A while back, I needed a long electric cable run for my amp. At the suggestion of a cable guru on another site I bought a long length of Viborg VP1606 5N OFC cable which was then available only as unterminated. I bought some good connectors and made up the cable and the improvement over a pretty good Supra cable was clear. I thought of making up some shorter cables for components, but the first cable was quite a trial as the cable is very thick. A suggestion at a Chinese review of the Musetec DAC to use a better electric cable for it was in the back of my mind when I ran across the availability of the same Viborg cable, but terminated and at no-brainer prices on Amazon. A 1.5 meter cable for $61.72 if you have Prime. Other sizes too. In Amazon search on "Viborg MBU1606 Hi-End Power Cable 5N OFC 6mm2 /Core, 16MM Copper Shielding +2 Layers Foil US HiFi Power Cord with Pure Red Copper US Power Plug+IEC C13 Connector". The detail of the raw cable is here. Scroll down for details.
The cable gives me a little of what I think a better (than I have) power conditioner might offer. A bit of smoothness, and better consistency over time, you know, good days and not quite so good days. I am quite pleased with cable even though it is thick and stiff. After a while bought a second for my preamp. Of course, YMMV, but if you want to try it I believe you can return it to Amazon with no shipping cost either way.
Any other suggestions for electric cable or conditioner that have worked well for this DAC?
|
@boxer12
The switch that some of us use is more properly the D-Link DGS105.
|
@boxer12
I should have noted on my last post that to bring the D-Link DGS105 to its potential it needs a better power supply than supplied. An iFi iPower 5v will do just fine. Also, be sure to ground the unit using the screw on the back.
|
@branislav
Thanks for your post. You are correct. It’s been a bit of a shock. I thought when @dbb posted his very strong comparative review that the traffic would move to that thread. Perhaps it really should have. For some reason, though there were Musetec DACs bought because of dbb’s thread I’m sure, folks chose to express their satisfaction with the DAC over here. And so it grew.
This is not the first component that was virtually ignored by the audiophile media but gained acceptance via a thread on Audiogon like this one, populated by satisfied users. Some of us have learned over the years that a thread like this carries more weight than a "review." There is no substitute for hearing the DAC in your own system. As has been made clear, the DAC has been designed by listening at every stage of its development. The quality of the DAC makes itself known pretty quickly. The willingness to share by those who have bought and used it has been appreciated by those who came later. Although not an inexpensive DAC, it’s been regarded as a relative bargain by several with a lot of DAC experience.
So thanks to Audiogon for making this forum available.
|
There's a new review of the Musetec on the head-fi site here. It was apparently purchased after considering several others.
|
@budkine
Thanks for your review. Sorry, but I couldn't resist pointing to it at head-fi. In an earlier post I remarked that, "a thread like this carries more weight than a 'review.'" You post is but another terrific example of why.
@jjss49
We look forward to your impressions of the Musetec. No one has ever said that it is the best of all DACs. If it can play comfortably in the same sandbox as some of the others you have, that will be plenty. I appreciate your effort. Anyone willing to plow through this whole thread of 21 pages, as you have, deserves the Audiogon medal of honor.
|
I thought I’d share some cable experiences with the 005. Just a caution that all of this is usually very system specific. Another caution, I was a "follower" of a recently deceased cable guru on another site. He was a master of identifying all sorts of cables and terminations available from a variety of places at very reasonable prices. He was actually about to launch a line of his own when we all learned the bad news. His basic advice for digital was was to go solid core. Of course, whether the 004 or the 005 we have the advantage of not being concerned with any interaction of the signal and 5V lines.
Beginning with the 004 I replaced a Supra USB cable with a Monoprice cable. Before you laugh at its price, scroll down to see exactly how it’s made. This was certainly an improvement over the Supra in every way. Still with the 004 I then tried AudioQuest Pearl USB cable. The differences between the two were very clear. The AQ made the soundstage open up considerably, but it lacked the sparkle of the Monoprice. It was just slightly dull.
I then happened upon an ebay listing for solid core silver cables at a very reasonable price. I wrote the maker and asked if he could make up a cable for me with 2 18ga solid silver, Teflon wrapped lines for pins 2 & 3 and a copper cable for pin 4. It turned out to be remarkably inexpensive. He did and when it arrived I was stunned by the improvement it made in every way, other than it did not extend the sound stage as had the AudioQuest. What it did do was give instruments the depth, liquidity and body the other cables did not. It was my end-game cable for the 004
Enter the 005. As much as the 004 had extended the high and low extremes, the 005 did even better. I started with the ebay USB cable. It was a mixed bag depending on the recording and even, perhaps the time of day or day of week. Sometimes perfect, sometimes a bit too much in the highs. I wrote earlier about substituting really terrific Viborg power cables for the Supras I was using. In my system these cables seem to act sort of like what I would expect from a slightly better power conditioner. So the time of day issues diminished. The AudioQuest still gave me the soundstage and the high end was better than with the 004, but it still sounded a bit duller than the silver cable. However some of the advantages that the silver cable on the 004, the depth and liquidity and body of instruments, came through on the AudioQuest when used with the 005, as the 005 has these qualities in spades.
