Okay...in another thread I promised to do a side-by-side evaluation of the Audiobyte HydraVox/Zap vs the Rockna Wavelight. Due to the astonishing incompetence of DHL this has been delayed. At the moment, I have a plethora of DACs here and am going to do a broader comparison.
I am going to do a compare of the Rockna Wavelight, Rockna Wavedream Signature, Audiobyte HydraVox/Zap, Chord Hugo 2, Chord Hugo TT2, Bricasti M3, Bricasti M1 Special Edition, Weiss 501 and the internal DAC card for an AVM A 5.2 Integrated amp as a baseline.
For sake of consistency, I am going to use that same AVM integrated amp driving Vivid Kaya 45s. I may branch out and do some listening on other speakers (Verdant Nightshade of Blackthorn and/or Wilson Benesch Vertexes) but want to use the Vivids for every compare as they are the fullest range speakers I have here. For sake of consistency I will use a Chord 2Go/2Yu connected via an Audioquest Diamond USB as a renderer. The only exception is the Hugo 2 which has a 2Go directly attached to it. I will use a Roon Nucleus+ as a server in all cases.
My plan is to use the same five songs on every DAC; In a Sentimental Mood from Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, Be Still My Beating Heart from Sting, Liberty from Anette Askvik, Duende from Bozzio Levin Stevens and Part 1 of Mozart String Quartet No 14 in G Major from the Alban Berg Quartet. The intent is to touch on different music types without going crazy.
I will take extensive notes on each listening session and write up a POV on the strengths of each unit. I am going to start this this Friday/Saturday and will be writing things up over the next month or so. If you have thoughts, comments or requests, I will be happy to try and accommodate. The one thing I am not going to do is make the list of songs longer as that has an exponential impact on this and make everything much harder. If and when other DACs come in on trade I may add to the list through time.
I've owned my Bricasti M1 Limited Gold for several years, paired with YG Carmel speakers and driven (in the past 18 months) by a Bricasti M25 stereo amp. All digital fed through Laufer Teknik 64 32-core.
I've heard a ton of DACs over the past several years, and remain satisfied with my Bricasti. I believe the pairing with the Bricasti amp is also splendid.
I often have "the itch", but there has been no urge to replace the Bricasti or YG's.
i hope you and yours are fine and survived the insane flash flooding in the tri state area... i have dear friends in fort lee with two cars in their underground garage that became leaky submarines... just amazing and shocking what is happening in our world these days
re dacs, and a question posed earlier, i believe the sonnet morpheus is a very good r2r dac and with a cool feature set (mqa card capability and remote volume control), sonically it is excellent in absolute terms but i suspect not quite to the class of what scott is testing (or maybe, equal to the lower tier of the bunch)
It is incredibly resolving. One of the most detailed DACs I have heard. I would guess that it is more detailed than the M1 SE, not sure how it will compare to the Rockna Wavedream Signature SE which is the most detailed DAC in this test thus far.
Tonally, I find it quite neutral. Not bright or warm. That being said, it is an accurate, very low distortion DAC. Some may find it clinical though lack of brightness will keep it from being cold. I have not had the experience of it being clinical but if paired with the wrong amp, maybe. That being said, I have not heard this DAC with pure SS gear. All of my gear here is either pure tube (Art Audio, Canor) or in the case of the AVM, has a tube input stage. I will have a Magnus Audio 340 coming in soon on trade which is a 50w Class A SS and will give it a listen.
The DAC is "Roon Ready" and is UPnP and DLNA compliant so ethernet in is a good option. In my testing, I found it to be the best input. It also has tons of DSP options and room correction which are easily executed via a Web Interface. It also has a nice quality remote and you can navigate via the touch screen and the front dial. That Web Interface is not used to play music though, just control the DAC. You need to use a separate bit of software (Roon, JRiver, etc...) and have either a PC or Server on your network. We recommend Antipodes servers with Weiss and Bricasti gear with built in network cards.
@dankef I have never heard a Sonnet product. I have no idea how it performs. I would start your own thread asking that question as the best chance to get a good answer from someone who is familiar with it.
@treebeard I would do my best to get as far back as you can. Can you maybe use the adjustable studs to compensate for different depth with carpet or are you using spikes? If you are using spikes, I get the limitations completely.
