For a while I was running a WDTV Live Streaming Media Player. While I didn’t use it often, it was handy to have around since it was easy to use.  Another one gets weekly use in a bedroom.  I am going to transfer this one to the TV in the living room, as I can easily set it up to point to the NAS to retrieve movies and TV series.

I replaced my WDTV with a Nexus Player, essentially a Google/Android TV appliance. It worked OK on some media, and it was simple to side load apps so that I could add more functionality. But, the rather limited processing power and a somewhat finicky WiFi radio made it rather choppy.  After adding my HDHomeRun tuner, it would be rare that a program could play without breaking up.

The NVidia Shield arrived today.  It is much, much smaller than I thought it would be!  It’s slim and barely noticeable on a black shelf, until the power is turned on. Plugging in the power and an HDMI cable was all I needed to get it working.

What surprised me right off the bat is how fast this thing is! It downloaded its updates very speedily over WiFi, and I flew through the menus without any lag whatsoever.

After cleaning up the home screen, I loaded in a few needed apps.  Kodi is still as pointless and frustrating as ever (so it may get deleted), but I will sideload BubbleUPnP once I get a chance, and use the VLC player as the default player instead.  I already installed VLC and it was able to connect to my NAS quickly, where I could browse folders and pick out files to play.

Doing some quick tests, the BluRay rips on my server played without any flaws or dropouts.  I could also move backwards and forwards through them easily, again with no lag.

Installing the HDHomeRun app, I was able to play through the DVR recordings with no issues at all, and broadcast TV played without glitches as well, something that gave the Nexus Player fits (unless it was rebooted).  In addition, using the Google TV “Channels” app was able to read all of my channels from the HDHomeRun tuner and display them as a nice program grid on the screen.

I have already installed TinyCam Pro to monitor my home security cameras. I also plan on installing (or sideloading, if necessary) other apps like Chrome, Maps (it is fun to “tour” other areas in Street View), and Weather Underground, and even TripAdvisor.  If not, I can still cast to the Shield, since it acts as a Chromecast endpoint.

I have a spare 5-port gigabit switch which I might deploy at the TV, since I can connect the Shield, a TV, and the devices in the audio system nearby.

This NVidia Shield is a nice bit of hardware.  Once I upgrade my screen to something more modern, it will make for a nice accessory to whatever “smart” features are built into the TV.  Definitely a keeper!  I may even get another one for the living room TV if it remains at its current price.

I noticed the last few times that the Dynavector XX2 Mk. II was souding a bit strange.  Oddly, I’d say it sounded “cheap” as it has not been tracking very well, reminding me of the muddy sound of some of the cheap phono cartridges I used to own (like the crap Ortofon I had on a Dual turntable).  It not only has been sounding very congested, there was dull sibilance where I don’t remember it being before.  Something’s up, and I need to send it out to be looked at.

I needed a replacement. I had a few on my short list (like the excellent, musical Hana SL), but ultimately ended up with the Audio Technica ART7.  For the uninitiated, this is a low output moving coil with “special line contact” stylus on a boron cantilever.  I got it lined up using the MintLP protractor, and still have yet to finish dialing in the SRA and azimuth.

Right out of the gate, it is an excellent tracker, the best I’ve had since retiring the old V15 Type V.  It still has a few dozen hours to fully break in, but it has a lot of clarity going for it with the improved tracking ability.

The only achilles heel right now is the phono stage–I am really not liking how noisy the Phonomena II+ is.  I’ve even replaced the $1.50 chinese switching mode power supply with a linear regulated power supply, but the noise remains. This is basically “amplifier rush,” that white noise that comes from high-gain amplification.  I have records so quiet that the noise from this phono stage is audible over the vinyl’s background noise.

I am only afraid that if I replace it, the replacement will also have similar noise. Step-up transformer? Perhaps, but I got this phono stage to eliminate having yet another device in the system, and to have many loading options available.

On my short list is the Pro-Ject Tube Box DS2, largely due to its two selectable outputs, one of which I can sum to mono using a Y adapter at the output and use in a spare input on the preamp.  I can also roll tubes to shape the sound as needed.