I was encouraged by what I had read to try AudioQuest Diamond USB. These are solid core silver. I picked one up used and gave it a lot of time. It didn’t work for me. Audio was thin, lacking body. My observation of what was lost was something like that described here. This is a very useful article on USB cables. Over time I began to realize that the AQ Pearl treble with the 005 was more true to real instrumental sound on more and more of my music and I’ve been happy with that choice in my system, for now. But I love to experiment with cables--so I’m not done. I could use a touch more sparkle maybe, just a touch.
Anyone else here been fooling with cables on the Musetec?
|
I know that all presumed improvements are very system dependent, but my most recent additions are very low in price and together have made a discernable improvement in increased clarity and consistency. Worth reporting, I think. And that is the combination of a new Viborg power cable and a D-Link DGS105, grounded and powered by an iFi iPower 5v wall wart. All cheap by any audiophile standard and available from and returnable to Amazon. More musical enjoyment than ever.
System is modem and Synology NAS to switch. Switch to laptop running JRiver and to SOtM sMS-200ultra neo powered by SBooster. AudioQuest Pearl from SOtM to DAC. SOtM running as DLNA Bridge controlled by EOS (perhaps the best JRiver remote app) on phone or Samsung pad. Streaming is by BubbleUPnP on SOtM and Phone or Pad. All ethernet cable is generic.
|
@budkine
I realize that anything that’s said here is necessarily system dependent and the use of the LKS 100 has already been discussed at some length. Without questioning lordmelton’s results I think it is fair to say that his is currently a minority view. Of course, that could change. But the 005 already provides the function of the LKS 100 (converting USB to I2S) with a very sophisticated power supply and upgraded clocks. There’s surely no harm in trying the LKS 100.
But you write that you are running from your PC straight into the USB on the 005. That is usually not optimal and can be improved upon easily, still into the 005’s USB. There are several other things you can do to yield better SQ. If you tell us more about your set-up (like what PC and program you are using on the PC and where you store music files, or how you stream) I’m sure folks will chime in with suggestions.
|
@yyzsantabarbara
I can only comment on the LKS 004. Here’s my $.02. I’m aware that sns has never liked the 004. IMO it is a very good DAC in its stock form, but it is not particularly small. If you look at the early posts at the 004 thread at head-fi, you’ll see its performance was well received out of the box. There was also a thread at Audiophile Style when it was called Computer Audio that covered the 004 stock favorably and in detail. Google will find some other stuff. At one point during the sales life of the Musetec,005 a used LKS 004 was a real bargain. It may still be. Were I to buy an 004 used I would make sure that it has not been modified unless you have great confidence in who and how it was done. I would look for one in at least its second series. That can be identified as having the 8 FETs on the underside of the circuit board where they cannot be seen in the usual interior pictures. Ric Shultz used to do a $500 mod on the LKS. That’s about the cheapest mod ever offered. He did not think very much had to be done. If it were mine I would shield the transformers from the remainder of the circuit--very easily done.
|
@ortodox
By USB renderer I assume you mean an ethernet in to USB out DDC. These are devices that can work very well. However they range in price from about $400 to over $11,000. Do it yourself versions based on Raspberry Pi computer boards can cost much less.
If you want advice I suggest you tell us more about your system and music. The more the details, the better can be the suggestions. Since you are asking here I assume you have or are contemplating getting a Musetec. Is that right?
|
Just a note that Shenzhen is currently in the midst of its semi-annaul sale with a price reduction on the Musetec.
And while I'm at it, for our British friends, there's a used Musetec for sale on the UKAudiomart.
|
Clear Components, the Musetec distributer in Germany, is currently advertising it at 2999 Euros, VAT included. At the current favorable exchange rate that’s $3135. The VAT in Germany, though, is 19%. The net price therefore could be very favorable, though shipping out of the EU is not included. There's a voltage switch inside the cabinet.
|
@daci
As I don't play much rock I probably can't answer directly. But the bass of the Musetec goes very low and is clean and clear. Low enough to easily provide organ notes you can feel as well as hear.
