ReasonTalk.com

mathieudemange wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

Hi,

Thank you for your feedback after the release of the RX950 1.1 update!

We've received a lot of messages about the audio model improvement that introduced a consequent change compared to the previous version. We understand that it can be an important issue for our users who were satisfied with the initial audio model. The 1.1 update was meant to bring a more accurate high-frequency response, as reported by some users and as measured by our own further comparisons with our S950 reference hardware.

We realize that changing the audio model of an existing product can cause a lot of trouble for our users, and we are sorry for that.

To fix this, we'll be implementing a toggle-switch for choosing between the old audio model and the new one, to be released as an upcoming 1.1.1 free update.

Thank you for your continuous support.

With kind regards,

Mathieu

Marco Raaphorst wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

mathieudemange wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

Hi,

Thank you for your feedback after the release of the RX950 1.1 update!

We've received a lot of messages about the audio model improvement that introduced a consequent change compared to the previous version. We understand that it can be an important issue for our users who were satisfied with the initial audio model. The 1.1 update was meant to bring a more accurate high-frequency response, as reported by some users and as measured by our own further comparisons with our S950 reference hardware.

We realize that changing the audio model of an existing product can cause a lot of trouble for our users, and we are sorry for that.

To fix this, we'll be implementing a toggle-switch for choosing between the old audio model and the new one, to be released as an upcoming 1.1.1 free update.

Thank you for your continuous support.

With kind regards,

Mathieu

Great!

Maybe also include a switch for phase invert? The whole unit is out of phase which can be a problem.

jimmyklane wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

Marco Raaphorst wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

Great!

Maybe also include a switch for phase invert? The whole unit is out of phase which can be a problem.

What situations would phase inversion be an issue? Multi-mic’ed drums if you’re using one on room mic(s)....I cant think of a reason to use this on one half of a stereo pair.

What problems are you running in to?

Marco Raaphorst wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

jimmyklane wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

What situations would phase inversion be an issue? Multi-mic’ed drums if you’re using one on room mic(s)....I cant think of a reason to use this on one half of a stereo pair.

What problems are you running in to?

Splitting the signal, using it on sends, parallel channels, with dry/mix in a Combinator etc.

A device should not reverse the phase. I guess it is a bug with the RX950.

jimmyklane wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

Marco Raaphorst wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

Splitting the signal, using it on sends, parallel channels, with dry/mix in a Combinator etc.

A device should not reverse the phase. I guess it is a bug with the RX950.

It’s probably in the gain stages he implemented. Not sure if you know this, but every time you run a signal through certain types of transistor amplifiers (at the component level) you actually flip the phase. There are also several rackmount devices that have a flipped phase and every studio has 4-5 cables wired up to flip the phase back to “normal”.

Marco Raaphorst wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

jimmyklane wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

It’s probably in the gain stages he implemented. Not sure if you know this, but every time you run a signal through certain types of transistor amplifiers (at the component level) you actually flip the phase. There are also several rackmount devices that have a flipped phase and every studio has 4-5 cables wired up to flip the phase back to “normal”.

All I ask for is a simple button. It's up to Mathias to implement it.

I am not guessing what might have caused this. Don't know.

jimmyklane wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

Marco Raaphorst wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

All I ask for is a simple button. It's up to Mathias to implement it.

I am not guessing what might have caused this. Don't know.

Fair enough.

mathieudemange wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2018

Hi,

Thank you for your feedback after the release of the RX950 1.1 update!

We've received a lot of messages about the audio model improvement that introduced a consequent change compared to the previous version. We understand that it can be an important issue for our users who were satisfied with the initial audio model. The 1.1 update was meant to bring a more accurate high-frequency response, as reported by some users and as measured by our own further comparisons with our S950 reference hardware.

We realize that changing the audio model of an existing product can cause a lot of trouble for our users, and we are sorry for that.

To fix this, we'll be implementing a toggle-switch for choosing between the old audio model and the new one, to be released as an upcoming 1.1.1 free update.

Thank you for your continuous support.

With kind regards,

Mathieu

kefkekeyser wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2018

How does this sound:

https://tal-software.com/products/tal-dac

Can anyone compare it with RX950 (I demoed RX950 in the past and my demo period is over)?

Loque wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2018

kefkekeyser wrote: ↑

20 Jul 2018

How does this sound:

https://tal-software.com/products/tal-dac

Can anyone compare it with RX950 (I demoed RX950 in the past and my demo period is over)?

I saw that too. Looks interesting. But its only free for TAL Sampler users, so i am curious how it sounds and compares to other stuff around. This thing coul be a reason to buy the sampler

miscend wrote: ↑

21 Jul 2018

Is Permut8 really worth 66 bucks?