Jump to content

DavidHB

Wammer
  • Posts

    2,575
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by DavidHB

  1. I hope not. I think that we've seen temporary forks for particular products before, superseded by a single global release. From the release notes, it seems that 66 Beta is Selekt compatible. That suggests to me that 65 was issued only (as its release notes say) as an initial stable release for Selekt, and that 66 when finalised will become a stable release for all models, including Selekt. But thanks for pointing out that 65 is not a beta (which is what misled me). David
  2. 4.66.252 is working perfectly well for me, both on my Exakt system and on my Kiko. Build 252 looks from the release notes to be a fairly minor bug fix release; there were more fixes in the previous build (66.250). Version 65 was either not published or has now been withdrawn. David
  3. Nope. Gave up keeping those about 60 years ago ... Well, the forum is in place, and can be found here. Congratulations to Phino on being the first user to post. As I rather expected, the range of topics on which one can post is quite limited. While it's understandable that general discussion on products is not appropriate for a development forum, it's a pity that there seems to be no way in which we can record software feature requests, other than on the sub-forum relating to the current beta, which is explicitly described as being for bug reports, and which presumably will have a short shelf life. David
  4. We inch forward. I have now been asked to provide a username for what Linn are calling the Development Forum (that's a better name than Beta Test forum, as it is potentially broader in scope. The Terms of Use appear to be pretty much identical to those of the old Linn Forum, and as such generally reasonable. No prizes for guessing which username I chose ... David
  5. Once again, any differences between us are probably differences of emphasis rather than of perception. I think that the discussion of what makes and 'ideal' UI for SO goes to the heart of the never-ending debate about how we work out whether a hi-fi system is any good, and in particular whether that assessment should be subjective ("if it sounds better, it is better") or objective ("it's only working well if it measures well").. If you are closer to the subjective end of that continuum, access to the modes will seem essential, for finer adjustment by ear. Those nearer the objective end will say that the science and maths in the SO calculations should do the job for you. I'm somewhat in the middle on this one. I accept that, in the end, it comes down to what satisfies the individual listener, and that key aspects of a systems performance (such as its ability to convey the emotional power of the music) cannot be measured. At the same time, I worry that complete subjectivity leaves without benchmarks or baselines, and, all too often, vulnerable to the wiles of any passing vendor of snake oil. As a keen photographer, I do a lot of image adjustment and manipulation, mostly using Adobe Lightroom. The various sliders in Lightroom are very clearly labelled, so you know what they do, and they provide good feedback on the effects of individual adjustments. That is my ideal for the SO UI. It would be nice if the existing single slider could be, so to speak, disaggregated to provide a range of clearly labelled user adjustments. As part of this, I should like to see the bass and treble shelves restored to the UI. And I should like to see some kind of feature that automates A/B comparisons on these adjustments. As the primary advocate of Tune Dem, Linn would surely find it advantageous to make the technique easier to use when making SO adjustments. Developments of that kind would, I think, go some way towards allaying ThomasOK's legitimate concern that SO should not be allowed to morph into a set of tone controls. David
  6. Simplicity (or at least straightforwardness) of setup is surely essential for widespread effective use? I have already said that I found SO v2 easier to use than v1. The wizard format of the UI structures the questions better (IMO) than the input screens of v1 in Konfig, and a higher proportion of the questions being factual queries about the listening space rather than invitations to adjust room modes by guesswork. Those changes, again IMO, make it likely that a new user will get better results sooner with v2 than with v1. Also, while I understand your point that the information content of the v2 profiles is not significantly different from the corresponding information used in v1, there is AFAIK no published information on the way in which said profiles are used to make changes to the digital data stream. Changes to the algorithms have been made pretty continuously since SO was launched. I guess that any future changes will not be applied to SO v1. David