Some of the best illustrations of the clean and clear bass I am getting are found in double bass solos that I admire. Examples are the playing of Ron Carter on Chesky JD376 "We'll Be Together Again" and David Holland on Flying Fish HDS 70701 (Untitled). I've never before heard anything like it from digital. The extent to which the Musetec "slams" for you (and for me) probably depends upon your sub-woofer. The DAC will definitely supply what is necessary. However some widely distributed sub-woofers don't go as low as you might imagine. Before investing in a sub go over the specs carefully. I use Rythmik.
|
@lordmelton @daci
Or if you want electric bass sounding real as it might in a medium size venue, Steve Lucas in "One Witness" on Ray Montford’s "Shed Your Skin."
|
I’ve written this before, but it’s worth repeating as Audiogon does not have a search within thread function. The Amanero board within the Musetec does the conversion from USB to I2S just like the external boards. It does that with an excellent power supply using super-capacitors, and clocks which probably outperform those on external DDCs. And without any cable carrying the I2S signals. Some here think that function can be better performed by an external DDC. Some think it cannot.
|
@debjit_g
What matters is the clocks, power supply feeding it and isolation. With an external DDC, you bypass the additional processing inside and go almost directly to ESS. The theory is this additional processing can put strain and induce noise/jitter on the chip.
In the Musetec, the ESS chips, together with its regulating clock, are on the analog board That board is powered by an elaborate LPS headed by the silver plated O-Ring transformer. That LPS powers nothing else in the DAC. The Amanero Board, together with its own 3 clocks are on a separate board. That board is powered by an entirely independent power supply at the head of which is a second transformer, a toroidal, feeding into a bank of super capacitors that act as batteries. That PS powers nothing on the analog board. This goes about as far to insulate the ESSs and their own clock from any strain, noise or jitter from the USB input circuit as I can imagine.
Nevertheless, anything is possible in audio and there are rarely any hard and fast rules. So people are feeling the desire to experiment and we'll all be the better for their findings.
|
@jjss49
That was a major effort and excellent writing. I appreciate it, especially as your own system is definitely at the very high end and you were not, yourself, looking for a new DAC here. In many ways the Musetec has been a mystery DAC with lots of favorable comments by owners, but without a comparative listening review from the usual commercial sources. Together with @dbb you have taken the mystery out of the DAC and placed it accurately among DACs I think.
A minor comment. The bulk of my own listening is to classical music. I find the front to back depth to vary very considerably from recording to recording, and especially from label to label. Sometimes it appears quite true to life. I am, though, happy to accept your observation that there may be an even a greater distinction as one goes up the DAC ladder.
|
@sns @charles1dad
"Screaming deal"? Perhaps so, but not so fast, please. Yes the Bricasti has a built in streamer and an analog volume control. But are these appropriate to the fine quality of the DAC function on the unit?
In the first place I’ve searched far and wide and cannot find a review or evaluation of the streamer function itself on the Bricasti M1se. The "se" denotes the streamer edition. Then, searching far and wide in this and other forums I find a general consensus that built in streamers on expensive DACs generally are usually judged to be inadequate compared to separates. I am making no judgment on the Bricasti streamer function. But I wonder, really, whether it proves itself satisfactory to audiophiles who are into 5 figure DACs. And I wonder if it would be satisfactory to @sns particularly. Now, someone may read this and tell us that the included streamer outperforms the Aires G2. One never knows for sure. Then perhaps: screaming deal.
Like most things in digital audio, streamers are developing at a rapid pace, even faster than DACs. I agree that the addition of a built-in streamer might help a DAC’s sales, even for some who would use it to get started but with plans to upgrade. On the other hand there are now some very good inexpensive streamers available to get started with. (My first streamer with the 004 was my stock Oppo 105, and it was actually pretty good.) And when you upgrade they can be sold. The Bricasti M1 MDx without the streamer is $10,000. The streamer adds $1000.
IIUC the knob on the Bricasti M1 is not a volume control, but it is on the M1se. A remote with volume and balance is available for the Bricasti for a steep upcharge. I have only been able to price it in sterling at 549 VAT incl. But again, if you’re running a 5 figure DAC will that be satisfactory? As @lordmelton writes, a preamp does a lot more than control volume and select inputs. None of the several reviewers of the M1 or M1se that I read has written of using the built-in volume control for their review.
I do not mean by any of this to detract from the exceptional sound quality of the Bricasti DAC as reported here, and I accept that as a given. What remains, for me is only the question of value for $$. That’s what brought many of us here in the first place.
|
@charles1dad
Well, describing sound in words has always been difficult. Wise writers have given us some guidance from time to time. "Organic" and "musical" are too often used by audiophiles simply to mean, "it has a sound that I like." I have used "musical" at times, including in this thread, but I have given it a specific definition drawn from an old writing in UHF Magazine. I suspect that "organic" when it is not used simply to mean "I like it" may actually denote "yin" as popularized by the writings of Harry Pearson. But yin was regarded by HP as a coloration and not an asset. So too IMO expressions like it sounds more analogue, or more like tubes.