@verdantaudio - just wondering if you've heard the Sonnet Morpheus? I'm considering an upgrade from the Morpheus to the Rockna Wavelight or Bricasti M3 (or similar tier DAC) but not sure if it's worth it.
Would also appreciate feedback from anyone else who's compared the Morpheus with the Rockna or Bricasti.
Have you gone closer to the sidewalls? It depends on the speaker if that reflection helps or hurts and those are way out into the room. Does the bass get to boomy if you move them back a but? For me, optimal is wider than 6'.
Not much room to side because they are on the edge of the rug. It doesn't get boomy at all. Moved chair back a foot and had my first real listening session since getting the XA25 and definitely got improvement. Next house will have more room for the speakers to breathe.
@treebeard1 - I took a look at your room. It is a very nice setup. It looks like you are trying to maintain an equilateral triangle. I have only a little experience with Tektons. I have a customer I am working with who has the Ulfbehrts. I am not sure how much they emphasize that and how sensitive they are in terms of placement near the sidewalls.
Have you gone closer to the sidewalls? It depends on the speaker if that reflection helps or hurts and those are way out into the room. Does the bass get to boomy if you move them back a but? For me, optimal is wider than 6'.
If you are looking for soundstage depth, the M3 or the Wavelight would definitely be a step forward. The M3 has the network card which makes it a brilliant option. I would seriously consider it. I do think you will have some limitations with how close you are to those speakers.
One note, I assume when you say "non-audiophile" you mean normal music that people like, not low res. If that is the case, I would recommend that M3 very much. I obviously listen to more than audiophile tracks and digging into normal rock music (The Cars, Black Sabbath, Hendricks, Christopher Cross, Jimmy Buffet, etc...) I really liked it. This is the DAC I have been listening too during my days and it makes me very happy.
If you mean low res 128k and 256k MP3s, that is a completely different issue.
@rja I have listened to the M1 SE and M3 via a renderer plugged into the USB. I also listened to the M1 SE via USB and the Ethernet. In the end, I think it very much depends on your musical tastes and how much precision matters. Via the USB the M1 SE is objectively the better DAC. That being said, “better” from a technical perspective doesn’t mean it would be more enjoyable. If precision and accuracy is important and the extra $4500 is not financially taxing, then yes, I think it is worth the step up based on my listening. As I said above, it might be possible that the gap between the M3s USB and Ethernet board is much greater than M1s. If that is the case then maybe I am wrong.
@rja I would think the OP can only answer your question if listening to each unit via their dedicated internal Ethernet ports. So far the OP has compared one unit via Ethernet (M1SE) and the other unit (M3) via USB. Apples to oranges.
verdantaudio, Do you feel that the difference in sound quality between the M3 and M1SE warrants the difference in their prices? I realize the answer would be strictly subjective but I’d be interested in your opinion.
yyzsantabarbara - all of the DACs tested produced what sounded like a clear bass line. It was only in comparison that I realized that it could be better than what I was hearing.
Yes, I understand that but I was a happy to notice that my cheaper DACs did not fail on that test. That album you used is awesome. Thanks for the musical discovery.
Yesterday I updated my system page and today I added this:
Speakers are 6 feet apart center-to-center and the back of the speakers are 4 feet from the front wall and about 2.5 feet from the side walls. Listening position is 6 feet back and speakers are on GAIA I's and slightly toed in to point over my shoulders. GIK bass traps are on the walls, corners and ceiling, which resulted in a big improvement in soundstage.
What I'm really missing is depth and space around instruments and depth of the soundstage. Maybe in my price range the space between instruments and instrument height is a big ask? I will admit that much of the music I listen to is not audiophile quality but a good amount is.
For the two units during the testing, I strictly used the 2Go/2Yu as the input. I did test the M1 SE separately with the two inputs and found I like Ethernet slightly better. Theoretically the network card could be much better on the M3. I am making an assumption that it had a similar benefit to both.
Regarding performance, my M3 does not have the network card. The M1 SE has the network card.
That’s a significant data point, and could go a long way to explaining differences in sonic characteristics between the M3 and M1 SE. It’s a shame they weren’t comparably equipped.
yes - that point jumped out at me too... i don’t know the bricasti units... can the network card be swapped from m1 to m3 and then run comparison the other way? that may isolate the beneficial effect of the card on sq of the 2 units
yyzsantabarbara - all of the DACs tested produced what sounded like a clear bass line. It was only in comparison that I realized that it could be better than what I was hearing.
