Anyone, Snaxo vs Exakt ?

The Exakt link and protocol were developed by Linn, provide an interconnect with very low jitter and have nothing to do with SPDIF/TOSLINK. It probably took some effort to develop. Why not call this an invention?

jfritzen posted:

The Exakt link and protocol were developed by Linn, provide an interconnect with very low jitter and have nothing to do with SPDIF/TOSLINK. It probably took a lot of effort to develop. Why not call this an invention?

I will give you the Exakt link protocol is an invention ... the rest of the Exakt system is Linn's implementation of existing technologies (afaik). This is not a bad thing.

AussieSteve posted:

Here in Australia is a company called DEQX. They make the signal from the dac, convert to adc, perform corrections and then convert back and send the signal to the power amps. They are used in several speaker brands as inbuilt functions or as a preamp or module. They are very well regarded and really work in improving the sound. The website provides much greater info.

There are quite a few DSP/EQ boxes available from various companies, though not all have a quality that would match that of a top flight hifi system. Ditto digital electronic crossovers. In my messings with speaker design, to simplify crossover design I am triamping (triple Musical Fidelity P170s, though with a P270 also available), and using a Behringer DCX2496 and DEQ2496. These are very versatile units, with 24bit/96kHz resolution as the names imply, which allow parameters to simply be 'dialled in'. They are not bad sound quality, but for serious listening quality they would need  the power supply improving (which can be done), while the onboard DACs are nowhere near the Hugo I currently use so would at least need 3 Hugos to be expected to match my current system SQ. if anyone wanted Dave DAC quality it would require 3 Daves...

Eloise posted:

jfritzen posted:

The Exakt link and protocol were developed by Linn, provide an interconnect with very low jitter and have nothing to do with SPDIF/TOSLINK. It probably took a lot of effort to develop. Why not call this an invention?

I will give you the Exakt link protocol is an invention ... the rest of the Exakt system is Linn's implementation of existing technologies (afaik). This is not a bad thing.

Well Mr Jfritzen, no wonder you are well informed, just pulled up a previous post a couple of weeks after the Bristol Show.

And you asked the million dollar question.

 What crossover did they use?

Search post:

Kudos Titans active with Naim, anyone heard them.

"have heard the 808 passive, with Naim amplification some time ago at Cymbiosis, prior to the move, they sound far better than speakers made by turntable or amplifier manufacturers IMHO"

"They used a Berhinger Professional x-over but aiming for a proper Snaxo with Naim. Clearly that would be an advantage for Naim to have such a popular speaker ready for their active amps. Win-win-win if you ask me (customer-Naim-Kudos)"

After glancing at that post, and the replies thus far from this post, this is what I'm left with.

1st, Naimees like to pair their electronics with Speaker Manufacturers of their choice.

2nd, Active Systems are not dead.

3rd, perhaps someone is working on a crossover that's suits Naim's Snaxo.

One gentleman left the show, with The Active Titans, with Naim taking first place, followed by Naim passive 500/Supra 2.

Sounds German, the XO, that was used?

Allante93!

This was after the Merger:

"Currently I think that only Linn and Naim promote active technology in the domestic hifi market, although it is common in pa/concert rigs. It will be interesting to watch developments as to whether the Focal/Naim merger leads to more or less active systems?

This very specialised expertise means that in practice few people will ever own an active system, even thought the rewards are great.

It’s just a shame that the pockets have to be as deep!"

Beit Linn's Exakt Technologies, or Naim's Snaxo Technologies! 

One doesn't haft to go for the Linn's 10K Klimax, Nor does on haft to do a Snaxo/500

Normal folk can hook up a couple of 200s and a Snaxo, through in an Ndx, with an 282, and call it a day! 

Likewise, Linnies can do the same thing with 2nd and third tier hookups! 

The Big Picture, who's technology will determine the Future of Active Systems!

Focal, Active Ready Speakers, That's what you do, Speakers!  

Just my Two Cents.

Allante93! 

Eloise posted:

[@mention:46760295022432911] ... I *have* read what the Exakt system does. It's a digital input, combination of speaker / room correction and digital crossover (based on everything I've read - and I've read everything publically published as far as I know). So what have I missed?

The (near enough) eliminaton of phase distortion within and between drive units.  As far as I'm aware that's new.

sunbeamgls posted:

I really suggest thoroughly reading what it does, even if you are an ex computer systems engineer.

I have designed audio amplifiers.
I have designed computer systems.
I have experience of DSPs.
I have experience of writing DSP algorithms.
I actually use a miniDSP 2x4, so I suggest you look up my system before writing such answers...
Yes I DO know what it does.
I have real practical experience of MiniDSP crossovers,
...do you?