We are left then with: it makes the music sound more like unamplified instruments in real space, or not. For the most part this limits the music to classical, most often performed without the benefit of microphones and loudspeakers. I was intrigued by your post suggesting jazz shows like that. Did I get that right? If so, kudos to them and to you.
Around here that writing has been done best IMO by @dbb which is why his thread deserves a bump from time to time.
|
organic for me does not imply some form of added warmth or coloration, to others who use this term it surely does imply this. . . . . . So again it is obvious (And understood) organic means different things to different people.
@charles1dad
Then as the Brits would say, the word "organic" is not fit for purpose. We need to agree on the meaning of words if we are to communicate. If "organic is synonymous with natural in [your] vocabulary," why not just say "natural."
|
@charles1dad
It’s just the three set of jumpers from board to board that are wired with short discrete silver wires. This is in place of the standard thin gauge ganged copper jumper connections. The O-Ring transformer powering the analog board is wound with silver plated OCC wire. I’d guess you’d call that attention to detail.
|
@charles1dad
This is almost exactly why I chose to buy the Musetec, sight unseen (and unheard) at the time. In the first place I believe that great parts make great sound, and the designer had proved his product to a cost with the 004. When I looked at the cost of the parts in the Musetec I simply said to myself that no one would increase the cost of the DAC so much unless each expenditure added to the SQ result. It was hard to find, but the 2 Mundorf gold and silver foil capacitors costs about $95 each. The gold plated O-ring transformer costs about $200. (See a similar one at Kitsune.) A typical torroid of a similar size is less than $25. I saw each of the new femtoclocks selling for $122. A Crystek is about $25. And so on.
So it seemed logical that each part was listened to before a commitment to its inclusion and cost. That was confirmed recently in correspondence with the designer as I wrote in an earlier post.
One of the things I have come to admire about this maker, and about many other Chinese manufacturers is their complete openness about exactly what’s inside their DAC. Compare that with the mystery that surrounds the interior of DACs from European and American makers. Long on promotional literature, but short on specifics.
|
@charles1dad
I would not be at all surprised if during part comparisons during design development he had parts that measured better yet sound worse. I bet if he were asked, he would admit this to be true.
Well, no surprise. In my "summary" of the issue I wrote, "At various stages he says he made changes that could improve measurements but reversed them if the sound quality, as he heard it, was not as good."
|
@rrboogie
Not a good idea to use one set of interconnects from DAC to sub-woofer and another to preamp. One set to preamp and two sets out from preamp to amp and sub-woofer, even if you have to use Y-splitters. That way your preamp volume control will control all. Otherwise a mess with control of volume.
I have used three different preamps with my 004 and 005. The Freya+ was my middle pre and is very good for the price. The emphasis is on: for the price. I used it with NOS Chrome Domes. Having tubes somewhere in the system when you are running a solid stage DAC (which is to say, most of them) is great. The Freya+ easily beat out a very good SS preamp. I found, though, that I couldn’t live without a balance control and for this and other reasons went to a much more expensive tubed preamp. It’s all much, much better. The moral of this story is that to hear it at its best you cannot match the Musetec with components appropriate to only a $3000 DAC. In this I agree with @sns . In your place I might consider selling all your pre- stuff and getting something better. But I’m not there and have not heard it all as you have.
As for USB cables. They really do matter and IMO are very system specific. I say first settle on your preamp. AQ Diamond works for a lot of people including @sns. It did not work for me as I wrote earlier. Nor did a custom silver core cable that did fine with the 004. AQ Pearl at 5% of the Diamond price works better here. But it did lose a bit of sparkle/openness that should be there. A change in the interconnect between DAC and preamp is proving just right along with the Pearl. I’ll write about that cable in a bit. So my advice: try interconnect and USB cable. Buy cheap or buy where you can return.
|
@rrboogie
Just a reminder about the USB in the Musetec, in that it doesn’t use the 5 volts from the USB cable. I mention this because most of the Sablon 2020 USB cables shown have a double cable configuration keeping the 5 volt, line one, wire separate from the digital lines. When used with the Musetec nothing flows through line one making the second cable unnecessary.
|
@debjit_g
I've been happy using Viborg VP1606 power cable first recommended by a cable guru on another site. My first was long and I had to terminate it, not so easily done as it's a big cable. Since then I see that they are available terminated, and at Amazon. The only negative is that they are quite stiff. Since as Musetec folks we like to look inside, here's what's inside the Viborg. Scroll down.
|
@sns
I gather that the Muon ($1312) is an Ethernet filter at a higher level than the Eno filter ($704) from the same source. Both are entirely passive devices. Have you (or anyone else here) used either of them? Do other devices in the chain have the same or similar effect?
