[Drewligarchy]

Deleted

 

[Drewligarchy]

For those of you who have a Bircasti M1 SE with the new Ethernet card, I am curious if you hear the same thing I do on ethernet vs USB.

On Ethernet I hear an upper midrange dip (maybe 1-3k), vs the USB. Of course this could also be a peak on the USB due to noise.

The effect: The ethernet is not fatiguing at all. I can listen to bright orchestral passages with no fatigue. Timbre is spot on, but the pitch/color/tone of the instruments seem muted. Soundstage is wide and deep. I like to think of audio in terms of coolers. This reminds me of a cool color temperature that (on a tv for instance).

On USB, pitch color is spot on, but timbre is harder to discern between instruments. Orchestral pieces can be too sharp, and cause listener fatigue. Soundstage is a little closed in. Color temperature is warmer.

Differences aren't night and day, but are not subtle - and easy to pick out in a blind test.Neither is "brighter" than the other. I sense this almost entirely in the midrange. Extension is great with both - however - the subtle differences in mid range give the overall sound a completely different characteristic.

Could USB noise potentially be the cause of this coloration, and is the ethernet to I2S internally in the M1 the first time I'm hearing flat midrange response - or is the M1 voiced in this way to prevent listener fatigue.

As a result the USB is immediately more impressive, where the ethernet comes off initially sounding dull but it much cleaner, more precise, and less fatiguing. I'm trying to dial in this DAC in the right way for my system so any help is appreciated.

 

[smodtactical]

Anyone compare the bricasti m1 se to the Dave or denafrips Terminator?

 

[musicman59]

For those of you who have a Bircasti M1 SE with the new Ethernet card, I am curious if you hear the same thing I do on ethernet vs USB.

On Ethernet I hear an upper midrange dip (maybe 1-3k), vs the USB. Of course this could also be a peak on the USB due to noise.

The effect: The ethernet is not fatiguing at all. I can listen to bright orchestral passages with no fatigue. Timbre is spot on, but the pitch/color/tone of the instruments seem muted. Soundstage is wide and deep. I like to think of audio in terms of coolers. This reminds me of a cool color temperature that (on a tv for instance).

On USB, pitch color is spot on, but timbre is harder to discern between instruments. Orchestral pieces can be too sharp, and cause listener fatigue. Soundstage is a little closed in. Color temperature is warmer.

Differences aren't night and day, but are not subtle - and easy to pick out in a blind test.Neither is "brighter" than the other. I sense this almost entirely in the midrange. Extension is great with both - however - the subtle differences in mid range give the overall sound a completely different characteristic.

Could USB noise potentially be the cause of this coloration, and is the ethernet to I2S internally in the M1 the first time I'm hearing flat midrange response - or is the M1 voiced in this way to prevent listener fatigue.

As a result the USB is immediately more impressive, where the ethernet comes off initially sounding dull but it much cleaner, more precise, and less fatiguing. I'm trying to dial in this DAC in the right way for my system so any help is appreciated.

I did not make that comparison. I upgraded one of my M1 SE to the new M21 and I did compared the AES input to the Ethernet. For both inputs I used the Nordost Heimdall II on their respective version. The source for the AES was an Aurender N10. I used the same song for both which came from the same source.
What I found was that the AES has a little bit wider soundstage presentation but the Ethernet has a taller soundstage presentation and a significantly deeper and more layered soundstage presentation. It also has a much cleaner sound like if a veil was removed from in front of the speakers.

As a result I sold the Aurender N10. I also just sent back my other M1 SE back to be upgraded to the latest digital board and add the network card so I will be selling my Aurender N100H

 

[chesebert]

Anyone compare the bricasti m1 se to the Dave or denafrips Terminator?

At these prices, you absolutely must audition the gear before purchasing. Few years back, I spent quite some time audition various high-end gear (including Bricasti DAC) before settling on Linn. Looking at my own notes and compare with notes from other reviewers, form members, and Internet in general, the only conclusion I can draw from all the reading is that I do not hear the same as any other person at all times. For example, I may have the same opinion relating to few pieces as a reviewer but then have totally opposite reaction on another piece of gear. If you are serious about purchasing, I would advise against reading any review until you have actually heard the piece.