ATC is another manufacturer of active speakers (that is the  amps are part of the speaker) - as opposed to active crossover speakers which sometimes mistakenly get called active speakers - and the rewards are absolutely worth it although currently I don't run active at home. ATC mainly position their active speakers for the professional market but they seem to be introducing more active variants into their domestic hifi models as well.

I think if I ever moved to three drivers i would go active speaker.... the passive crossover starts to get more in the way with this or higher number of drivers... which no matter how good your power amp is or your crossover  you can't avoid... and I am not sure i want the clutter of active crossover speakers.

S

Huge posted:

Yes I know exactly what it does - I'm an ex computer systems designer.    (And read my post about how to implement the system.)

It's functionally comparable to a SNAXO, but operating in the digital domain instead of the analogue domain; and it can also do DRC in a way comparable to (but not the same as) a Linn Exakt system.

 

Plus a few other things ... corrects phase distortion for each drive unit, corrects for individual drive unit variations, time-of-flight correction between drive units, time and phase alignment for sub-woofers. Possibly a few other bits and pieces. Search for "Linn Exakt Film" in Google

Allan Probin posted:

Plus a few other things ... corrects phase distortion for each drive unit, corrects for individual drive unit variations, time-of-flight correction between drive units, time and phase alignment for sub-woofers. Possibly a few other bits and pieces. Search for "Linn Exakt Film" in Google

Does the Exact Box do all that stuff automatically, or is it all set up by hand? I have enough trouble with the plethora of input, time, word length, phase & gain settings on the 5.1 Meridian system - in fact, it's relief to go back to the Naim system.....switch on - insert CD (or use NAT03 pretuned to Radio 3) - press play

Bit of both ... you need to define your room dimensions and location of speakers, you need to specify the make and model of your speaker and if you're using Linn Akurate or Klimax speakers the serial number of the speakers so the system can access an online database of driver measurements made during construction of the speakers. That's what the dealer is for, the rest is automatic.

Does the Linn Exact system cope with the situation where the room isn't a regular cuboid?

Allante93 posted:

Well Mr Jfritzen, no wonder you are well informed, just pulled up a previous post a couple of weeks after the Bristol Show.

And you asked the million dollar question.

 What crossover did they use?

Search post:

Kudos Titans active with Naim, anyone heard them.

"have heard the 808 passive, with Naim amplification some time ago at Cymbiosis, prior to the move, they sound far better than speakers made by turntable or amplifier manufacturers IMHO"

"They used a Berhinger Professional x-over but aiming for a proper Snaxo with Naim. Clearly that would be an advantage for Naim to have such a popular speaker ready for their active amps. Win-win-win if you ask me (customer-Naim-Kudos)"

After glancing at that post, and the replies thus far from this post, this is what I'm left with.

1st, Naimees like to pair their electronics with Speaker Manufacturers of their choice.

2nd, Active Systems are not dead.

3rd, perhaps someone is working on a Speakers that's suits both, Snaxo, and Exakt. (Typo 're edited 3rd)!

One gentleman left the show, with The Active Titans, with Naim taking first place, followed by Naim passive 500/Supra 2.

Sounds German, the XO, that was used?

Allante93!

I guess a real comparison can't be done, until we put Snaxo to the test.

 Berhinger/Naim amps/Titans @ Bristol

 Someone needs to compare:

Naim front end/Snaxo/Naim amps/Briks

 Vs

Linn front end/Exakt/Naim amps/Briks

The Analog in, Analog out,Snaxo XO

Vs

The Digital in, Analog out Exakt XO

Sounds logical to me!

Allante93!

Huge posted:

Does the Linn Exact system cope with the situation where the room isn't a regular cuboid?

There are people on the Linn forum with L-shaped rooms and rooms with sloping ceilings, etc. who are successfully using Exakt by starting with an approximation of the room and tweaking from there. It's highly configurable if needs be. What shape room do you have?

Allan Probin posted:

Huge posted:

Does the Linn Exact system cope with the situation where the room isn't a regular cuboid?

There are people on the Linn forum with L-shaped rooms and rooms with sloping ceilings, etc. who are successfully using Exakt by starting with an approximation of the room and tweaking from there. It's highly configurable if needs be. What shape room do you have?

And a box shaped room is at the same time the most common and one of the worst situations regarding standing bass waves, so Linn have covered the most important case. At the other extreme, a room that has no parallel surfaces at all would be most difficult to model in Space Optimization but be ideal for suppressing standing waves in the first place.

Huge posted:

sunbeamgls posted:

I really suggest thoroughly reading what it does, even if you are an ex computer systems engineer.

I have designed audio amplifiers.
I have designed computer systems.
I have experience of DSPs.
I have experience of writing DSP algorithms.
I actually use a miniDSP 2x4, so I suggest you look up my system before writing such answers...
Yes I DO know what it does.
I have real practical experience of MiniDSP crossovers,
...do you?