I am not saying that either your Gustard or Benchmark can't do this. Unless I was able to do the test side-by-side with these, I can't be certain. I merely am saying I was surprised how much more info was available and wasn't showing up, even among these rather expensive units. The Rockna Wavedream Signature executed this better than any of the units, by far and it was illuminating.
@treebeard1 - I have never heard the DSD Jr. I had the DSD which is definitely competitive with this range. I sold that DAC about 15 months ago so I am going on distant memory.
The DSD sounded pretty big to me and extended well beyond the boundaries of my speakers. The Bricasti sounds MASSIVE. It has, by far, the biggest soundstage of the DACs I have tested.
I would start thinking about speaker placement before we go to actually buying a new DAC unless you just want one. What speakers and what amp? How far apart are your speakers? What have you done in terms of toeing and positioning? How far off the front wall and side walls are they? This all matters very much.
Regarding performance, my M3 does not have the network card. The M1 SE has the network card. Both my direct experience and everything I have heard and everyone has told me is the internal network card is the best way to get sound to your Bricasti. I used a 2Go and 2Yu with an AQ Diamond USB. It is very good. Not as good as network direct on the M1 SE with an AQ Cinnamon direct from my router.
So that makes it a huge win. It is less expensive than any decent renderer I am aware of and is only $1000 when added to the DAC. Seems like a no brainer to me.
@verdantaudio, Great thread and glad you started it.
I saw on another post you have had experience with PSA DSD. I have a DSD Jr. and am at a crossroads between upgrading to a network DAC or buying a dedicated streamer with a DAC to follow in the future.
What are your thoughts on how the DSD Jr. (bridge II) compares to the M3? Would the M3 be a significant upgrade? Did you test the M3 using ethernet or did you use a separate streamer.
My main goal is to increase the soundstage in all directions and increase emotional connection. I get a nice image, but mostly between the speakers.
Bozzio Levin Stevens - some excellent musicianship. Love this disk. My 2 $1500 DACs, Benchmark DAC3B and Gustard X26 Pro, did manage to produce the bass line clearly.
This almost says it all, warmer presentation, no sibilance on Stings voice (which "can" tear you a new one), yet top level sparkle from piano. Save for no mention of bass slam and tightness?
Georgehifi - Tons of bass slam. Overall relatively tight.
Thanks that to me is where one of the places R2R’s really shine, with that kind of bass then, it’s to me the ideal sound for a DAC.
Georgehifi - Tons of bass slam. Overall relatively tight. Not elite like the Wavedream or even the M1 SE but very, very good. The Wavelight is a very enjoyable DAC to listen to.
wjob - I tried both. I opted for minimum. It is a noteworthy change though. Linear definitely tightened up the bass and image a little but at the expense of some excitement and the raw joy in the listening experience of this DAC. I could easily change depending on the track.
Great work. What filter did you use on the M3? I've heard some people prefer the minimum phase and others the linear. (I own the M3 with ethernet - great DAC).
This is the ladder DAC of the four and it sounded very, very good. This had the least amount of sparkle and the warmest presentation of the four. If you like a warmer presentation or you are struggling with brightness or glare in a system, this is a brilliant option. It struck a nice balance where there was no sibilance in Sting’s voice or during Liberty but there is still top level sparkle in the piano. The intimacy of the Berg piece was lost a touch, but sounded more like a large room rather than a concert hall.
This almost says it all, warmer presentation, no sibilance on Stings voice (which "can" tear you a new one), yet top level sparkle from piano. Save for no mention of bass slam and tightness?
Bricasti M3 vs. M1 SE - This is, in some ways tougher to describe than the the cross manufacturer competition.
The M3 is brilliant. It is insanely detailed compared to most DACs but is not the end all in terms of detail.
It sounds massive. . It is the biggest soundstage I have ever heard in a DAC. It is not warm, not bright. It does have a slight emphasis on bass which makes it appealing for speakers that have less bass emphasis and makes it good for lower level listening.
The M1 SE is the same flavor of DAC. Tonally, very similar. It simply is more refined. You get a bit more detail. Everything is more focused. Details are there that aren't on the M3. Notes are crisper. Everything simply is technically better. This led the a shallower central image but with more focus. Definitely not a bad thing.
