Decision made today. Movin' on up with the BSG Qol SCU.

treitz3

Hello all, just thought I would chime in here and let you know that I have pulled the trigger on a controversial new toy for the rig. I'm sure most of you have heard of this before but some may not have. It's the BSG Qol Signal Completion Stage.

Here is the actual system I auditioned the BSG Qol with


Here is the unit, front and back (stock photo)

I have been blessed recently with a little extra audio fundage and I decided today that I would treat myself to something special. I perused the 'gone and a couple of other hi-fi shops / sites and I was originally thinking about a new man amp. Not that there is anything wrong with my current amp....just wanted to see if I could improve the system by moving on up the line.

It came down to one amplifier I had my eye on. The Musical Fidelity M6 PRX. Then I had one of those mysterious and spontaneous light bulbs appear above my head that reminded me of the sound I heard a couple of years ago on the system pictured above.

I had the pleasure of auditioning this unit (the Qol) at a private Hi-Fi shop here in Charlotte, Liquid Hi-Fi. Back then, I was........and this is a severe understatement........HIGHLY impressed with what this unit did to the system pictured above. Sure, I read that some folks don't like them. I read that it's all phase manipulation and that this unit somehow "processes" the signal. My ears tell me that's all hogwash.

The Qol was, is and has been since that day the most realistic reproductive sound effort I have heard from any system. No other stereo system to me has even come close. Not Carver's implementations, Not even Polk's SDA's come close to what this unit does. Yes, it basically does the same thing but this unit does it right. It literally does "complete" the signal and it does it in a way that (to me) it becomes the greatest thing to happen to Higher Fidelity since the advent of "stereo". Yes, that is no mis-type. I meant every word I just said.

I have found it hard to try to describe what it is that this unit does. When you hear it, it is definitely not subtle. It is quite obvious what this brings to the end result. The best thing it does in simple, layman's terms? It takes a stereo signal that already has depth, perceived height and width and transforms what you currently "think" is a 3D sound stage and makes the 2D sound stage we have been listening to for decades a true and indisputable 3 dimensional one. I really never knew what I was missing until I heard it for the first time. Anyhoo, I don't know if anybody on this site has one or not. If not, come next week, we will have at least one member with one.

Now I need to find a good deal on a used pair of Transparent Reference RCA interconnects so I can hook this bad boy up. Any help on that front would be appreciated.

Looking forward to the new toy!

Tom

WagnerRC

keeping an eye on this. I look forward to it. Thanks Tom

mikeyb128

http://www.dagogo.com/bsg-technologies-qol-signal-completion-preamplifier-review

A cool review of it here. Sounds interesting.

treitz3

Larry told me that what you hear from the Qol can change with speaker types. Omni-directional and wide planars will yield the least amount of change. Ribbon speakers will yield more. The box-type speaker is where this baby shines the most.

Has anybody here heard this unit yet? I have read conversations that range from no difference whatsoever to an overwhelming appreciation of what it brought to the table.

Tom

Toolfan66

I have never heard of it, just did a little reading on it, I would like to hear one. I wonder how it would gel with the SDA's?

treitz3

With the SDA's, horrible combination. While I have not experienced it yet, I could be wrong, experience tells me that the combination will work toward nothing but negative aspects with regards to the reproductive experience.

The opposite of what this unit can achieve.

Tom

txcoastal1

Have not heard the QoL but have interests. Also interest in Deqx

Toolfan66

treitz3 wrote: »

With the SDA's, horrible combination. While I have not experienced it yet, I could be wrong, experience tells me that the combination will work toward nothing but negative aspects with regards to the reproductive experience.

The opposite of what this unit can achieve.

Tom

With what little I read I was thinking it would be a bad idea as well.. The unit still sounds interesting though...

treitz3

Good morning txcoastal1, the Deqx looks like it does somewhat of the same thing as the Qol. It looks like the Deqx corrects the time and frequency domain. The Qol layers the phases currently in the music to construct the same time and frequency domain. I believe Larry told me that there are 30,000-60,000 layers of phase that is introduced to a signal (Could be wrong here, it's been a while since we spoke....BTW, he's the President of Qol) to do the timing corrections but note - it does it without processing any of the signal. The phase layering does nothing to the signal, it just layers it and it sounds like with the Deqx, the signal is processed.

I haven't heard the Deqx but it sounds like in the right application that it would be a heavy hitting contender to the Qol. Perhaps one day soon I can get my ears on one. One thing that would or could be a major advantage between the two goes in favor of the Deqx. That being that it corrects the system to the room, much like a SMS-1 does. (Thinking out loud here...) One thing that could be a major disadvantage of the Deqx -vs- the Qol would be the loss of the true 3 dimensional sound stage. It would be great if they could combine the two technologies, eh?

I am looking to reintroduce the SMS-1 into the rig sometime in the near future when I can locate another VMPS Larger sub. That thing did wonders to integrating the system to the room but there is currently no need for that without a sub in use.