May be my words could have been better. I wasn't questioning your credibility.  What I was trying to say is that, regardless of anyone's job or experience, its best to understand what it does (and that doesn't require an understanding of how it is done) before declaring that its just a re-hash of existing approaches.

Allan Probin posted:

Huge posted:

Does the Linn Exact system cope with the situation where the room isn't a regular cuboid?

There are people on the Linn forum with L-shaped rooms and rooms with sloping ceilings, etc. who are successfully using Exakt by starting with an approximation of the room and tweaking from there. It's highly configurable if needs be. What shape room do you have?

That enquiry was just idle curiosity, I measured my room resonances and use a miniDSP to provide amplitude and time correction for my setup in my room.  I was interested as I've done the measurement and corrections for myself and was wondering what the Linn system would do with irregular situations.  I also noted that as soon as you introduce substantial damping, then, in practice, the practical measurements start to diverge from the theoretical amplitude calculations as it's almost impossible to measure the absorption profile (frequency and spatial wrt wavefronts)  that's actually achieved with the absorber in situ.

For the record, the room is almost square, and I use bass traps to reduce the degree of DRC necessary (hence the comment about absorption).

sunbeamgls posted:

...

 

 

May be my words could have been better. I wasn't questioning your credibility.  What I was trying to say is that, regardless of anyone's job or experience, its best to understand what it does (and that doesn't require an understanding of how it is done) before declaring that its just a re-hash of existing approaches.

It's OK, it was just the repeat that 'got to me', but yes I do understand the effects, forms and mechanisms of DRC.

I did the research so I could select components and calibrate my system (my room correction comprises a combination of acoustic and digital components).

Huge posted:

Allan Probin posted:

Huge posted:

Does the Linn Exact system cope with the situation where the room isn't a regular cuboid?

There are people on the Linn forum with L-shaped rooms and rooms with sloping ceilings, etc. who are successfully using Exakt by starting with an approximation of the room and tweaking from there. It's highly configurable if needs be. What shape room do you have?

That enquiry was just idle curiosity, I measured my room resonances and use a miniDSP to provide amplitude and time correction for my setup in my room.  I was interested as I've done the measurement and corrections for myself and was wondering what the Linn system would do with irregular situations.  I also noted that as soon as you introduce substantial damping, then, in practice, the practical measurements start to diverge from the theoretical amplitude calculations as it's almost impossible to measure the absorption profile (frequency and spatial wrt wavefronts)  that's actually achieved with the absorber in situ.

For the record, the room is almost square, and I use bass traps to reduce the degree of DRC necessary (hence the comment about absorption).

As well as room dimensions, you can specify wall construction type and objects in the wall, like windows and doors. However, the bit of Exakt that is being influenced by this kind of information is the Space Optimisation feature, which comes up with room corrections, which can be treated as suggestions or starting points. If you want to get really tweaky and have the tools, you could make actual measurements in your room and apply modifications or just override it all and input your own settings.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

ATC is another manufacturer of active speakers (that is the  amps are part of the speaker) - as opposed to active crossover speakers which sometimes mistakenly get called active speakers

Simon ... I may be misunderstanding what you are saying but you are WRONG here.

Any speaker system which uses an active (as opposed to passive) crossover is an active speaker system.  It doesn't matter if the amps are part of the speaker or not.  If the amps are part of the speaker then it is also a powered speaker system, but that doesn't affect whether or not it is ACTIVE.

An active speaker can be all built into the speaker cabinet (ala ATC SCM50A), or may have a separate crossover and amplifiers (ala Naim SNAXO / NAPs / Ovator).

So there is no "mistake" in calling any speaker using an active crossover (be it analogue or DSP based crossover) an active speaker.  

OK, last time I looked it didn't have the doors and windows (or other objects), and the demo didn't mention using your own measurements.  Linn seems to have filled in some of the missing elements needed to get a better theoretical model.

From my experience though, accurately modeling absorbing features is nearly impossible without very complex measurements and specialist gear.  However for normal domestic elements (e.g. people and sofas etc), the absorption usually isn't sufficient to completely invalidate the models, so that's probably a fair compromise for those who aren't prepared to conduct measurements.  I'm not so sure about tables though, they can cause some 'interesting' resonances!

Eloise posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

ATC is another manufacturer of active speakers (that is the  amps are part of the speaker) - as opposed to active crossover speakers which sometimes mistakenly get called active speakers

Simon ... I may be misunderstanding what you are saying but you are WRONG here.

Any speaker system which uses an active (as opposed to passive) crossover is an active speaker system.  It doesn't matter if the amps are part of the speaker or not.  If the amps are part of the speaker then it is also a powered speaker system, but that doesn't affect whether or not it is ACTIVE.

An active speaker can be all built into the speaker cabinet (ala ATC SCM50A), or may have a separate crossover and amplifiers (ala Naim SNAXO / NAPs / Ovator).

