[KMann]

I use the preset for my LCD-4. Can you provide a little bit of a layperson’s explanation of the pros and cons of the two linear phase filters? I use a pretty fast CPU (Apple) so, if I’m seeking the most transparency and imaging (a/k/a sound quality), is the new option the way to go?

In short, yes if Roon shows 10x or higher in its signal path, the new filters are the way to go. In my listening, I have not heard any downside to it. It is easy to switch between the two and the difference is hard to miss.

Edit: To be clear, 'Low-latancy' is not a linear phase filter. The new filters are linear-phase and the new filters just get out of the way.

 

[VandyMan]

We have updated the Roon prests with couple of customization options, please see here(http://kb.roonlabs.com/Audeze_Presets)

Could you please consider adding filters for the various major revisions? For example: LCD-2.1, LCD-2.2, LCD-2.2 w/ Fazor, LCD-2 2016, etc.

 

[KMann]

Due to how these were designed, we have found the presets to work quite well on all Fazor versions. With pre-fazor, it is a closer call. Which version do you have?

 

[CoLdAsSauLt]

Due to how these were designed, we have found the presets to work quite well on all Fazor versions. With pre-fazor, it is a closer call. Which version do you have?

Can somebody please explain what these linear phase filters do (or point me to an explanation). I'm inclined to believe by your post that Audeze's fazors create phase errors/timing errors that need correction by DSP... what big merits do they have to warrant such trade-offs? Or am I going about this the wrong way?

 

[VandyMan]

Due to how these were designed, we have found the presets to work quite well on all Fazor versions. With pre-fazor, it is a closer call. Which version do you have?

I have the LCD 2.1. The Roon/Audeze filters definitely improve the sound, so I'm curious what a filter for this specific version would do.

 

[VandyMan]

Can somebody please explain what these linear phase filters do (or point me to an explanation). I'm inclined to believe by your post that Audeze's fazors create phase errors/timing errors that need correction by DSP... what big merits do they have to warrant such trade-offs? Or am I going about this the wrong way?

The filters are for EQ, not phase correction. Applying digital EQ can introduce phase/timing errors. Different types of filters (mathematical formulas essentially) have different characteristics in this regard.

 

[KMann]

I have the LCD 2.1. The Roon/Audeze filters definitely improve the sound, so I'm curious what a filter for this specific version would do.

Our intent was to make changes that are not too intrusive and/or alter the charecter of the headphones too much* also keep the interface simple. The profile we chose are based on statistical analysis of the database of measurments and also critical listening on random samples of the model.

*EL-8C and XC are an exception as we wanted to make them sound more open.

 

[KMann]

Linear-phase filters do not alter the phase response in any way, nor are intended to correct any phase errors. However, in order to be transparent, the filters need to be really long. We hve found short linear filters not to have any audible advantage over the low-latancy filters.

Fazors help linearize the phase response of transducer by reducing difraction.

 

[David B]

So KMann, I infer that what you’re saying is that the new linear filter does require some processing poorer but that in this case, if you have the processing power you get it done the right way here. Is this a fair statement?

 

[KMann]

So KMann, I infer that what you’re saying is that the new linear filter does require some processing poorer but that in this case, if you have the processing power you get it done the right way here. Is this a fair statement?

Yes. Roon's DSP engine is quite effecient and linear-phase is what I will recommend. Unless you are trying to play DSD and the signla path shows 2x are less, you need not be concered.

 

[gunwale]

i like linear and dry. the only reason i subsribed roon is because of the audeze plugin. good job audeze.

 

[KMann]

i like linear and dry. the only reason i subsribed roon is because of the audeze plugin. good job audeze.

Did you mean Wet? Having the slider all the way to the left (dry/0%) will not apply any preset.

 

[gunwale]

Did you mean Wet? Having the slider all the way to the left (dry/0%) will not apply any preset.

any preset filters or having 0% means choosing lcd4 or lcd3 will sound the same?

 

[groovyd]

We have updated the Roon prests with couple of customization options, please see here(http://kb.roonlabs.com/Audeze_Presets)

1. We have added Wet/Dry mix, same as what is offered by Audeze Reveal plugin. This controls the extent to which the preset is applied.
2. We have added a linear-phase option to all the presets in addition to the previous presets which now are available as 'Low-latancy'. The Low-latency option currently uses a zero-delay, analog equivalent filters.

The linear-phase filters are quite long and have a latancy of about 3 seconds for Redbook, but improve imaging and transparancy. They are also processor intensive, but should be a problem except on some low powered CPU while playing DSD.

@groovyd - I remember you asking about linear-phase presets, this may be of interest to you.

Yes indeed but 3 seconds??!! That doesn't really make sense for a linear phase filter in the normal 20-20k spectrum. Are you sure it isn't more like 60-100ms? Sonarworks linear phase filter which performs a similar correction has a latency under 60ms.

 

[KMann]

any preset filters or having 0% means choosing lcd4 or lcd3 will sound the same?

Yes 0% implies no preset. There will be no change in sound no matter which one you choose.