I picked up the TubeCube|7 a few years ago.  I’d never owned a true tube power amp before.  I knew that this amp would never find a place in my main system, as it only puts out a tiny 3.5 watts per channel.  Yet I had a perfect use case–I was retiring my Altec Lansing computer speakers (which sounded OK, but had an annoying background hiss whenever the system was on), and wanted to up my game a bit.

Since getting the Oppo BDP-105, I had a spare DAC–a Cambridge Audio DACMagic.  With a newly-built computer, I used the optical Toslink connector from the computer to the DAC, in order to isolate it completely from the computer.  (No, I’m not one of those who feels Toslink is worse than Coaxial–there is a reason our Internet backbone runs on fiber vs. copper!)

I also needed speakers for the new computer desk–I located a used pair of Boston Acoustics CR65 bookshelf speakers that fit the side shelves perfectly.  I knew bass would be no great shakes with these speakers, so I picked up a Dayton 6.5″ powered subwoofer which tucks neatly under the desk.  The CR65s have one flaw in that there is a resonance hump at 125Hz.  I had to notch that out in JRiver.  Much as I hate using digital EQ, this helped clean up the speaker’s response, at least until I can get in there and brace the cabinet, and perhaps deaden the cabinet walls and/or add some fiberfill to help out with that resonance.  Beyond that, the speakers have a nice midrange and the highs are easygoing.

Before permanently installing the TubeCube|7 in my desktop system, I gave it a try on the big rig.  My speakers at the time were not terribly inefficient (they were around 89-90dB/w efficient), but this amp struggled to get a usable volume out of them.  This amp may work well with horn-loaded speakers with high efficiency, but don’t expect it to drive most typical speakers today without running out of gas quite quickly.  The bass in this case was rather ill-defined, since there simply was not enough current to drive the woofers.  What also didn’t help was that there was a rolloff in the highs–everything sounded dulled through the amp.  After purchasing it, I found another review online which echoed my comments, and backed it up with measurements for exactly what we were hearing.

I don’t know, then, if it was the amp’s circuitry that was rolling off the highs, or the unidentified Chinese tubes that shipped with it.

I did replace the tubes about 18 months after buying the amp–I went with new production Mullards–a pair of EL84s, and a 12AX7.  I noticed the sound is slightly cleaner and less gritty.  Did the highs improve?  No.  These tubes might have helped with added smoothness but provided no change in the rolloff.

One tweak I have yet to make is to use a crossover for the amp. The speakers are currently running full range.  Blocking the frequencies below 100Hz would go a long way towards improving headroom a bit, since the amp would not be struggling with the bass.  Parts Express sells a pair of crossover RCA plug adapters in various frequencies, so those may work out perfectly for this installation.

EDIT: See my updates about the amp.

The Dahlquist DQM-9 pair have been a pleasant speaker to listen to.  In today’s dollars, they would have sat cost-wise in the $3,000 range.  It’s hard to imagine that, given its construction.  It is not at all laid out like the DQ-10 with its five time-aligned drivers set on individual small baffles; instead, it is more like a traditional “bookshelf” speaker.

Since I have replaced them, I thought I’d give a couple of closing comments.

First, the dynamics and the bass were very healthy in these speakers.  Despite their being smaller than the Grafyx speakers I had in the system for decades, these actually sounded like they had more powerful bass, and handled any dynamics I threw at it.  They easily put out sound that belied their somewhat diminutive dimensions.

The midrange had no issues.  The highs, however, were strange.  Not a bad strange, but just not what I thought was completely true to life.  They occasionally seemed a bit “peaky,” accentuating already bright material a bit too much.  Strings recorded on the bright side (such as the biting strings in some of the Reference Recordings SACDs) came across a little too ragged.  The big issue here–were the tweeters intact?  They sounded mechanically fine (no rattles from voice coils rubbing, or odd colorations from being previously overdriven), yet slightly “off.”  Not a major complaint, as these speakers presented a lot of the music really well.

They do render the music more accurately than the Grafyx, especially in imaging and soundscape.  I’ve heard better on other speakers (I still don’t get that complete “holographic” effect with the imaging), but they were still an improvement in that regard.  It also showed a little more inner detail to the music.

The capacitors in the crossovers were left alone–they are not electrolytics, so, no worries there.  Cosmetically they need work.  The one grille is still broken at the corners.  The cabinets could use some new finish rubbed onto them (or a complete strip and re-stain).  And, I would have liked a good polishing of the aluminum trim on the three drivers.  But for now, they’re retired.