So there is no "mistake" in calling any speaker using an active crossover (be it analogue or DSP based crossover) an active speaker.  

Eloise,

Simon is right, the word 'active', in electronic terms, refers to active components (broadly speaking that is amplifiers and diodes), so by definition an active speaker is one with amplification.

Any speaker system without amplification is a passive device.  You can have an active crossover with multiple power amps driving a passive speaker system.

Huge posted:

Simon is right, the word 'active', in electronic terms, refers to active components (broadly speaking that is amplifiers and diodes), so by definition an active speaker is one with amplification.

Any speaker system without amplification is a passive device.  You can have an active crossover with multiple power amps driving a passive speaker system.

Huge ... thats the point ... the work ACTIVE in speaker terms describes a crossover using active components rather than passive components.

A SNAXO is an active crossover.  A Beringher CX2310 is an active crossover.  A miniDSP is an active crossover.  All these added to a speaker without a passive crossover (i.e. direct connection between amplifier and driver) is an active speaker.

Its only a "passive" speaker system if it has a passive crossover.

It may not be technically correct in electronic terms ... but it is the way the terms are used in speaker manufacturing.

There is a separate term "Powered" which is what Simon is referring to.  But a speaker can be Active AND Powered, or Active and requiring external amplification, or Powered yet using a passive crossover.

The point is "active" doesn't refer to built in (or otherwise) amplification.  Simply the crossover design which may be internal or external to the speaker cabinet.

ATC SCM200ASL powered by their P4 is as much an active speakers the ATC SCM20ASL.

Eloise,

What you are talking about is an active system, not an active loudspeaker; and in overall system terms 'active' is a very wide ranging term (any system with active components, i.e. including all systems using electronic amplifiers, but excluding phonographs!)

You say that "Its only a "passive" speaker system if it has a passive crossover."  That's not correct.
A loudspeaker is passive if it only has passive components.

If your definition were correct then not only would it violate the definition of 'active', but then full range single drive unit speaker systems would also have to be classified as active as they don't have crossovers.  Furthermore, in this definition, as phonographs don't use crossovers they too would be classified as 'active'!

Eloise posted:

Huge posted:

Simon is right, the word 'active', in electronic terms, refers to active components (broadly speaking that is amplifiers and diodes), so by definition an active speaker is one with amplification.

Any speaker system without amplification is a passive device.  You can have an active crossover with multiple power amps driving a passive speaker system.

Huge ... thats the point ... the work ACTIVE in speaker terms describes a crossover using active components rather than passive components.

A SNAXO is an active crossover.  A Beringher CX2310 is an active crossover.  A miniDSP is an active crossover.  All these added to a speaker without a passive crossover (i.e. direct connection between amplifier and driver) is an active speaker.

Its only a "passive" speaker system if it has a passive crossover.

It may not be technically correct in electronic terms ... but it is the way the terms are used in speaker manufacturing.

There is a separate term "Powered" which is what Simon is referring to.  But a speaker can be Active AND Powered, or Active and requiring external amplification, or Powered yet using a passive crossover.

The point is "active" doesn't refer to built in (or otherwise) amplification.  Simply the crossover design which may be internal or external to the speaker cabinet.

ATC SCM200ASL powered by their P4 is as much an active speakers the ATC SCM20ASL.

Ok. It looks like we are all on Track!

Thanks Simon, Huge, and Eloise.

 Title: Snaxo vs Exakt

What I was unaware of was Linn's Exakt, and all that it does. Jfritzen, and others has enlightened us on Linn's Exakt technologies.

But one thing for sure, when Naim Forum members here the word Active, we all all relate it to Naim's External Active XO.

DB, Graham, Ken, and a host of others, is a testament, towards Naim's Active Technologies.

So our Dilemma, how does one compare these Active technologies.

The Speakers Seems to present a problem!

When, I use the term Speakers, I'm referring to Speakers that Forum members associate Active Systems with. 

 Naim's, IBL, NBL, SBL, SL2, DBL, and Ovators.

The Briks are included, because back in the day, that was Naim's Active System.

Naim's electronics, sandwiched between, Linn's front & rear end.

Of course, Linn has a host Speakers to support it's Exakt technologies, but have reached out to the likes of third party Speaker Manufacturers.

Kudos, PMC, B&W, KEF, and JBL.

Ok, Jfritzen, and other Active enthusiasts, was curious, how did the Titans 808, perform at the Bristol Show, earlier this year.

 I think the rear end was coupled with Naim Amps, not sure about the front end.

But one thing for sure, it wasn't coupled with an Snaxo.

It was the Berhinger, which one gentleman suggested, it stole the show, with Supra/500 coming in Second !

The Big Picture, how does one compare Linn's Active technologies to Naim's Active Technologies?

Snaxo vs Exakt? Anyone!

Allante93!