Tom

txcoastal1

treitz3 wrote: »

Good morning txcoastal1, t
I haven't heard the Deqx but it sounds like in the right application that it would be a heavy hitting contender to the Qol. Perhaps one day soon I can get my ears on one. One thing that would or could be a major advantage between the two goes in favor of the Deqx. That being that it corrects the system to the room, much like a SMS-1 does. (Thinking out loud here...) One thing that could be a major disadvantage of the Deqx -vs- the Qol would be the loss of the true 3 dimensional sound stage. It would be great if they could combine the two technologies, eh?
Tom

What I like about the idea of the QoL idea is it's versatile placements i.e. in between source and pre, between pre and amp. Also read where where the QoL was also integrated with room correction
http://www.dagogo.com/bsg-technologies-qol-signal-completion-preamplifier-review/2

So the chain would be source, pre, QoL, RC, amp, then speakers sounds crazy and expensive...yes, but if I added up what I spent tournament fishing...it's just another hobby. At least audio can be enjoyed rain or shine.

Anyway, there's a 2nd purpose other than room correction why I want to play with the Deqx, a large set of DIY speakers for a 18x24 room I'll be building with Russ. I want to experiment with the DEQX HDP-4/5 as an active crossover before and after Russ builds the speakers crossovers.

Also with this large room want to play with subwoofer integration. Looking at using a pair of 15" Rythmiks.

So I hope to hear more of your thoughts if you purchase the QoL or any other goodies

Glad to see you around Tom

Cheers
---Ron

BlueFox

I have been going back and forth about getting a Deqx. If I didn't already have a pre it would be a no brainer, but at this point I just can't rationalize putting it between the pre and the amps. Going from analog to digital and back to analog makes me pause since I doubt if they are using the best A/D and D/A. Plus I would have to get another power cord and a pair of interconnects.

txcoastal1

The Deqx HP4 and % can be used as pre's, but is limited on analog inputs. Does have digital inputs, really depends if needing extra source inputs.

Although not extremely critical but it's another toy for thoughts

treitz3

Okay, I have a question off the beaten path. I have found a Transparent Reference RCA IC with the mm2 technology at a good price. Here is the issue I have. The cable is a "Low Z" type cable (as opposed to "High Z").

The purpose of this cable would be to go from the Dodd Audio MLP tubed pre to the BSG Qol. I guess my question is or would be this - Is this the correct application for a "Low Z" cable or am I gonna have to send the cable back in to Transparent and switch it to a "High Z" cable?

I can also swap out the location of one of the other two pair of Transparent Reference IC's that are currently between the Jolida CDP and the Dodd pre or from the Dodd pre to the Musical Fidelity A3cr amplifier.

Sorry for the question(s). I am a complete newbie when it comes to impedance matching with cables. I just want to make sure i get it right.

Tom

treitz3

Okay, I have a little bit more information to offer to help you help me. While i have no idea what the Dodd MPL pre's spec's are, here are the spec's to the Musical Fidelity A3cr amplifier;

Input sensitivity 1000mv
Input impedance 31K ohm

The Dodd pre and the MF A3cr currently are a match made in heaven, so I am assuming that the two have a compatible impedance match.

Anybody know how to contact Gary Dodd these days? I'd like to find out the spec's of the Dodd MLP.

Tom

treitz3

Wow, I am floored. Just now found this out. RIP Gary and thanks for the many hours of conversations over the years.



Ouch. *walks away in great sorrow*

Tom

txcoastal1

Tom,
Gary Dodd passed away in July

treitz3

I know, I just read about it. Kinda in shock right now. I considered him a good friend....good enough to where when he picked up the phone, he knew who it was before i identified myself. Sometimes, we would have 4 hour long conversations about audio. He will be missed....he will definitely be missed.

Tom

F1nut

Tom, I'm very interested in your impressions once you integrate the Qol into your rig.

The input impedance on the MF amp is considered low, so the "Low Z" cables should work well between the pre amp and amp.

This popped into my mind. Since it appears the goal of the Qol is timing corrections and the goal of Transparent cables is timing corrections, how will the two work together?

treitz3

Good question. I guess we shall find out tomorrow morning. Ron should be here with the unit around 11:00am. Unless I am completely submersed in listening, I should be able to offer my initial impressions, good or bad, shortly thereafter.

Thanks for the information on the cables.

Tom

F1nut

Ha, I thought you were in Zzzzzzzzz land. Too excited to sleep?

treitz3

Naw, fell asleep on the couch watching the boob tube. Woke up and wanted to check the forums before I hit the actual bed. We have tomorrow off since it's raining and we are working on the exterior of a house right now.

I don't "think" that the cables would pose any issues. A normal recording [Think Pink Floyd or Enya] has phases that have been manipulated by the mastering or recording engineers to create a certain effect. These effects have not been altered by the Transparent cables to date, so I would thing (after further thought) that the timing correction performed by the cables would have little to no effect on the phase layering.

Still a good question. Before I think about it any longer, now I am off for a date with the pillow.

Tom

treitz3

Well, I am now the proud owner of the Qol. Ron came over a little early and we sat and listened to the rig for a stint....never did hook it up. Gonna go get some adult beverages and then it's game time.