I no longer buy blind unless it's an upgrade within a brand that I already own or have extensive experience with.

 

[chesebert]

For those of you who have a Bircasti M1 SE with the new Ethernet card, I am curious if you hear the same thing I do on ethernet vs USB.

On Ethernet I hear an upper midrange dip (maybe 1-3k), vs the USB. Of course this could also be a peak on the USB due to noise.

The effect: The ethernet is not fatiguing at all. I can listen to bright orchestral passages with no fatigue. Timbre is spot on, but the pitch/color/tone of the instruments seem muted. Soundstage is wide and deep. I like to think of audio in terms of coolers. This reminds me of a cool color temperature that (on a tv for instance).

On USB, pitch color is spot on, but timbre is harder to discern between instruments. Orchestral pieces can be too sharp, and cause listener fatigue. Soundstage is a little closed in. Color temperature is warmer.

Differences aren't night and day, but are not subtle - and easy to pick out in a blind test.Neither is "brighter" than the other. I sense this almost entirely in the midrange. Extension is great with both - however - the subtle differences in mid range give the overall sound a completely different characteristic.

Could USB noise potentially be the cause of this coloration, and is the ethernet to I2S internally in the M1 the first time I'm hearing flat midrange response - or is the M1 voiced in this way to prevent listener fatigue.

As a result the USB is immediately more impressive, where the Ethernet comes off initially sounding dull but it much cleaner, more precise, and less fatiguing. I'm trying to dial in this DAC in the right way for my system so any help is appreciated.

I am not surprised by your finding. Ethernet is a much better and more robust protocol than USB for transmission of audio data. USB DAC is by definition a compromise.

If you want your USB DAC to sound natural without noise contamination, you will need to provide galvanic isolation between the source and decoder, lift the ground (eliminate ground plane noise) and provide a separate source of clean power for the 5V line to power the USB receiver on the decoder.

 

[musicman59]

At these prices, you absolutely must audition the gear before purchasing. Few years back, I spent quite some time audition various high-end gear (including Bricasti DAC) before settling on Linn. Looking at my own notes and compare with notes from other reviewers, form members, and Internet in general, the only conclusion I can draw from all the reading is that I do not hear the same as any other person at all times. For example, I may have the same opinion relating to few pieces as a reviewer but then have totally opposite reaction on another piece of gear. If you are serious about purchasing, I would advise against reading any review until you have actually heard the piece.

I no longer buy blind unless it's an upgrade within a brand that I already own or have extensive experience with.

100% in agreement. That is a very solid advise.

 

[musicman59]

I am not surprised by your finding. Ethernet is a much better and more robust protocol than USB for transmission of audio data. USB DAC is by definition a compromise.

If you want your USB DAC to sound natural without noise contamination, you will need to provide galvanic isolation between the source and decoder, lift the ground (eliminate ground plane noise) and provide a separate source of clean power for the 5V line to power the USB receiver on the decoder.

I agree with you in regards of the USB but my actual comparison was to the AES digital output and to me the Ethernet input still won.

 

[Random Lunatic]

Can anyone comment on/compare how the M1 compares to popular newer dacs, like the RME ADI 2, Chord, Denafrips or the like? I'm wondering, considering the M1 is now 8 years old - but I'm considering using one as dac/preamp for my speaker system.
I can't demo it at the moment, but the descriptions of its sound I've seen are promising.

 

[bigfatpaulie]

Can anyone comment on/compare how the M1 compares to popular newer dacs, like the RME ADI 2, Chord, Denafrips or the like? I'm wondering, considering the M1 is now 8 years old - but I'm considering using one as dac/preamp for my speaker system.
I can't demo it at the moment, but the descriptions of its sound I've seen are promising.

I've had an M1 and DAVE and currently have a ADI-2. The M1 is an outstanding DAC - no amount of time will ever take that away from it.

Interfaces change, good sound doesn't.