Also, placed between a switch and a streamer, there seems to be no need for the extra streaming cable offered. Would that be correct?
|
@debjit_g
Comparison is only to the best Supra power cable that I terminated. I don't believe what power cables have to do is all that complicated: deliver and shield. If we are able to look inside a DAC and make some assumptions about what we may hear, surely a power cable is a much simpler investigation. Some time in May, when I discovered them on Amazon, a 1.5 meter Viborg MBU1606 terminated cable was selling on Prime for $61.72. Many months before I had bought a long length of the unterminated Viborg cable and set it up for my amp, a distance from an outlet. Terminating this thick cable was a trial. At the price on Prime It was a no brainer for me to buy a few. And Amazon has a very easy return policy. I'm satisfied with the buy. As usual YMMV.
|
Once again @jjss49 and @lordmelton have given us very valuable insights into the sound of the Musetec and other DACs. Any of the DACs mentioned together with care in digital signal delivery, I believe, will give the listener a real taste of what digital can do.
I would add only that some of the differences, admittedly small differences, among the several DACs considered can only be accurately understood and evaluated by reference to particular recordings and recording techniques. Consider, for example, the question of how up front or recessed might a soloist appear in relation to the speakers. Close miking would suggest, I think, that the soloist in an accurate system would be on the line between speakers, rather than recessed. Distant miking should reveal a more distant perspective.
A brief comparative review some years ago of my phono pre against another revealed that one of them had a singer up front and the other had the singer further back in the sound stage. The reviewer wrote that the buyer could make a choice based on preference. I recall saying to myself at the time that this doesn’t make sense. Only by knowing something about the recording set-up could one determine that one of the two more accurately revealed the proper spacing.
Here, as in other evaluations, I judge by classical music as there is usually some attempt to make it appear like a real event. So there can still be the close up orchestral perspective of a Mercury recording in Detroit vs. a distant perspective of a Philips recording in Amsterdam. What I seek are components that reveal these differences. The sound of a grand piano on a large concert stage will be very different than the same piano in an average room. Closeness or distance will be but one aspect of the difference. Some recordings put the piano in my room; others have it at a distance on a stage. Similarly for chamber music.
Re another issue consider, for example, the comment of the slightly leaner mid-bass giving a sense of slightly greater clarity. Some of you may know that I’ve been experimenting lately with some very interesting balanced Chinese interconnects. Well, one of these provides to the Musetec precisely what is described here. It works spectacularly well for some recordings. Whether it works well for a great variety of recordings is something that I am currently wrestling with. Applied to some other DAC it may take it too far into the entirely too lean category. I will write more about this cable adventure in time.
All of which is to say that good component reviewing can be very, very difficult. @jjss49 did some terrific work here and some very careful listening. Expressing these sonic issues in words is a tall order. My only demur would be in the lack of musical examples. The difficulty, of course, is that we don’t have a common base of music so that we can all hear what the reviewer hears. I guess I miss the old TAS days when they would chose from a small group of recordings.
|
Just a note about a sale price on the Musetec from Shenzhenaudio.com from August 22 to 26. $2,969.10.
They run this store-wide sale from time to time.
|
If anyone is using their Musetec 005 straight in to the amplifier you might want to rethink that based on a recent post at head-fi. Adding a preamp was said to add major improvement in in "dynamics, holographic quality and organicness." True, the preamp is a $17,000 tubed unit, but the principal applies broadly, I think. That the Musetec fits comfortably into such a system is itself interesting.
|
I have wound up with a tube system, but for the Musetec, Although with its twin JFET analog circuit it probably sounds as much like tubes as a transistor circuit can.
Just by chance, rather than by theory, I have found value in the tube components I have. I came to tubes rather slowly. I do think though that it's good to have tubes somewhere in a system and the preamplifier is perfectly positioned to be the place. Moreover preamps use small tubes which are inherently more stable than power tubes. That makes owning a tube preamplifier not much of a burden.
|
@batvac2
You named some DACs you might be interested in. I suggest you audition any of them and then let us know then if "fantastic" still applies to the Topping that will probably measure better than most of them. Topping DACs seem to be designed with ASR in mind. The Musetec SQ has been compared with two of them here and, while one may be preferred over the other in a particular system, they are said to be of comparable quality. The Musetec SQ has also been compared favorably, here and elsewhere, to that of the Mola Mola Tambaqui and also to the Chord Hugo 2 with the M Scaler.
The difference, though, is that while the SQ of all of these has been said to be at least comparable, the Musetec costs but a fraction of what the others cost. Where I come from, THAT is what is called fine engineering.
PS: In the early solid state days popular tube amps had about 2% IM and HD at rated outputs; solid state under 1%. Do some research and you’ll find it.
|
@batvac2
I wonder how you can hold to your position when we consider your excellent integrated tube amplifier, the Ars Sonum. I have searched the 'net and can find no review of the Ars Sonum that provides detailed measurements of it. The maker provides very little by way of specs. So how is it possible to like it?
