Timmytentoes

I would strongly suspect a fault in the Wadia. As I said above, I bought the Devialet - however ironically it developed a very similar problem with a humming/roaring sound after listening for some time. It turned out to be a faulty circuit board in the Devialet - the "duet" board if I recall - it was replaced very quickly and easily and all has been well since.

Wow, Mayhem, that's some post. As someone with an entirely scientific upbringing I respect and understand your argument. But here's the thing - I've been fiddling with cables, cones and kit for three decades. I've tried as best I can to understand stuff. I've drunk more snake oil than I care to admit, and thrown most of it back up. I've enjoyed my hifi, but never, ever, been satisfied. in real terms, in my system, the Devialet is about half the price of the Wadia/BAT it replaces. And for the first time - ever - I am utterly relaxed listening to music. I'm like a crystal meth addict. I cannot stop listening to stuff. Even stuff I don't much care for. The Devialet has transformed my listening experience. sAM has made it better. But it was already awesome. And for the first time I really don't care how or why. Sure, I'd like to understand why it sounds so good. But it's not the most important thing. And that, for me, is a first. Yours is a counsel of perfection. I respect that. But perfectionists are never satisfied. And, in my extensive experience, never happy either. I accept your skepticism, but urge you not to let it stop you listening to a Devialet. If you hate it (and some do), well, nothing ventured nothing gained. But you might, like me, decide you realty don't care why it sounds great. Because believe me, it does

I wouldn't be too disheartened. SaM has only just got off the ground, so it was predictable they would go for statement speakers like Wilson and Magico. However my AP Sitaras, whilst not cheap, are hardly mega bucks - and very much at the humble end of the audiophile spectrum. You've nothing to lose by voting for your speakers, and potentially something to gain. When I voted for mine they had 5 votes.two weeks later they tipped the necessary 100 - to my amazement. I am also aware of certain unscrupulous audiophiles getting friends and family to vote - and in one case a CEO who got everyone in his firm to vote.... Where there's a will, there's always a way!

Fair enough. We've already established the limits of my knowledge in this sphere. Devialet claim only that SAM affects the sound as it leaves the speaker. What happens afterwards is, as you say, entirely dependent on the room. In my own room I've taken a lot of trouble with positioning to minimise room reflections etc so maybe this is why the difference is notable. What's clear to me however is that there certainly IS a difference, evidenced by the observation that my subwoofer cones were clearly suddenly running to catch up with the rest of the band, and were adequately helped to do so by inverting the phase, which I've never felt the need to do before. More than that I cannot say - and Devialet seem not to want to kiss and tell.

My room is 4.5m deep and 8+m long. In line with Audio Physic's preferred set up, the Sitaras are widely spaced along the long wall, and toed in. The sub however is placed along an adjacent wall and fires down the length of the room. So I suspect that even though the wavelengths are very long, it may well be that I am getting a complete wave within the length of the room. Either way, I suspect I am just lucky that my particular set up meant that the sub was almost exactly 18o out of phase with the SAM enabled speakers, and was therefore amenable to adjustment in my system. Like you Ive never really thought much of phase inversion - indeed I often couldn't really tell the difference except on bass-heavy tracks. I have to say though that the effect of SAM was startling, and very obvious, in a bad way at first and then, with the sub adjusted, in a very good way. One final thought which is to say that I have concluded Devialet are also to be believed in their claim that SAM improves the low bass frequency response/roll-off. If your sub doesn't have a phase invert then the next best thing is to switch it off. This not only amply demonstrated what SAM does, but you might even conclude a sub is no longer needed...

This is what I had surmised also - albeit rather more eloquently put than me. Once I knew what was going on I sat next to the subwoofer with "Sir Duke" on very loud, and was amazed that it was genuinely half a beat behind the music. In fact it must have been almost exactly 180 degrees out of phase because inverting the signal snapped it precisely into phase with the Sitaras. I suspect this was rather lucky for me, since the sub only has phase invert on/off, with no facility for linear adjustment in between I emailed Devialet to ask if it was SAM doing this and got this response: "The issue you address is directly linked to SAM. Your subwoofer is designed to work in pair with the Sitara loudspeakers without SAM. Therefore, the time-alignement of the subwoofer is matched with the time-alignement of the Sitara. But SAM is changing this time-alignement, therefore the phase balance between your devices has been changed and there is a mismatch. It seems that inverting the phase of your subwofer aligned them once again. However, there is an additional effect : the Sitara loudspeakers with SAM enabled have a flat frequency response down to very low frequencies, so you should adjust your crossover frequency to a much lower frequency. Thus, we would recommend that you set the crossover knob of your subwoofer to its lowest value. The results should be even better." So I suspect Matias is correct. Certainly if you look inside the Devialet there is an awful lot of DSP provision....

