[Jackula]

Listened to the 4.07b3 for awhile on parallel/internal clock, the bass is much better balanced than b4. The dynamics and attack is best of the lot, separation is better too but not as good as b1. Problem with both b3 and b4 is the sound is too smooth, which some may prefer but not me, I prefer the sound with all its nuances as though you were listening live. 4.07b1/parallel still the best overall sound on my setup with internal clock, spot on tonal balance, body and the most convincing transparency, detail, soundstage and imaging.

 

[rsbrsvp]

I agree that 4.07b3 and 4.07b4 are smoother than 4.07b1. 4.07b1 and 3.993 have best detail of all of them with least smoothing.

3.993 is better with external with better bigger deeper bass and better imaging and 4.07b1 better with internal and providing a more open style sound. My issue with 4..07b1 is I find it a bit thin and I am psychologically pained that my $5,000 extremal clock is going to waste..

I could live with any of these.

We need that button on the DI to allow multiple firmware options.

 

[Jackula]

I agree that 4.07b3 and 4.07b4 are smoother than 4.07b1. 4.07b1 and 3.993 have best detail of all of them with least smoothing.

3.993 is better with external with better bigger deeper bass and better imaging and 4.07b1 better with internal and providing a more open style sound. My issue with 4..07b1 is I find it a bit thin and I am psychologically pained that my $5,000 extremal clock is going to waste..

I could live with any of these. Kingwa- I need that button on the DI to allow multiple firmware options PLEASE....

The "thinness" could be a number of things, it can also sound too thick depending on synergy. When I replaced my HE9 with the HE1, everything sounded too thick and quite congested. I had to change cables back to what used to sound "too thin" with my HE9 as pre. Maybe one day when I have an external clock my opinion will change (my Morion was sent back), but I am not moving from 4.07b1 in the mean time.

 

[FredA]

I think it should be possible to combine the sound of 4.07b1 with internal to the sound of b3 or b4 with external into the same new fw. Not sure about you suggestion @rsbrsvp .

 

[FredA]

The "thinness" could be a number of things, it can also sound too thick depending on synergy. When I replaced my HE9 with the HE1, everything sounded too thick and quite congested. I had to change cables back to what used to sound "too thin" with my HE9 as pre. Maybe one day when I have an external clock my opinion will change (my Morion was sent back), but I am not moving from 4.07b1 in the mean time.

What happened with the Morion, Jack?

 

[Jackula]

What happened with the Morion, Jack?

It stopped working one day, Queen generously provided a return label so I didn't have to pay a cent returning it. Apparently it turned out to be the faulty power supply they sent me.

Afterwards I was reconsidering buying the Mutec Ref 10 or HE1 as my wife would only approve one purchase, so I consulted Kingwa and he said the latter will bring a bigger improvement, so now I have a HE1 and no external clock.

 

[rsbrsvp]

I just re-flashed my FW between 3.93b2, 4.07b1, 4.07b3, and 4.07b4.

I listed to a specific song on each FW and took note of the differences- which by the way were obvious. Then I repeated this entire process a second time and third time and took note.

Everything was done using my Mutec external clock, parallel mode, usb in from my iso regen and i2s out.

First of all- I am now convinced I was wrong about the 3. FW versions along with the 4.07b1 having more detail. 4.07b1 does seem to have the most detail retrieval at first listen and does have a very nice soundstage and excellent separation. However I now believe that 4.07b3 and 4.07b4 have either equal detail or very slightly less with a much nicer smoother more analogue tone IMHO; a kind of a honey glazing. I think the more sterile and harsh tone of 3.93b2 and 4.07b1 give the initial impression that the resolution is superior, but after going through this process and comparing the FW's multiple times, I don't think I'm loosing much in the resolution department with 4.07b3 and 4.07b4 if any and it just sounds noticeably more pleasant to my ears.

4.07b4 is more focused and has fuller, more powerful sound while 4.07b3 has the same basic tonality (honey glazed) as 4.07b4 but with a wider soundstage- further back in room feel.

I could really see how these perspectives could change with different system factors. Just to give an example of one such factor, I use i-tunes in my mac mini to play my music. i-tunes provides a very non-colored colder style presentation and because of this I believe I appreciate the honey glaze of 4.07b3 and 4.07b4. However if I switch to Audrivana which has that honey glaze built in, I can easily appreciate 4.07b1 more because no more honey is needed.

There is no right and wrong here. Thanks to everyone for the fun conversation.....

 

[Wynnytsky]

Apparently it turned out to be the faulty power supply they sent me.

I never even tried Queen's switching supply. I have the Morion on HDPlex's 2amp low noise tap and the uptone ether regen on HDPlex's 8amp tap (replacing the 4.8amp switching unit it came with). It's the swiss army knife of LPSs.

 

[nazhmd]

I agree. The 3d experience is excellent.

I also agree, “ In my setup” the 4.07b3 has the widest soundstage, best timbre, 3D soundscape and bass using USB/Parallel/I2S settings into my PS Audio DSD Sr DAC windom FW.

 

[nazhmd]

Forgot to mention I am also using the external Morion OCXO. Incredible realism. I am set, a BIG THANK YOU to Kingwa

 

[FredA]

4.07b3 has meaty timbres. Excellent presence and soundstaging. Still my favorite.

 

[nazhmd]

4.07b3 has meaty timbres. Excellent presence and soundstaging. Still my favorite.

Yes Sir were in the same page.

 

[Wynnytsky]

I bounced back and forth between 4.07b3 and 4.07b4 today (forgetting to engage external clock).

b3 is sound stage centric and is the best yet at this familiar yet safe/conservative production.

b4 is new to my ears in the way that it spotlights individual performers. I'm more engaged and it holds my attention like a good film.

 

[rsbrsvp]

b3 and b4 are clearly the best overall to my ears after multiple tests switching between many FW's and listening. No other FW is in play any more.

b3 has the bigger soundstage and b4 is a bit more intimate and more front row. Both have full bodied analogue sweetness which is addictive; resolution is not compromised.

 

[rsbrsvp]

Many have commented on the incredible 3D soundstage of 4.07b3.

I was wondering if anyone feels that the soundstage is not realistic?

The more I listen to it- as much as I love the super wide and deep soundstage, the more I detect something about it does not sound convincing;- perhaps slightly artificial.. I can't put my finger on just what the issue is. Could just be I am not used to it yet.....

I am switching several times a day between b3 and b4 and every time I switch back to b3 from b4 I immediately detect that 3D depth- just many rows further back in the audience- but not sure it is realistic. Could be a headphone issue which is not an issue with speakers.

b4 sounds more correct/believable and I also like the more powerful front row sound of it- but still not sure yet.

edit: b4 has slightly better detail and separation than b3 as well- a half step less foggy and more clear in direct comparison.......