Jesse, NOW I am excited!!!

Tom

txcoastal1

That's awesome Tom, looking forward to hearing results. Don't let the beverages blur the testing...LOL

Cheers

lightman1

Took a look at after you and I spoke the other day. I does seem to mimic sonic holography but with out all the psyco-acoustic whiz bang. It might be trouble with SDA's. Crosstalk elimination and massive layering.
When I get back to the coast side, a day of speker swapping is in order.

treitz3

Not gonna happen LM1. When I first put this in, I was severely disappointed. "Phasey" was the word of the day. My initial thoughts were that I made a mistake....and a bad one at that.

Time marches on and my initial thoughts have subsided. I broke out the laser, measuring devices for the speakers and since I have redone all speaker placement, all while the system is playing. I am still not satisfied in the end result as it does not mimic what I heard prior to this.

Some things I remember it does exceedingly well (beyond what I have previously heard) but as of right now, there are still many things that are left to be desired.

Part of this has to do with introducing a cable that "thwarts" the system. The only cable I had that was spare to hook it up was far down the line of Transparent cables. The first thing I noticed was the same thing(s) I noticed the last time I introduced this cable to my system. An overponderance of mid-bass, a slight loss of top end and an overall restriction of what my system is capable of.

What I noticed different was a bringing back of the singers and the weight thereof. Deep bass was affected in a way that was not pleasureable, it had somewhat lost the impact, authority and coherence. This, to me, is unacceptable.

After 24 hours.....at this point, I am still not impressed. This is not what I thought I would be reporting to you or anyone else. While I still have yet to get the cable I want [that I know will not influence the signal like it has] to hook this up, things are getting better and even a 1/4" of speaker movement makes quite the difference. I am still experimenting but at the same time, I am still unimpressed.

Sorry guys, this is not what I wanted to report but my ears do not deceive me. It is what it is. The initial "phaseyness" (is that a word?) is for the most part gone. The sound stage has grown to unfathomable reaches given that just two speakers are reproducing the sound. The images at this point are not what I had experienced before. They, in layman's terms, suck.

I can hear more of the images but it (at this point) is too much. So much that I rarely sit in the sweet spot. This is the opposite of the norm. Usually, the sweet spot IS THE place to be and the pinpoint precision of imaging is something that a very few get to truly experience, regardless of how much one spends on a system.

I must have moved my speakers 100 times since 24 hours ago and while things are definitely getting better? The end result is that I am still unimpressed.

To throw another set of speakers into the equation at this point Russ would be counterproductive and given the fact that SDA's are not a common speaker, if you will, may take much longer than I am willing to try to get to sound good.

It has been 24 hours and the system has been running ever since it was hooked up. Loud, soft and everything in between. Still at this point, I am unimpressed....with a couple of exceptions.

This is the opposite of my initial observations with this unit on a "decent" system that most folks (not in this hobby) would drool over to begin with.

Time will tell but don't plan on bringing the modded 1C's over anytime soon. The other cables should hit the pad within the next couple of weeks or sooner. I will try my best to dial this bad boy in until then. Hopefully I won't have to start over when they come in.

If it doesn't work out, the cables will be going to the vinyl part of the rig, so no worries about wasting money on that front. I can tell the Qol has potential in my rig but if it turns out that this is not the case? It will go out the door like the rest of the gear that has come and gone and at least I can say that I tried.

Time will tell.

Tom

txcoastal1

All I can say is I appreciate the honesty and keep us posted.

Cheers

treitz3

Hello, txcoastal1. You are sincerely welcome. If there is one thing I am, it's honest when it comes to audio. No fluff, no BS, just straight talk. It either works or it doesn't. I have no stake in this game and expectation bias is not a factor. I only have a stake in the end result as to what hit these ears....

...and it damned well better be good!

Tom

treitz3

Skip, if you could multiply J-Lo times 3 (think triplets) when they were 20 years old, tight and fit as a fiddle....and you expected a date with all 3 expecting the special "closed door, adult themed, whatever your mind takes you too thoughts", I am sure the expectation bias would knock you out before you even dropped your drawers if it were real.

This is just audio man. Things are what they are.

Tom

lightman1

Did you try it in different points in gear chain? Source, qol, pre, amp etc. And we're these the same Trasperrnt IC you've had before in the other rig? Those were a bit soft sounding IIRC.

treitz3

You heard the same cable(s) back in the day that I just re-introduced. No to different points in the chain. It is supposed to be the final point in the chain prior to the amp. That is where it is currently located.

The Transparent Reference IC's were just what the doctor ordered for the rig. I learned a lot with those cables.....things I "thought" were room issues, well, they turned out to be cable issues. Whoda' thunk? Thing is, the ones you heard were the best out of the 30-40 I had tried up to that date.

Different locations in the chain is something I would not be opposed to trying but I have heard it once in the same spot. That spot made what I am trying to achieve...that being close to reproductive effort bliss.

Tom

F1nut

Ya gotta let it burn in.