Removed from the crazy A/B of the other test, it is very obvious that these DACs are great at everything. They are an absolute pleasure to listen too on all 5 pieces. As I type this, I have simply let the Berg piece continue to play on the M3 and it is intoxicating.
jjss49 - I don't disagree even a little. The Chord is clean and clear. The Mscaler helps clarify and boost inner detail. The other three are just not as clean and clear. This presents differently and is very appealing. Part of why I equate and want the Chord for classical is that clean and clear sound is where I value that clarity the most.
My hunch is that of all the DACs mentioned here in this thread, the one that would be closest to the Chords would be the Mola Mola. But the price of the Tambaqui puts it up in Dave+ MScaler, Rockna Wavedream Signature, Bricasti M21territory. And at that level, there is no trade between detail, clarity and soundstage. It is how the DAC is designed and what its sound signature and image do to your system that matters. Clarity is a price of entry to $12K+ DACs.
I am very much looking forward to the return of the Weiss to see how it does vs. the M1 SE. My memory is that the Weiss is incredibly clear but with a warmer presentation. The renderer and processor with room correction and all the other functions makes it pretty incredible.
good stuff, scott, thanks again for your efforts to document and report your findings
as always, among well respected gear in higher price brackets from top makers, nothing will be downright poor ... the key is understanding the differences in presentation/sound quality so one can match components well in system building... this is where your results can help so many who dearly want to know
i have a great many dacs here, priced high and low, and for sheer pristine clarity, lack of coloration or electronic artifacts and timbral beauty, the chord scaler/tt2 duo is really exceptional, and unbeaten
other dacs, like the audio note 4.1 may sound more ’beautiful’, but you can tell it is from a carefully added sympathetic coloration, at the expense of ’hearing into the music’ that the upper chord gear enables one to do
tvad - bass is an area that saw a big uptick in resolution. The M1 SE had much better separation on the very rapid bass notes during Duende. Like I said, it falls short of the much more expensive Rockna which sounded crystal clear, but better than the M3.
Like the move from Chord TT2 to Dave or Wavelight to Wavedream, the M1 is a clear and noticeable step forward from what is a very good place to start with the M3.
rsf507 - whenever you change speakers, there is always a chance that you will need to make other alterations to your system. Speakers can sound so wildly different. I can't imagine using the same gear to drive Vivid's and Vandersteen's.
tvad, the Bricasti emphasises bass compared to these other DACs, in my system, with these speakers. This is relative. It is not an absolute. With my Wilson Benesch's, this does not sound bass heavy at all, for example.
I want to redo the M3 and M1 SE back-to-back but in brief, the M1 is much more resolving. It is not quite at the same level as the Wavedream Signature (I bet the M21 will be) but better than any of the DACs in this $5K price tier. You have 13 filters to choose from which allows a lot of refinement in terms of sound preference.
I thought the width of soundstage was similar where the depth was maybe a bit shallower but much more focused and clean. It is simply clearer and cleaner. Not that the M3 is unclear or dirty sounding.
The M1 SE simply elevates and refines what is an extraordinary listening experience.
@verdantaudio so you buy a dac based on your current setup with maybe a bit of bass shy speakers then change speakers that have much more bass. No you have to change dacs? Even maybe cables? Seems like we start chasing our tails. Does one ever get off this merry-go-round. 🤔
One final note, I have been running these this morning in my main system with Art Audio Opus 4 Monos and Verdant Blackthorns. The brighter, less bass heavy speaker meant everything shifted.
The net takeaway is focus on system matching. That is the key.
Please note, I am
using the AVM A5.2 integrated amplifier which is a Class D with a tube input
stage. This is the German company AVM
and has nothing to do with and is not affiliated with Anthem in any way. If you have read my other posts you will know
that I am a huge fan of this brand and this amp. My opinion only improved as a result of this testing
as this amp was really up to the task of properly driving these speakers and
highlighting differences in DAC performance.
The Vivid Kaya 45 is not the easiest speaker in the world to drive with
a min impedance of 2.8 ohms. This was a
brilliant combo.
I listened to the TT2 first following the AVM
internal DAC and the Hugo 2. I was actually not certain I was going to
hear a huge difference between the Hugo 2 and the TT2. The TT2 has
"double the taps" of the Hugo 2 but I had a lot of faith in the Hugo
2. I was wrong. The TT2 and other
three DACs in this class are demonstrably better than the rung down in every
way.