They’ve been a really good speaker for ten months, a welcome change to what I’d heard for decades.

I had a chance to move on a pair of Dahlquist DQM-9 monitors recently, so I took advantage and have them in my listening room now.

They came about locally, with woofer surrounds that were shot, and cabinets and grilles needing some TLC.  The tops of the cabinets have some minor flaws.  The veneered wood sides of the cabinets are in decent condition, although one of the sides has some of the stain missing in tiny spots lower down; it really is not that noticeable unless you are close.  The one grille frame was cracked on opposite corners and I have it perched on the mounting pegs for now.  It will need angle brackets and gluing to bring it back. The aluminum trim around the drivers needs cleaning and polishing but behind the grilles, only the outlines are noticeable.

The construction is all Magnat (Germany) drivers; I’ve even read rumors that the entire systems were made by Magnat and branded Dahlquist. Nothing officially verified though, but I have seen entire systems made by Magnat from the same era (Magnat All-Ribbon series, etc.) that have similar cabinet construction, with the same “velvet” front baffle material.  The DQM-9 came in two versions–the larger one that I own, and a slightly scaled down “Compact” version with an 8″ woofer, which had a butyl rubber surround.  The woofer in the DQM-9 is a 10″ with foam surround.  Midrange, 5″ with rubber surround.  Tweeter is a treated fabric dome type.  Cabinet is a reflex design with dual ports facing rearward.

List price on the DQM-9, circa 1982, was $1200 for the pair, climbing to $1400 for the pair by the mid 80s. These were, therefore, a couple of notches above the speakers I’ve had in recent years (the Grafyx, and the Boston A-150s).

When local audio emporium Absolute Sound carried the DQM series in the 1980s, I remember them having a somewhat “chesty” resonance to the mid-bass that wasn’t too pleasant.  When I removed the woofers to redo the surrounds, I noticed that the bottom half of each cabinet had no insulation whatsoever.  The top half uses fiberglass.

I ended up putting some polyester fiberfill into the bottom halves of the cabinets before reinstalling the woofers.  I have not heard that resonance at all.  I thought maybe there was no internal bracing, but there was–a brace runs between the two sidewalls against the rear panel of the cabinet, which is the dividing line between the top and bottom halves.  I had considered using Dynamat inside as well, but it won’t be needed.  It is interesting to note that the left and right sides of the cabinet are a double thickness of MDF, so they are sturdy to begin with.

Beyond doing a full cosmetic restoration, one tweak or improvement I thought of making would be to redo the crossovers with new components.  However, the crossover uses more expensive film capacitors, so they are not prone to age like electrolytics.  I would possibly redo the cheap hookup wire with some OFC copper wiring.  An interesting design feature is that the crossover is split across three modules inside the bottom half of the cabinet.

The sound?  Quite good, and clearly a step above both the Grafyx speakers I have had for decades, and the Boston A-150s I had for several years.  Imaging is rock solid left to right, yet I do not yet hear much in the way of depth or a soundstage spread beyond the speakers.  I have not tinkered with positioning much yet.  I settled for now on having them halfway between toed in directly at the listening seat and facing straight ahead.  My stands tilt them back slightly, and I am thinking to have them tilt just a little more forward.  I also need to spike the stands to the floor (there is a concrete slab beneath the carpeting and padding), and the speakers to the stands.  I am even at the point of possibly making some stands for these.

Tonally the bass is deceptive–while it does not seem as deep the Grafyx at lower volume, they really fill out nicely when the volume is kicked up.  It takes a little volume to fully wake them up.  In fact, they may go a bit deeper; they grab the 32Hz notes easily when called upon, and orchestral crescendos are taken in stride, with no stress or strain.  The highs are not completely as smooth as I’d have thought, but that may again be due to the aged crossovers; what is there, however, is not at all bright, and that lower treble/upper midrange glare I had from the Philips tweeters in the Grafyx is all but gone now.  These are easy to listen to for hours, and while I haven’t tried them fully with rock music (which I don’t listen to much anymore), it holds up well with large-scale classical, acoustic jazz, vocals and even electronic jazz.

These will be in my system until the Martin Logan refurb project is completed.