DEQX

@almarg:  Thanks for your response.  I did read what seemed like the “War and Peace” lengthy discussion on Deqx.  I’m running strictly analog and am not sure this is for me.  Guess I’m a dinosaur. I still have plans to make a couple of QRD 7’s for the back of my room.  I think my system sounds sweet, but always looking for improvement, as we all are.  I’m also considering a high-end EQ, that matches my systems quality.  According to Dennis Foley, eq’s won’t help in frequency difficiencies that much.

@Almarg:  Thinking once again, about getting the PreMate plus.  I read you use your “5” unit as a line stage.  Are you happy without a traditional line stage?  I have an Aesthetix Calypso Signature I really like.  I like the tube sound it gives, when playing both CDs, as well as my vinyl.  I do have a Kora Hermès II dac I could incorporate into my system, for my CDs.  Just need some added assurance and advice.  I’ve spoken to Larry a few times by email and only need a laptop and microphone stand, before getting the unit on their 21 day trial. He claims that time will be sufficient, for me to decide to go, or no go.  Pls render your advice.
Steve

This is technology and a subject that has intrigued myself as well.
However at present using an integrated amp it really is not going to work.
If I ever consider going to a pre/power amp combo again then the 5 would be of great interest.
Tech that I am definitely keeping a weather eye on!

@Handymann,

My experience and opinions just represent one data point, of course, and certainly there are those who would prefer to use a DEQX in conjunction with a traditional line stage.

But FWIW my bias, generally speaking, is to place the burden of proof on adding anything to the signal path that isn’t necessary in terms of functionality. And I’ve been sufficiently happy with the sound of my system that I don’t have any desire to consider adding a separate line stage. Also, finding a place to physically put one in my system, which is in my living room, would be problematical from a practical and aesthetic standpoint.

In addition to numerous other system and listener dependencies that would enter into a preamp/no preamp decision it wouldn’t surprise me if in some cases the tradeoff would hinge on whether the DEQX’s balanced or unbalanced analog inputs and outputs are used. I’ve never tried the balanced analog i/o’s in conjunction with critical sources, as my power amp, headphone amp, and my one critical analog source (a Herron phono stage) have only unbalanced interfaces.

Another thing that may be relevant to that decision, depending on the particular system, is that a DEQX doesn’t provide much in the way of gain. See pages 165 and 166 of the manual. And in fact the default/as delivered positions of the internal jumpers which affect that produce a **negative** gain (-6 db) from the unbalanced inputs to the unbalanced outputs. As you’ll see at the bottom of page 165 of the manual that is done to provide headroom for equalization (and for speaker and room corrections, although that isn’t explicitly stated). Although changing the position of an internal jumper can raise the -6 db to approximately 0 db, while retaining the same amount of headroom (which I’ve done, btw).

Finally, regarding the possible use of your DAC in conjunction with a DEQX and/or your Calypso preamp for listening to CDs:  I’ll mention FWIW that while I found connecting the AES/EBU output of my Bryston BCD-1 CD player to the AES/EBU input of the DEQX to be preferable to using the BCD-1’s internal DAC in conjunction with the DEQX’s A/D converter stage, the difference wasn’t huge, and in fact was smaller than I was expecting.

Best regards,
-- Al