I like all four of these DACs very
much. Each does many things very, very
well and I could be happy with any of them assuming they are in the correct
system. And that is the key to
remember. This is my observation using a
very particular integrated amp and pair of speakers. They happen to be very competent but have
their own unique characteristics. In all
cases, instrument separation was very good.
Very little smearing and air around strings and cymbals was first rate. Some things may sound negative. For example the TT2 has the narrowest
soundstage of these four. It is still
massive compared to a step down, just different than its peers.
The TT2 was the most accurate / precise of the four
and this could be perceived as cold and bright. In the wrong system this
could be extremely unpleasant. In the right system, it creates an image
that is very accurate. In the AVM/Vivid combo, the sound is
realistic. Tonally, the instruments
sound just as they should. It did
present a touch of sibilance with Sting’s voice in Be Still my Beating Heart
and a few moments during Liberty as well.
The soundstage is
realistic but flat. The image is stable
and relatively wide, but the central image lacked depth. The soundstage is presented to the
listener. It is in front of them to
observe rather than a feeling of immersion.
The colder tones that show up as accuracy in jazz and vocal presentation
were completely absent in classical.
This DAC presented the soul of the string instruments in a way that
borders on impossible to explain. It
captured the emotion of Berg’s quartet and if more people heard classical music
with this DAC there would be more classical music fans. The soundstage was
intimate and this DAC shined like the sun.
This was clearly the best of the four with the chamber music in this
system and in some ways, the best of the four with Duende.
The Hugo TT2 showed a
level of competence that was simply absent from the Hugo 2 and on-board
AVM. Not that they are bad, just not in
the same league as the Chord.
I then switched to the
M3. Talk about contrast. You immediately notice the M3 has a greater
emphasis on bass and the soundstage is massive.
This is not a soundstage presented to you but one that immerses you in
the listening experience. It does not
have the same tonal accuracy as the Chord and sounds a hair colored. This comes across as incredibly soulful,
especially with female voices and horns.
So much so that I had to depart from the five songs only program and
listen to Jewel’s You Were Meant for Me which, when presented well, is one of
the most incredible vocal pieces I have heard.
The M3 met my extremely high expectations.
The M3 has a greater
emphasis on bass which I am guessing is contributing to the massive soundstage
it delivers. Be Still my Geating Heart
is the song with the largest soundstage of these five. The Chord presented an image that extended
maybe 8’ beyond the outside of the Vivids.
I struggle to quantify how large the image seemed. It had to be double
what the Chord presented and portions of the soundstage were coming behind
me.
On the other hand, the
bass was a little much on Duende for my taste and the intimacy of the Berg
piece was lost. It sounded too big and
beyond a chamber piece. Tonally, the
emotion of the strings were lost a bit for me compared to the Chord. If the amp was a hair brighter
These two DACs are
like comparing BMW and Lexus. Both are exceptional
at what they have chosen to do but are opposites in terms of style. If I was to sit down and listen to
Prokofiev’s Lt Kije Suite or Beethoven’s 9th, I would choose the TT2 without
question in this system. If I was to
listen to Black Sabbath’s Volume 4 or Peter Gabriel’s So, the M3 would be my
choice.
Music style is one
part but system matching is also critical.
I say that in this system. If I
had Raidho speakers which have a reputation for delivering a massive image, the
Bricasti might be too much a good thing and the Chord might fit just
right. My own Blackthorn speakers are
accurate and clinical and doubling down on that would be dreadful with the
Chord and the M3 would be an ideal match.
This brings us to the
other two. If Chord and Bricasti are BMW
and Lexus, Audiobyte and Rockna are Infinity and Lincoln. Different flavors in the middle. Equally extraordinary, but different.
The Rockna was the
next that I listened too and at first, I was shocked at how poor it
sounded. There are four filters and they
sound like completely different DACs. I
used hybrid and linear. I found minimum
and NOS to be unpleasant with this system.
Minimum in particular drifted too bright for my taste. This DAC also has a slight emphasis on bass
the way the Bricasti does which lends itself to delivering a big, deep
soundstage, albeit not quite as big as the Bricasti.
This is the ladder DAC
of the four and it sounded very, very good.
