I wonder. It is difficult to get much information on the Leedh processing but the little than I can find implies that the algorithms used are based around equal loudness curves ( Fletcher- Munson curves). If so that indicates that as the volume is reduced EQ is applied to compensate for the change in hearing sensitivity at certain frequencies ( for example providing a bass boost).
So if that is correct the Leedh processing seems to be a digital equivalent to what was called on amplifiers (from particularly the 1970s) a loudness control. There are good arguments why such an approach is inaccurate regarding fidelity though these may be thought less important for some genres of music where the sound is an artificial creation in the first place. However in real life if an orchestra plays ppp then, everything else being equal, the audience will hear e.g. less from the bass instruments , it is a feature of our hearing.
People may find it subjectively pleasant but those old loudness controls were switchable for a reason and gradually disappeared from the market after the 1970s .
Hello, it is not at all about what you describe and for sure not at all a ludness control. Leedh wrote a white paper to explain how it works and would release in a while. As soon as i would have the agreement from Leedh i would share. ANy way, dCS has all the information in hands on how it works.
Thanks Patatorz. I look forward to reading this or any further information that you can provide. As I said it is very difficult to find anything on the processing as Leedh seem very secretive so I have had to rely on what I can glean.
Thanks for the link. Unfortunately the syntax of the patent is difficult for a layman to easily interpret and understand. I think that I will need to await their white paper ( assuming that it is not just a copy of the patent) even to get a superficial grasp of it. But anyway it certainly seems at first look that the source that I found which associated Leedh processing with curves of equal loudness may have been way off the mark.
Of course whether or not dCS are interested will not depend on simply its technical aspects but the terms and conditions of any licence. The latter would certainly not be publicly disclosed.
The Patent is an interesting read (I’ve got an Engineering and Physics background), but it appears to be just a form of logarithmic volume scaling convolution function. It doesn’t immediately suggest it’s somehow better than dCS’ own digital volume control, especially considering dCS specialises in digital signal processing.
Soulutions on the other hand, adopting Leedh’s algorithm may not be surprising considering that that same top-of-the-line DAC they implemented it in also adopts other OEM’ed technology - “Our players and D/A converters use an algorithm from the highly regarded Anagram Technologies followed by Burr Brown D/A converters in a digital symmetric configuration.” - is it a surprise that they chose to implement yet another 3rd party algorithm for the volume control?
In the first place, is there a “problems” with dCS’ volume control? Maybe some folks have a problem with it, but I’m more on the page of JA’s view in Stereophile;
Considering the cost of some preamplifiers, audiophiles with only a single source component can drive their power amplifier directly with the Vivaldi DAC, which has a digital-domain volume control, and save the cost of a standalone preamp.
…
I could play the Vivaldis at whisper-low levels. Unlike many digital front-ends, which fall apart and get murky at low SPLs, and get hard and etchy at high ones, the Vivaldis maintained their graceful, delicate, yet solid sound at volumes high and low.
Yes, JA1’s comment reflects something I have posted several times on other threads here. No matter how low I set the dCS volume control I cannot hear any change to the quality of the sound.That also is counter to Leedh’s assertion in the preamble to their patent. My preference for using a preamp remains however.
I used to share the same opinion for the past couple years that my Rossini at low listening levels is fine until I added an Audio Research Ref 5 SE pre-amp. Without the pre-amp, low listening levels are relatively lifeless. With the pre-amp at the same db level, there is more heft to the music.
Interesting that Lumin recently added LEEDH processing to their X1 product seen here, http://www.luminmusic.com/support-leedh-processing.html . LEEDH and an optical port, in addition to the Ethernet port, have piqued my interest in an X1.
Hi Brian, Lumin added the Leedh Processing on their all range.
Vermeer, Soulution, 3DLAB already adopted and other prestigious brand are going to integrate in the near future.
Yes there are now some prestigious users of Leedh. However whether or not dCS adopt it will only be revealed when the new generation range is launched . So this topic now really belongs to the speculative Vivaldi successor rumours thread:
For my part it attracts me as the preamble to the Leedh patent indicates that they are aware of the audible aberrations that upsampling can bring and which is hardly discussed otherwise. As many here are aware these disturb me to such a degree that I cannot listen to upsampled programme or at least to the result of using either dCS’ transport or Upsampler conversion and I therefore have the clone mode permanently set to lock. Yes, I realise that I am an outlier on this.
Yes, but glad you are. Moves us forward. I am not sure I’d spring for a new stack just for Leedh—my system is extremely rewarding as is—but I sure am looking forward to what dCS has up their collective sleeve.
Not sure to understand Pete why you link this thread to the next dCS range, most of the prestigious users integrated in their actual range. As you mentioned it is purely speculative. Anyway, i’m really happy with my actual stack even if i had the chance to listen to the Leedh Processing and appreciated it.
Yes , mine too. In a way there is absolutely no need for dCS to do anything more. Still I expect that their engineers want to carry on being paid and their distributors and dealers need something new to sell, the market for new Vivaldis in 2020 I imagine being rather slow compared to to its first couple of years.
It is only because any manifestation of Leedh processing in relation to dCS IMO can only be in relation to a new product range. Although other manufacturers may have incorporated it in existing models it is only for current and future production. I don’t think that dCS could implement it by a software upgrade nor do I think that they are likely to change production at this point in their flagship model’s life cycle. Although dCS products enjoy a long production life compared to other company’s lines I would be pretty certain that generation three will be replaced over the coming few years commencing with Vivaldi. As I imply in my reply to Greg above, there is an inevitable business need to replace product lines eventually in order to stay in business.
Yes, but those are newer models. I would be surprised if something like Leedh could simply be built into new firmware for current models, but even if it could, given the Vivaldi line age, it strikes me as a more likely inclusion for Vivaldi’s successor. That’s why Pete linking to the other thread made sense to me.
Lumin integrated the Leedh Processing in the M1 (the FDA amplifier with network capabilities) and the first streamer, the A1. Quite old products. Anyway let’s see what the future will tell
Yeah, I know [I own a Lumin A1 still], but those are very different products and architectures from dCS. As I said above, I don’t know that something like Leedh can/can’t be implemented, but given the way dCS appears to manage their product lines, upgrade/update rollouts, and EOL cycles, etc., I’m just not expecting to see Leedh in the current product lines.
Terrific discussion everyone. Even if LEEDH doesn’t make an audible improvement in dCS’ future or current products, they need to be careful from a sales and marketing perspective as Pete points out. If many manufacturers adopt LEEDH and dCS doesn’t, it may look like they’re avoiding LEEDH due to a NIH (Not Invented Here) position.
My understanding of LEEDH is that it only has benefits those that want to eliminate a pre-amp. As I mentioned earlier in this post, I’m now convinced that I need to use a pre-amp especially for low listening levels. I’m not 100% happy with this as I thought one of the benefits of the Rossini was saving the extra cost of a pre-amp and associated cables.
If LEEDH narrows the gap between dCS and Lumin products, then I’m unlikely to purchase any next generation of dCS product as I suspect the cost will be other-worldly. BTW, Lumin was brilliant about their implementation of LEEDH by allowing a user to enable/disable it, thus giving the listener a chance to judge for themselves.