No, its not a room correction, its a speaker correction. I gather Devialet were considering a room correction facility at some point, but it isn't on their immediate horizon. Once the sound leaves the speaker the rest is up to us. I suspect its little different in principle to the common practice of constructing a speaker with a backwards rake to try and time-align the drivers, albeit a much more sophisticated and accurate implementation of that principle. But I am only surmising - as I said, Im a music fan, not a sound engineer. Whatever it does, it does seem to work (at least in my system)

"sAM ready" means that the speaker has been tested by Devialet and it's characteristics mapped, there is then a tailored software modification made available for download for that speaker. Since all speakers have different impedance, phase, crossover etc etc characteristics Devialet have to measure them one by one. They initiated a voting scheme and when any speaker gets sufficient weight of votes they borrow it from the manufacturer and do their stuff. i am not an electrical engineer but Devialet claim it corrects phase errors in the bass region. I assume that, since those signals are slower and take longer to generate by virtue of the longer travel of a heavier larger bass cone, that Devialet software must time align the audio signal in the digital domain via a software patch bespoke to each speaker, such that the end result issuing from multiple sources in a particular speaker are in phase. I think.... anyway the end result appears to be rock solid imaging, deep textured bass and marvellous clarity. I though my audio journey had truly ended when I bought the Dev, but SAM demonstrated improvement was still possible

as the post states, Audio Physic Sitara25 (floorstanders) and an Audio Physic Luna subwoofer

Thought I would share a cautionary tale... To start, I am delighted with my new Devialet 200, which recently replaced a Wadia301(with a digital input board) and BAT-VK250. I was even happier to be notified that my Audio Physic Sitara 25s were "SAM-ready". To say I was excited to try the SAM upgrade is an understatement. However on the day things didn't go to plan. The upgrade itself was easy but the SAM-activated system sounded, well, awful. Bass lost all definition, becoming bloated, boomy and homogenous. Midrange detail blurred and was overly warm. After two days of listening I decided to uninstall SAM. However on a last ditch track - Stevie Wonder's "sir Duke" 24/96 my Audio Physic Luna subwoofer was clearly doing something very odd. By chance, whilst fiddling with its settings, I tried the "phase-invert". Problem gone. It seems SAM corrects phase errors on the main speaker but of course not on the sub, so the two were now clearly out of phase. I emailed Devialet support (who are brilliant btw) who confirmed that yes, SAM will cause a mismatch with main speaker and sub. They recommended, in addition to adjusting the phase, setting the sub to a much lower crossover point. It's now at 33Hz and the result is sensational. So, a cautionary tale - SAM really is worthwhile, but if it makes things worse, look to the sub for an explanation.

Following my last post and, still wracked with indecision, I decided the only thing to do was arrange to borrow both the Devialet and Intuition for a week in my sitting room. It was most illuminating. The Wadia is an extremely detailed, immediately impressive device. The ergonomics are poor - the log scale volume does nothing from 0-50 and goes from quite loud to deafening between 60-75. The remote doesn't work without absolute line of sight, including in the plane of the main unit (the overhanging edges shield the IR sensor otherwise). And the speaker plugs were a poor, loose fit for the Siltech bananas. But it does have immediate wow! The Devialet on the other hand was initially so underwhelming that after 2 days swapping units I nearly put it back in the box. However after devoting two days of solid listening to each unit without swaps, things changed. with the Dev I noticed a quite sudden change having left it to tick over overnight - iron grip of baselines, masses of detail, air and space, a beautifully clean presentation. It just all sounded good. the Wadia, on the other hand, started to grate. Soprano voices had a slight edge, an unrelenting quality I began to find fatiguing. In the end, though still full of admiration at the extraordinary detail it dug from my playlists, I was slightly relieved to put it back in the box. The Devialet I am still missing. I intend to place an order next week. the irony of thus exercise is that it exactly matched, and confirmed, my initial impression. Intuition fans will argue that it is simply giving a true representation of music, warts and all, and that the Devialet is simply putting a warm gloss over everything, the same criticism levelled at horns and tubes. Devialet fans will say I suffered the same sort of listener fatigue that bedevils class D amps, and which the Devialet avoids through it's unique design. ultimately, even at this level, hifi is about choosing which compromises to accept in comparison to real music. As a long- term Wadia advocate, and owner for over a decade, I am still struggling to overcome brand loyalty. But for me the Devialet has far fewer ergonomic compromises and a better overall mix of strengths. in fact my Audio Physics sounded so good I may not proceed to the planned speaker upgrade. (For now)