I suggest you do yourself a favor and send it to Amir for testing. Yes he tests some expensive components. He didn't like the Chord DAVE at all, yet it is a reference for some. I'm certain he'd be happy to oblige if you send him your Ars Sonum, for that's how he gets almost all of the units he tests.* The problem is that we all know that it would come out far behind the Topping LA90 integrated amp that he tested recently. The harmonic distortion specification of your Ars Sonum is about 4000 times greater than that measured in the Topping. The Topping SINAD is 30db better than the Ars Sonum s/n.** Amir concluded that the $900 Topping amp engineers "have outdone every amplifier I have measured . . . getting ahead to capture the #1 position with a large gap to #2 choice."
So for US$900 you can have it all, with a bit more power as well. Why would you continue to listen to all that noise and distortion from the Ars Sonum when the Topping is only $900 away? The answer probably is because you know that the Ars Sonum integrated tube amplifier in all likelihood sounds better than the Topping. And how it sounds is the only thing that really matters. Bottom line: isn't that where it's really at?
*Topping units, though, are all sent by the manufacturer. An ASR review is a evidently a major part of their marketing plan. The suggestion, therefore, that they are designed with Amir's testing in mind is not exactly off the wall.
**I concede these are not precise equivalents, but they are close enough.
|
@batvac2
Can audio components be designed entirely by ear- exchanging capacitors in the circuit based on the sustain of a piano in one recording or the input jacks based on one singer’s voice? . . . . Maybe there is a rare unicorn with the requisite skills, absolute perfect pitch, and access to reference recordings.
Well, not a unicorn exactly. Just a trained engineer--caring more about audio design than marketing--with a fine ear, a love of music, and the requisite skills. Perfect pitch not required. He would not be the only one in the history of high-end audio.
You seem to have put together an audio system that deserves better than the Topping as your source. Sooner or later you’ll want to trade up. By your selections, I’m guessing that you look for good value. Having hung around here for a while, the Musetec must be tempting. The testimonies here and elsewhere surely suggest that it is in the category of DACs costing far more. I’ll leave it at that.
|
My, my. How many angels are dancing on the head of this pin?
Consider two different strikes of an etching taken a few days apart. Number one has the artist’s signature on it He signed it and died the next day. He never saw the second, which was the next strike numbered consecutively, and it is indistinguishable from the first but for the signature. Both of them share the embossed stamp of the print studio guaranteeing authenticity.
The first will surely sell for more, probably much more. But is the second any less of an artistic achievement not worthy of the same admiration?
|
@batvac2
What persuaded me early on was the description of the excellent, and costly, parts used by the engineer/designer in producing the Musetec DAC. No one in their right mind, or so it seemed to me, was going to use this quality of parts but that each one made a noticeable improvement in the sound quality. I saw nothing like it in comparably priced products.
This thread, now with 110,000 views and 1300 posts, has plenty of testimonies from satisfied owners, each of whom seems to have considerable of experience in audio and with other DACs. And as you well know, the DAC has been compared carefully, and often favorably, to other far more expensive ones. Notwithstanding all that, like the owner of the print without the signature, what you are left with that would seem to keep you from enjoying this DAC to its fullest is fundamentally nothing more than a qualm. So be it!
As for "closer to reality," I can provide you with nothing better than this. If you can find a review of any DAC anywhere with this level of description against reality, I am ready to read it. I hold to the Harry Pearson dictum that if a component can reproduce classical music well, it can reproduce everything well. The full range of unamplified classical music in real space is the ultimate audio test.
|
@boxer12
As compared to other DACS I have used, the Musetec seems to have what I would call a fuller treble that’s a bit hard to describe. It’s not a tipped up top end, but rather a fullness that has the effect of filling out the overtones of instruments. I wrote about its ultimate effects here.
Nice that you have found a USB cable that works for you. I have experimented with cables of all sorts. The DAC seems to respond to cables: the power cable, the XLR cable and the USB cable. I have used silver cables with success on other DACs, but I have found that at the moment copper cables are the most natural sounding with the Musetec. I continue to use Pearl USB. I went to a chamber orchestra concert last weekend so my ears are calibrated. What happens when I substitute a silver cable (either USB or XLR) is that a couple of my very best recordings sound extra specially good. I’m coming to think of that as a super pleasant (euphonic) surreal effect. However many, many of my recordings then seem a bit strident. Back to copper and everything is back to comfort--back to natural. I know it’s all extremely system dependent and especially due to my close listening space, roughly an 8 foot equilateral triangle--speakers facing forward. I keep looking for something that might add just a tiny bit of that silver magic while maintaining the natural quality and the great sound stage of the Audioquest. However I am aware that solid silver USB cables have worked very well for others here.