This had the least amount of sparkle and the warmest presentation of the
four. If you like a warmer presentation
or you are struggling with brightness or glare in a system, this is a brilliant
option. It struck a nice balance where
there was no sibilance in Sting’s voice or during Liberty but there is still
top level sparkle in the piano. The
intimacy of the Berg piece was lost a touch, but sounded more like a large room
rather than a concert hall.
I have a lot of
experience with this DAC. Part of what
makes it remarkable is that it is un-remarkable. It simply works in a lot of systems and just
sounds great. It is easier to describe
than its big brother, the Wavedream Signature (we will get to that later), but
especially if your tastes cross many genres of music, this is a “Goldilocks”
DAC for a lot of systems. Additionally, this is the only DAC among these four
with an analog input and home-theater bypass available so it can be used with a
turntable (yes, it sounds very good) or an AVR/PrePro.
And finally the
Audiobyte. This is definitely closer to
the Chord in terms of sound profile. It
is coincidentally also an FPGA. This is the most detailed presentation of the
four however it is less accurate than the Chord. Tonally the Chord is perfect in this system,
there is a tinge of warmth that comes across with the Audiobyte. It could be its greater emphasis on bass vs
Chord.
The image is larger
and deeper than the Chord but smaller and shallower than the Wavelight and
Bricastit. This had the best separation
of instruments among the four which was generally very good and it also had the
best air around cymbals and strings.
Although the TT2 was best with the opening bass solo in Duende, the
slightly stronger bottom-end of the Audiobyte.delivered and overall better
presentation. There is a very complex
underlying bass line during the song that the Chord did not present and was
muddy on the Bricasti and Wavelight, that came through clearly on the
Audiobyte. It also delivered details and
effects that remained inaudible during Liberty.
These were quite audible on the M1 SE and Wavedream Signature.
There was more top-end
sparkle in piano with the Audiobyte compared to the Wavelight. It maintained a very nice level of intimacy
on the Berg piece. This also has the
potential to be a “Goldilocks” DAC in a lot of systems. Especially those that are not challenged with
brightness and place an emphasis on detail.
In the end, all four
of these DACs are awesome and do so many great things. The priority needs to be on system matching
and making sure that the DAC meets your needs and appeals to your taste. You would think with the rather significant
investment each of these units commands there would be less compromise involved
and you could simply buy anyone and be happy but that is definitely not the
case. A good evaluation of your system
and your own tastes will deliver a great match though as one of these is
certain to deliver against everyone’s needs.
I will follow up with my wife's opinion of these but that will stretch out over days.
I do a lot of comparative listening and totally agree it is a worthwhile undertaking, if all goes well, there is a good possibility a Device will be discovered that is very pleasing to the individual doing the listening, and also one that interfaces within the used system in a manner that makes it standout against the other devices in the line up.
Swapping out devices and allowing a short play time will again be most likely to create a change in how the SQ and Presentation is perceived, the Demonstrations IME can develop into the changes being heard and not the qualities of the device in use. I myself take notes and have in the past recorded the differences, but not the impression the overall performance has made. To counteract this today, I will compare with short term replay times allocated as per the usual method , and then separately allow each device to run on and play in a non comparative listening to see how the device attracts to myself and my preferences. The outcome of the extended playtimes are usually much harder to be critical about as the devices are usually capable of creating an experience that shows attractors.
My Experience is that as the listening pool of individuals increase, the hierarchy of each individuals attractors and preferences starts to come into play, 'One persons punchy Bass Line is another persons nemesis'.
As said a lot can be gained in broadening an experience, learning where ones preferences lean toward and the learning of certain Brands Sonic Signatures. How the results can be used are pretty much a personal thing, but it is quite nice when a group in attendance and there are unanimous agreements about a particular device in the system being used.
Weiss will be back this week. I am very curious how it will perform vs. the M1 SE. I will likely connect both via Ethernet as this will show both off at their very best.
tvad - let's call it poor phrasing. A good reminder that I need to be more exact in my language.
I checked my notes and Duende did not distort on the M3 (it did on others) but it is a bit muddy relative to the M1 SE and Rockna Wavedream. This I went back and checked several times on all the DACs. It proved to be one of the most obvious moments among these five songs hat highlight differences between units.
The portion in question is the bass solo that starts at around 21 seconds with the hardest part to reproduce at about 31 seconds. This does not sound bad on the M3 and without having the luxury of swapping in the M1 SE and or Rockna Wavedream Signature, you would not know that there is a lack of precision.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
