and only one conversion is applied.
Did you test analog vs digital inputs on your SHD?
Currently I am treating it like a black box with analog I/O, and have not yet evaluated the performance through a digital input. I plan to run ethernet back to the router so I can use the streamer. The crossovers are analog 3 way 24dB/Octave Linkwitz-Riley of my own design.
I have two digital and three to four analog sources. I have a Sony HAP-Z1ES which has a usb port that can be used for a variety of purposes including for connection to a DAC, I may try it at some point. I also have a Sony SCD-777ES SACD player which has spdif out for CDs only, and I don't use it to play CDs. None of my digital sources were really intended to be used in the digital domain.. LOL
I currently have two turntables, and tuner, and possibly will be adding 15ips tape playback next year. So I live in a mostly analog world. I do use the HAP quite a lot, but otherwise play vinyl.
I have two digital and three to four analog sources. I have a Sony HAP-Z1ES which has a usb port that can be used for a variety of purposes including for connection to a DAC, I may try it at some point. I also have a Sony SCD-777ES SACD player which has spdif out for CDs only, and I don't use it to play CDs. None of my digital sources were really intended to be used in the digital domain.. LOL
I currently have two turntables, and tuner, and possibly will be adding 15ips tape playback next year. So I live in a mostly analog world. I do use the HAP quite a lot, but otherwise play vinyl.
Please can you specify that? Measurements? What is causing that, distortion, noise? Perhaps you are clipping it with too high input voltage?
I have three 2x4HD and 4x10HD units and I haven't noticed any degradation of sound or measurable changes in AD/DA (with REW, don't have oscilloscope or such)
Kevin, so there's no high rez Flac on your laptop? Would be easy to test just an album. There are some really nice audio files on Homepage | HDtracks - The World's Greatest-Sounding Music Downloads
But if you just want to try some files for free, it is hard to top the stuff here: 2L High Resolution Music .:. free TEST BENCH
Foo: I do not see 96khz as a limiting factor here. It is a sensible compromise. 48khz has some limitations in post filter processing, but 96khz should not pose any audible difference compared to 192khz. The dsp filters however, are processing in 32bit which may give some tiny audible difference to 64bit, because it is how the filters are calculated to influence the signal. The output dac is 32bit so in theory 32bit dsp processing should be adequate, but this is not always the case, because again, it is basis of calculation for how the filters should influence the music, and it can theoretically limit the performance of the signal, when the signal itself is 32bit.
But if you just want to try some files for free, it is hard to top the stuff here: 2L High Resolution Music .:. free TEST BENCH
Foo: I do not see 96khz as a limiting factor here. It is a sensible compromise. 48khz has some limitations in post filter processing, but 96khz should not pose any audible difference compared to 192khz. The dsp filters however, are processing in 32bit which may give some tiny audible difference to 64bit, because it is how the filters are calculated to influence the signal. The output dac is 32bit so in theory 32bit dsp processing should be adequate, but this is not always the case, because again, it is basis of calculation for how the filters should influence the music, and it can theoretically limit the performance of the signal, when the signal itself is 32bit.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.