[jonywalker]

I went through with reading the complicated PXE-H650 user manual and think it may be the best DSP processor on the market. It really do a great job for sound optimizing. It calibrates dynamically on acoustic level with a microphone as measuring point, not on an electrical output as the most other DSP do. Therefore, no matter what an amp and speaker system you use, it always generate optimized sound results. It recreates not only a flat spectrum on the acoustic level, but do also time phase correction automatically depending on where you put the measuring point. After gathering the measuring data up to 7 points the optimization is calculated based on the Imprint database with thousands of labor trys. This measuring point communicates with the DSP via bluetooth. After the calibration is done you can precede with your own equalization with a PC (I would use my notebook) connected via USB. What could be more for a sound precessor!
Sure, up to now every thing is theoretical, there are few test reports.
Did any one try it?
The only one drawback is the volume control has to be surrendered to the PXE-H650. I am not sure whether it is true?
I have to realize our BMW HU has huge frequency hole, somethins I have strong bass if the music has very low frequency components, sometimes I don't have bass at all and thought wether my sub-amp were down.

Any user experience with PXE-H650 is wanted.

[VP Electricity]

On paper, the H650 is indeed very good. But as you point out, real-world experience is the kicker.

I have friends who have used the Imprint CD HU in very high-end Zapco Morel systems and found it to work very well... but the input side of the 650 is another question. I too am interested...

[Technic]

Originally Posted by jonywalker

The only one drawback is the volume control has to be surrendered to the PXE-H650. I am not sure whether it is true?

That's the only part that I don't like about this processor otherwise, in paper, it looks good. I would like to listen to one setup with this Imprint processing after the microphone calibration. So far, in home systems, this type of calibration sounds artificial to me, not satisfying at all.

[dvn]

I considered this along with the other popular choices for processing and due to the following thread have decided against it:
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/...&highlight=650

My latest choice is to go with the Audiocontrol DQX. I guess we'll find out how that goes soon enough.

[jonywalker]

Originally Posted by dvn

I considered this along with the other popular choices for processing and due to the following thread have decided against it:
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/...&highlight=650

My latest choice is to go with the Audiocontrol DQX. I guess we'll find out how that goes soon enough.

thanks for the link, the comments there were very object. I do need a sound correction but I am afraid I am not able to without additonal sound measuring devices. The commentator said even few experts could do better than the PXE-H650, that may be the strong arguments to me. Slowly I unterstand why all AntEQ systems need to take over volume control, because they don't use large float point calculation for the quantization, it is the question about real time computional capability. Although it is still possible to use HU volume control it introduces however SQ degradation because of higher quantization error, higher quantization error means lower S/N.
It is not easy to make a decision between DQS and H650, to be and not to be?
But I think even DQS (like all other DSP EQs) too suffers from SQ degradation if volume (its input) is turned down, any lowering by half corresponds to one bit less for resolution.
The best EQ should be located in HU, and acts directly on mp3, or ape codec.