Result from firmware upgrade on RSP-1068

[metallo]

I often follow the rule "Don't fix what ain't broken" and i really didn't have any reason for upgrading the firmware for my RSP-1068, everything worked fine, I think it was version 1.1.9.

I never has been pleased with the stereo performance except in "analog bypass". No problem, just use "analog bypass" then you may think, and yes, i did, for several years, but then the great Velodyne DD-18 arrived and messed things up.

I was now forced to use "analog/digital stereo" and set the crossover to 60 in the rotel for best performance, measued with the velodynes room calibration (I just must say that a calibrated sub makes wonders, specially for music where I never liked to have a sub before)

When playing "Jennifer Warnes - The Hunter", which is one of the best cd's i've ever listened to, with my Rotel RDV-1092 (upgraded with new firmware and DVD/CD-rom), the voices where beautiful and almost real (fantastic analog performance for a DVD-player!), IF i used "analog bypass" in RSP-1068.

As you have figured out by now, if I wanted to use the DD18 for the bottom I must use "analog/digtal stereo" in RSP-1068 which sounded terrible! yes, I say it again without shame, is sounded terrible! I must sell RSP-1068 and get something else...

A nice person as I am, I wan't my buyer to have the latest, so i borrowed my mothers old computer (with com ports) and started upgrading RSP-1068, both firmware and eprom, everything worked fine, and now it has v1.2.8.

BUT

When I was testing it after the firmware it sounded great! I couldn't hear any difference when switching between "analog bypass" and "analog stereo" except for the extra beatiful bottom by the great DD18 adds when bass management is active. The voices and everything sounds almost identical with bypass and without, just as it should!

One question... how is this possible?

Br
/Daniel

[PewterTA]

It's possible because the firmware wrote to the digital processing board and re-configured the way it processes the data. It's sort of how a PCM in a car can be updated or flashed and it will give you extra HP/TQ with the same engine/modifications...it's just a way they extract the most out of the incoming data.

The other explination is that they probably tweaked the soundstage, imaging, tonality of how it interprets the data when converting to analog.

They (for the 1068) should sound very close with the digital and analog...I know my 1098 sounds very close to the CDP, but my CDP has a slight edge on the sound stage and openess of the sound.

[bleeding ears]

Metallo, Did you have any settings in stereo mode, such as speaker settings, contour controls & crossovers that may have contributed to stereo sounding so different to bypass ? (bypass has no setting at all except for EQ)

I actually prefer stereo mode over bypass as it allows me to run the speakers as small which means the crossovers can be used on the speakers.
(bypass mode means no speaker settings and the speakers run full range)

With so many possible settings in stereo mode it is hard to understand how it sounded so bad and could not be adjusted or configured to sound reasonably good and possibly even better than bypass mode in some situations with some discs.

Perhaps when you did the update you lost all the settings and it went back to the default settings which from my experience sounds very similar in stereo with no settings to bypass mode.

PS I also have version 1.2.8 installed.

Pete

[metallo]

PewterTA, okey, your explanation sounds reasonable, it just feel strange that rotel coulnt make it "right" from the beginning

Bleeding ears, my comparision was originally made with no subwoofer, analog connection and the front set as large and with defeat contour. And just switching between bypass and stereo, and bypass was far superior on some records (jennifer warnes) and not that big difference on others.

I also prefer to have analog stereo with v1.2.8 and with the DD18 (with crossovers set to 60hz and speakers to small in RSP1068) instead of analog bypass nowdays :P

/Daniel

[WI Rotel]

PewterTA, okey, your explanation sounds reasonable, it just feel strange that rotel coulnt make it "right" from the beginning

Bleeding ears, my comparision was originally made with no subwoofer, analog connection and the front set as large and with defeat contour. And just switching between bypass and stereo, and bypass was far superior on some records (jennifer warnes) and not that big difference on others.

I also prefer to have analog stereo with v1.2.8 and with the DD18 (with crossovers set to 60hz and speakers to small in RSP1068) instead of analog bypass nowdays :P

/Daniel

The same is true with the 1069, the "Stereo" setting is much better than it was in my 1068. My guess is that your new update has the same parameters that are included in the 1069. :T