@jjss49
I confess to having contributed to the boredom. The good doctor is happy with the Topping and we shall move on.
|
From recent comments here it looks like I am not the only one here experimenting with cables of all sorts. Like may high-end devices I find the Musetec to be very sensitive to cables: power, USB & analog. I noted that in my particular set-up silver USB cables that had been very effective with other components seemed to give a surrealistic (and sometimes very pleasant) sound to many recordings used with the Musetec. Similarly recently with silver XLRs. That's uniquely what I hear in my own system and I am persuaded that there is no cable that can be optimal in every quality system. I know some will think otherwise.
In my last post I said I had "calibrated" my ears by going to a concert given by a small orchestra in an appropriately small performance space. I had missed concert going during the Covid period. When I go to a concert like this I can't help comparing it to listening at home. Calibrating one's ears is not a bad way to put it. When The Absolute Sound was run by Harry Pearson and was worth reading, each of his reviewers was required to attend concerts of unamplified music on a regular basis, to "calibrate" their ears.
The possibility of making a component sound better-than-real reminded me of how friends in the past had sometimes remarked that classical concerts sounded dull compared to their stereo systems. Of course anyone can make their system sound any way they wish. Unfortunately though, I don't think any reviewers these days, print or video, are listening for accuracy to the real thing, rather than simply expressing personal likes and dislikes in audiophile jargon.
|
@yyzsantabarbara
Too bad that Audiogon does not support a "search within thread" function. it would often be a great help.
The best you can do here is to use the general search on "Musetec Bricasti". You will come up with something.
|
@sns
It seems to me that the vocal excercises you outline might work to help "voice" your listening room rather than the component system.
When I go to a dealer or a show I always carry with me, in one form or another, some music files with which I am very familiar. It is easy and inevitable that I would compare what I am hearing there to what I hear at home. It requires no special aural memory to do that. I suppose we have all done that. It may, though, require some insight to separate the different room from the different components. I believe someone here has written of taking his Musetec to a dealer in order to focus more carefully on a different component of interest. IMO that is much the same, and requires similar aural memory skills, when visiting a concert. In fact, avoiding that comparison is virtually impossible--for me.
IMO the Musetec is agnostic when it comes to silver cables. It probably has much more to do with the rest of the system.
You are correct when you say that the Musetec is voiced wonderfully. I would say, accurately. I do not want a component to be "warm." That would be coloration, a distortion. The DAC should be neutral. A cello, piano or bassoon can sound warm and the neutrality of the DAC should let that warm color of the instrument through. I think this is a common misunderstanding of what a good component should accomplish.
It is all too common that components that measure very well will reproduce instruments and voices as flat and colorless. This forum, like others, then find their owners asking for recomendations for amps/preams/DACs that sound warm. One way this often happens is as a request for recommendations of solid state units that sound like tubes.
@dbb
"The Serene review seems impossibly contradictory. More transparent than the Benchmark, but yet more engaging and musical. I would need a lot more information in order to understand what exactly their reporting."
As i wrote earlier, reviews today are "simply expressing personal likes and dislikes in audiophile jargon." Forget asking for more; that’s what they do. Not to mention extolling the detail in the sound of a dentist drill. And with a song he gets a lump in his throat. Who knows? It could be Covid-19!
|
As long as there’s so much talk about preamps I’ll add my $.02.
Within the last two or three years I’ve gone from a fine 2 piece Sim Audio to a Schiit Freya+ to a Rogue RP-7. I have found that what works for me is that the preamp is the perfect place to put some tubes into the system. And some tube rolling can help to tune things up a bit. I am very happy with the Rogue as it seems about as neutral as a tube preamp can be and it has great ergonomics. I discovered when I had the Schiit that I cannot live without a balance control.
|
@americanspirit
When I wrote my last post I thought that the reputations of the Schiit and Rogue preamps were sufficiently well established that I failed to say the following. Remember that my personal judgments are, as best as I can, against live unamplified music. The inexpensive Schiit preamp with tubes was a very clear improvement over the fine transistor one. It was then that I discovered that I MUST have a balance control, which has gone out of favor on many excellent preamps. So I went to the far more expensive Rogue--I needed balanced outputs as well. It proved to be an even greater improvement than was the first change. A testament perhaps to the value of the Rogue’s extremely strong power supply (LPS, of course) in delivering sound quality. I am very happy with the Rogue listening to all recorded music. That should answer question 2.
No doubt you are focusing on the THD number. First I would refer you to all the discussion here (and elsewhere) about the uselessness of the industry type of specification next to the experience of actually listening. One of the problems with the published THD number is that harmonic distortion may take on different shapes--all hidden in the industry-standard number. Generally in units with tubes, the major factor here is that the THD is principally in the second harmonic.