each to his own I suppose. Slightly off topic, but after a full 1.5 days of intensive auditioning I am still yet to decide on a Wadia intuition vs Devialet 170. On sonic grounds the Wadia is my preferred option, by some margin. But the Devialet is a functional, finished, user friendly product. The Intuition is not. And the worst part of it is the trendy, sexy, expensively heavy brushed aluminium remote. Even if I were not partially sighted I would find the damned thing near impossible to use. You can't tell up from down, or left from right. It must add hundreds of $ to the price and it's useless. I cannot (yet) overcome the worry that, despite the Intuition's superb sound quality, the remote will simply kill my listening pleasure. Like buying a Ferrari with a long-wave only radio. So give me a cheap plastic remote -that works - any day, and I will buy the Wadia

very good points, David. I am a long-term Audio Physic fan and currently have Sitara 25s. I really wanted Virgos but they made my living room look like Stonehenge, and the Sitaras are definitely a stop-gap compromise. The current upgrade exercise is in conjunction with a move to a bigger house (and living room). Aesthetics do Im afraid play a part (as I don't live alone!) and although I liked the PMCs they are just not pretty. The SF Olympicas are about as spouse-frinedly as a floor stander can get. But the planned upgrade includes speakers. Wadia/Devialet first, get used to whichever with the Sitaras then chop them in for an upgrade. I think though that my impression of the Devialet and Wadia were consistent across all three speakers, and also with changes of cabling, and with Amarra switched off and on. A good example was Alison Krauss singing "Down to the river to pray" I must say that the Devialet/SF combo was the most satisfying and moving, with a truly jaw-dropping sweep of blended choral voices that was so gorgeous that my listening companion (a non-hifi music enthusiast) had to stop afterwards for a little walk in the fresh air to calm down. It was about as good as it gets. Listening next through the Wadia I could pick out individual voices within the blend of the choir much more clearly, but the effect, whilst impressive, was a little distracting. I ask myself if, when listening to a live choir, i really want to hear each person picked out, or if this is just a reflection of the recording technique that bears little relevance to live listening. Oxford audio probably have more experience of Devialet than anyone else in the UK, and are ardent fans. Alasdair, who was running the demo, told me that Devialet had deliberately "voiced" their product to sound like a single-ended triode, but without all the inherent flaws of that type of amplifier. I am inclined to believe him. I didn't want to like the Wadia, and listened mainly out of brand loyalty but there is no doubt in my mind that it is "better" in terms of ultimate information retrieval. I just wish it was a sorted product, and I am still not sure if I really want quite such a full-on musical experience all the time. Tim

Hi all, I am new to the forum but thought I would reply to this thread as I have been following it for a while. I have just spent a day auditioning the Devialet 170 and the Wadia, at Oxford Audio Consultants. Comparison started with PMC Fact 8 then Sonus Faber Olympica II and finally Magico S5. I listened to ALAC files through Itunes ans Amarra. With the revealing PMCs there was no contest - the Wadia was consistently more detailed, revealing and exciting. With the SF it was more difficult. There is clearly some synergy between this and the Devialet. Overall however my impression was the same, that the Wadia was superior in terms of overall representation of detail, dynamics and, well, pretty much everything. With the Magicos it was no different. Comparison was most obvious when going fromWadia to Devialet, where it seemed a soft blanket had been thrown over the soundstage. So, job done.......er, not quite. The problem is that the Devialet is just so sorted. Excellent remote, lots of inputs, including a decent enough ADC for occasional vinyl use, excellent remote. The Wadia by contrast seemed unfinished. Stupid, clunky slow remote, that crappy stepwise digital volume that I dislike in my Wadia 301. And it was just SO revealing it felt a bit relentless. With the Devialet everything sounded good. Everything. The Wadia...well, the highs were really high, but a crappy recording was at times painful. So what do I want - great music all the time in a used friendly package, or musical truth, albeit painful at times. 20 years ago it would have Ben no contest - truth, and damn the consequences. But these days I appreciate that I listen to music because I enjoy it and it moves me. I enjoyed everything on the Devialet. I sat amazed at some of the things the Wadia did, but I just wonder if with prolonged listening I might feel a bit exhausted by it. i still haven't decided.