TOPIC: basic question about the miniDSP product lineup

I have been following this company for over 10 years but I sort of dropped off the 'keeping up with new products' bandwagon about 5+ years ago. Saw the benefit of room equalization way back in 2007 with the Roland/Edirol M-16X, which had terrible A-D D-A conversion but did have main channel digital I/O which I used when I set up my first "audiophile" system. The Room EQ was quite good, surely almost as good as the Audyssey in a later Integra AV processor I bought.

So here's the question: If I want to do TRI-amplification, with 96kHz resolution and 24bit depth throughout, with Advanced room correction (i.e., DIRAC) the only way to do that with the current miniDSP product line up would be to buy either 2 SHDs, or an SHD and an SHD studio??? (I have a very nice external DAC I could use with the SHD studio). Is piggybacking them like that a problematic configuration in any way? Seems like the only other avenue with digital inputs, high resolution, and state of the art room correction is DEQX's very expensive products.

And is the reason miniDSP doesn't have a 2X6 version of SHD yet simply because they haven't seen the market for it yet, or does something about DIRAC intrinsically limit products licensing the technology to a single crossover point???

Sorry I just now spotted this thread: www.minidsp.com/forum/shd-series/17636-shd-with-stereo-3-way

I had browsed around a bit before posting.
FWIW I was definitely going to do it the way mobentz suggested. Splitting the stereo image between units seems like a bad idea. First unit splits off low for subwoofer(s) (Have Velodyne DD-15, but thinking of buying a second sub, maybe a Hsu research) . Let that unit 'correct' the room for sub balance, which is probably more computationally intense. Then pass to another unit to do the HF crossover, at 1500 Hz for my tweeters.
Set up the crossover points and then, start with running the correction at the end of the chain; next move to the start of the chain. I would think the first unit should just "SEE" the correction of the second as "not needing correction". On second thought, though, will the second unit "know" that it is really processing something already HF passed? Can you tell it to not correct below a certain frequency?

Hi,

Imho it doesn't make sense to buy another shd. You'll pay twice for features you don't need, like second dirac license, second streamer you don't need. Dirac only works fullrange with two channels. If you want a three amping, put a threeway stereo crossover behind the shd and calibrate it with rew. Then run dirac. Another possibility would be to run the shd as first crossover for, for example divide mid-high and sub and feed the mid-high into a 2 way stereo crossover and the sub directly from the shd.

Greets
Christian

Thanks Christian.
Yeah, I actually didn't 'mind' having to buy two - at least not as much as people might think given the potential alternative is 5000 clams - BUT, now that I think it through, there is uncertainty in my mind about how the 2 would perform together if not explicitly designed for it. I guess I just need to wait for miniDSP to come out with a 2X6 version.
It's interesting though, I think my Integra 60.5 was one of the last mainstream AV processors, other than ungodly expensive top of the line ones, to facilitate tri-amping. It no longer seems like a sought after feature. But all mainstream active studio monitors still have a H/L biamped configuration so I am convinced I will see a benefit of it on my Tannoy system 12 DMT IIs. Which are after all, set up for it.

I’ve found the lack of Digital outs on many MiniDSP products frustrating.

If only 2x4 HDs has a digital out. Then you could use a DDRC24 and a 2x4HD. I’ve been pondering the purchase of a DDRC24 for ages. I like things to be a little future proof which digital out would make it. It means if I want to go bi-amping later on things are easier.

Unfortunately at the moment daisy chaining anything means D/A - A/D/A conversions. Probably still ok but the purist in me doesn’t like it!

Have you looked at the C-DSP 8x12DL? It’s got all the inputs you could want and plenty of Dirac channels to Tri-Amp with.

@DonT202

Hi,
The shd has complete digital outlets. You could use a minidsp 4x10 as digital crossover. Or some other analog or digital device.

Greets
Christian

Thanks asx77 but I am one of those balanced audio snobs. Srsly though for various reasons I have a noisy and ground loop prone environment; for one thing my audio system has a Mackie mixer, lexicon reverb, digital piano and synthesizer also attached to it. And various other things at times.

Christian the minidsp 4X10 does make more sense as an alternate product instead of a second SHD. What I found confusing about it was this: "48/96kHz sampling rate depending on plug-in" - I don't like the thought of anymore resampling than necessary. I want all those expensive 96khz files I've bought for download to stay that way as long as possible. It seems like the SHD series has maybe a newer/more advanced DSP chip? So if only used as a crossover, everything will stay 96k?

Here is a reasonably priced analog crossover with impressive specs if they are to be believed. I don't recall finding this company back when I putting brain cycles into this topic 5-10 years ago.
www.xkitz.com/collections/active-crossov...ly-balanced-xover-2b

So I'm thinking...first thing in chain is, well, my source unit which is a linux 'puter running MPD with a Schiit EITR output. So that's really the first. Then an SHD, (or SHD studio if I decide to use my external DACS). This will split off the bass, where like I said, you get the best benefit of the DIRAC room correction. Last thing in chain would be either the analog xover above, or a mini-DSP with balanced outs. The DIRAC will just "see" the performance of this xover as part of the existing acoustic balance of the system, and correct for it, right? If I get the mini-DSP 4X10, I should JUST use it as a digital xover and turn off its version of correction? (not DIRAC but I assume it can do some rudimentary correction since a microphone is an option)

And never mind the OT fact that I am still very much debating what to use as my "highs" amplifier! LOL. That will probably take me a month more to decide. As I maybe implied in the opening post, I will just give the built-in triamping a chance (well, tri-capable signal processing), on my integra, but I know I'm not going to want that as a long term configuration. For one thing Audyssey is now considered out of date.