  7. Thanks, Paul, for your customary courtesy. Where are Briain and Phino posting their findings? (If they are already in this thread, I beg pardon for my ignorance and inattention) I think that, from the engineering perspective, the difficulty about offering SO v1 as a 'toolbox' has been well enunciated by ThomasOK. In the wrong hands, that kind of user choice can all too easily morph into something like a graphic equaliser or a set of tone controls. Users need to be protected from themselves sometimes, and dealers need to be reassured that SO will not turn into a support nightmare. And I believe that the guys at Linn were always trying to create something that would behave "objectively", that is based on well-respected documentation of room behaviour. Of course the law of unintended consequences came into play ... When you, or someone like Chris at Hidden Systems, are working the system, the results are remarkably good (I am listening to them as I write), but in general SO v1 is at one and the same time off-putting to people who ought to give it a go and an open invitation to the cack-handed users who should be leaving it alone. I've thought about this quite a lot, and have concluded that, rather than incorporating v1 features in an 'Advanced' section of v2, Linn should continue to improve the 3D modelling of listening rooms. Even in v1, changing the effective measurements of an oddly shaped room is often a better approach than adjusting the modes directly. That said, I shall certainly give your Kiko tweak a go and report results in due course. As regards the Linn forum, I do of course agree with you. I just didn't want the discussion on this thread to get sidetracked into repetition of things that have already been said elsewhere. David
  8. I'm coming late into this discussion, and confess that I have not yet read all 13 pages. But, like SnapperMike, I'd like to respond following Paul's recent contribution.. Given that an SO v1 optimisation can be imported into v2, and a Linn account open on a phone or tablet makes switching between optimisations a doddle, I tried setting up a v2 optimisation for my Kiko, which had already received Paul's Space Commander treatment (in fact, I think that it was the first Kiko that Paul optimised). I can't yet use v2 on my primary system, as it is Exakt-based. The results were interesting. Compared with the process of fighting all those data entry boxes in Konfig, the web-based UI of v2, though not perfect, is a joy to use, even though it actually requires much more data than v1. Asking for more data is in fact sensible, because with v2 you can build a much more accurate model of the listening space than with v1. Asking for that data in a wizard, so that the user is not overloaded with data entry boxes, also makes good sense to me. How, on the Kiko, does the default v2 optimisation compare with Paul's 'tailored' v1 version? Pretty well on the whole. With no optimisation, listener engagement is definitely reduced, compared with either of the SO profiles. The choice between profiles is more difficult. With v2, I found that the sound is a bit more forward and has a slightly better sense of space (something in which the Kiko is a bit lacking compared with its more expensive brethren), but I thought that the tonal balance was better with v1. Moving the v2 Optimisation Preference slider a bit to the right improved things; whereas with the default settings, I marginally preferred Paul's v1 profile, the adjustment now has the two profiles running neck and neck. I now have the adjusted v2 profile on longer term test. So, no firm conclusions yet, but it's been a pretty good start on the whole for SO v2. A couple of learning points are clear. Firstly, you have to hand it to Paul. As I haven't read the whole of the thread, I don't know whether this point has already been made, but my experience suggests that his expert v1 optimisations still have a lot going for them (and that's without all the other system tweaks he's had us try, more often than not to good effect). Secondly, at a time when Linn is (and deserves to be) in the naughty corner over its decision to close its forum, we can reflect that at least they seem to have learned the right lessons from Paul's activities. If your product's major USP can only be made to work at its best by a friendly Canadian jetting round the world to offer his services pro bono, then the workings of that USP feature need a significant rethink, which is what SO certainly has had. Power users will bemoan the loss of freedom and configurability in the new version, but the very complexity of v1 was really its undoing, and I suspect that most users (and dealers) will prefer the better UI and what seems to be significantly improved performance "out of the box". David
  9. +1 for Vic's comments. Except that I shall probably not be investigating the Naim forum . David
  10. It's hardly the WAM's fault, but it simply cannot, as Linn seems to be claiming, be the replacement be the replacement for an archive of discussion between Linn owners, with significant contributions from dealers and some Linn staff too, that we have lost with the closure of the Linn forum. It remains to be seen how things develop here. Many of the 'refugees' from the Linn forum have already moved over to the Lejonklou forum, so I suggest that Linn owners who haven't done this have a look there as well. Will the closure of the forum have an effect on Linn sales, particularly to enthusiasts? I think it will, but, given that the contributing members of the Linn forum must have been only a tiny proportion of the Linn customer base, I don't think that the effect will be huge. My own system (LP12, KEDSM, Akurate Exakt, Akubariks) is pretty much complete, and so that is an academic issue for me personally in any case. And while it's easy to think up all kinds of dark conspiracy theories as to why the forum was closed, my guess is that the real reason is the cost (in terms of staff time) of moderating the forum and maybe that the Linn technical staff who were doing that job actually wanted to be doing other things. Linn is a pretty sall company (£20m p.a. turnover, 200 employees), and, particularly at a time when they are venturing into new product lines as well as maintaining a pretty broadly based catalogue, key resources are probably stretched pretty thin. All that said, it is really sad to see the Linn forum go. David
×
×
  • Create New...