It has long been a controversy in audio. Does the slight bit of second harmonic that is ordinarily introduced by tubes "distort" the sound so as to make it less like the real thing, live music? Or does it restore an element of the sound that is ordinarily diminished slightly in the recording and reproducing process with the result of sounding more like the real thing? And so one can choose solid state or tubes conforming to your answers here, and I chose a tube preamp that is know for having that fine attribute of tubes, but mildly so. I believe that answers your first question. We touched upon a similar issue a while back when discussing feedback in solid state components.
To answer the third question directly. I don’t spend much time on the kind of comparison you ask about. But for a short while when I was experimenting with streaming I was receiving Tidal and Amazon Music at the same time and testing the streams with MusicScope. A series of Shostakovitch symphonic recordings with the Boston Symphony Orchestra under Nelsons was the being released. Tidal had them at 16/44 and Amazon had them at 24/48. While the differences were subtle, they were sufficiently distinct.
|
@americanspirit
I don't think you can use the Mac C22 as an example by which to judge the sound performance of all preamps with tubes. I know that there are those who drool in front of the visual attraction of Macs. However, the build of the C22 and its predecessor twin C70 leaves a lot to be desired. There's a lot of empty space inside the chassis, only two of its six tubes support the preamp function, and it relies on chip op amps in its signal path. If I'm not mistaken all its caps are generic. Typical for Macs there are no reviews to be found and information about their insides is very hard to come by.
@sns is the tube guru in these parts and it would be interesting to hear from him on the general topic of the resolution potential of tubed pres.
|
@americanspirit
There's been such an explosion in "interfaces" as you call them that asking for a low cost option is like asking for a low cost DAC. You'll get a boatload of suggestions, basically as what various people have settled on. The Musetec is good enough to warrant something very good up front. You might also look on the threads here focusing just on that.
My own experience is that I was using a laptop running JRiver and its remote app Eos directly into the DAC by USB. That was enough to impress everyone at my house that I could run music from my phone or pad. Quite by accident I discovered that my Oppo 105 could be used (with some limitations) as a DLNA interface with its coax out to the DAC. That made a significant SQ improvement. Getting the computer out of the direct path yields real benefits. Based on that experience I think any reputable interface that gets the computer out of the way either by going directly or by DLNA will give you a worthwhile result.
I next tried an SOtM SMS-200 with its wall wart also running as a DLNA interface. Surprisingly, that didn't do much better than the Oppo, though it might have improved with a better power supply. I finally wound up with an SOtM sMS-200ultra Neo that I found on the used market. I power it with an Sbooster power supply. That was a very substantial upgrade in sound and I am very happy with the results. I run my own files using the JRiver Eos program on phone or pad and do streaming of Qobuz or Tidal, also through the SOtM, simply by opening BubbleUPnP on the same phone or pad.
I've never seen the usefulness of Roon for my own listening.
|
@sns
Always in a learning mode, I'd love to hear more about the "custom build streamer" that you're using. It's great to know that as you've gone higher and higher in the streaming realm, the 005 can keep up.
|
@yyzsantabarbara
Since the reviewer says he bought the review DAC the real "bargain" comes a few months down the road when it is up for sale at about $27,000 if he follows the road of so many reviewers. So you’ll probably have another chance. He’d clear about $7K.
|
@balja
I do not recall any such talk. It was the position of the maker that if a component improved the sound it would be incorporated into the DAC even at the expense of measurements. This was followed by a good deal of discussion here about sound vs. measurements. The consensus IIRC was that the only thing that mattered was the sound. This was the same with tubes and vinyl, for example that could sound better notwithstanding better measurements from solid state and digital. There are many examples of components that measure very well but have sound that is sterile and uninvolving. The only adjustment, I think, was a refund from the American retailer to the customer who, by the way, never took possession of the DAC or listened to it.
In any event you wrote of your pleasure with the DAC over several months. Eventually you came to replace the Furutech IEC with a Schaffner FN 9260-1-06 IEC which includes a filter. You wrote that it added some holographic effect. Some of us use tubes in the other parts of our systems to get that. I assume you're on 220 volts; is that right? Are you still using the filter? Any other tips?
|
I have used several different USB cables. Most contain all four wires but one was made without No.1, carrying the 5 Volts. On occasion I have blocked the 5 Volt wire. Blocked or not there is no current in the wire when connected to the Musetec. I have never noticed any difference by blocking the wire. As always YMMV. I agree that wire No. 4, the ground should be connected. It is necessary for the "handshake." There are purists that have a switch to disconnect No. 4 after the connection is made for it is no longer necessary. Some others put a resistor on No. 4.
It is, I think, always preferable as here for the USB function within the DAC to have its own internal source of good power. Besides its dependable power source, it can give the user an extra degree of freedom in selecting a USB cable, in that the cable is freed of the powering function which is sometimes thought to compromise digital performance. Hence all the workarounds keeping the 5V line separate from the others.
|