 

[musicman59]

All Bricasti DACs have now a new digital board with a more powerful processor.
Brian Zonler from Bricasti does not stop his research and development.
A group of friends did an A/B comparison between the M1, M21 and Bartok. The result was the M1 and Bartok very close and the M21 better. One of them bought the M21 and the other due to budget ordered an M3. His comment on the M3 is that it performs well above its price.
If you have a high performance system I would recommend you take a listen to the M21. Specially if you want to drive a speakers amplifier. The M21 has an even better volume control than the M1. If you do analog then take a look at the M12.

 

[Random Lunatic]

I've had an M1 and DAVE and currently have a ADI-2. The M1 is an outstanding DAC - no amount of time will ever take that away from it.

Interfaces change, good sound doesn't.

I’m curious what prompted you to change to the RME and how it compares though - good sound may not change, but especially digital technology does advance rapidly; I’m worried if the M1 can keep up in details, separation etc, the technicalities...

 

[Random Lunatic]

All Bricasti DACs have now a new digital board with a more powerful processor.
Brian Zonler from Bricasti does not stop his research and development.
A group of friends did an A/B comparison between the M1, M21 and Bartok. The result was the M1 and Bartok very close and the M21 better. One of them bought the M21 and the other due to budget ordered an M3. His comment on the M3 is that it performs well above its price.
If you have a high performance system I would recommend you take a listen to the M21. Specially if you want to drive a speakers amplifier. The M21 has an even better volume control than the M1. If you do analog then take a look at the M12.

The reason I’m asking is that there is an M1 (from 2015 I think) on offer locally, second hand - so I don’t really have other options in that sense. I’m basically choosing between it, an RME or Chord Hugo/Qutest

I did see some mention the M1 might have a lossy volume control, which seems rather inexcusable at that price...

 

[bigfatpaulie]

I’m curious what prompted you to change to the RME and how it compares though - good sound may not change, but especially digital technology does advance rapidly; I’m worried if the M1 can keep up in details, separation etc, the technicalities...

Those things you are talking about - details, separation etc, the technicalities - all relate to good sound. What changes is in the interface (SPDIF, TOS-Link, USB, etc) and formats (MP3, FLAC, MAQ, etc). Good sound is the same as it was 30 years ago.

I switched from a M1 to a DAVE + DNA Stellaris then scaled waaaaaaaaaaaay back to just the RME+HD600's. That isn't saying that the RME is as good as the others, it is saying that my focus has changed. Though, the RME was very deliberately chosen.

I'll say it again, the M1 is an outstanding DAC. You aren't missing anything with it. At least not any more than with any other high(ish) end DAC. At that level, you need to worry more about signatures than technicalities, despite what some audio reviewers will tell you (gotta keep that word count up!).

 

[Random Lunatic]

Those things you are talking about - details, separation etc, the technicalities - all relate to good sound. What changes is in the interface (SPDIF, TOS-Link, USB, etc) and formats (MP3, FLAC, MAQ, etc). Good sound is the same as it was 30 years ago.

I switched from a M1 to a DAVE + DNA Stellaris then scaled waaaaaaaaaaaay back to just the RME+HD600's. That isn't saying that the RME is as good as the others, it is saying that my focus has changed. Though, the RME was very deliberately chosen.

I'll say it again, the M1 is an outstanding DAC. You aren't missing anything with it. At least not any more than with any other high(ish) end DAC. At that level, you need to worry more about signatures than technicalities, despite what some audio reviewers will tell you (gotta keep that word count up!).

True about reviewers - can’t stand people waxing lyrical for 2 pages just for the sake of it!
It is true that the aspects that define good sound have remained the same, but the level of technicalities that can be achieved have vastly increased/come down in price, at least with some component types, more than others.

but the reason I inquire is that from what I’ve been able to find, the Bricasti supposedly strikes a good balance between being ‘technical’, but without being bright or sharp sounding like fx chord is often accused of.

Thank you for responding by the way, was honestly not expecting to find much info about the dac, and having to pass it up as a result