[Sonic77]

Same here, I am waiting on a black Blu and a Black Hugo 2.

 

[Christer]

I no longer use an Ethernet endpoint like the microRendu or sMS-200. They have their positives but also their negatives. My setup is now straight USB. I have found that if you decide to use a single box machine as both your server and renderer and if you carefully pick out your low power components, replace bad clocks, and power everything with the lowest noise, lowest impedance PSU you can find, this kind of setup can be superior to the Ethernet endpoints. Moreover, you also now have the flexibility of using Chord's ASIO driver for Windows which I have found to be superior in some ways to the built-in drivers that the Linux-based endpoints use. For example, with Chord's ASIO driver, you can play DSD files natively up to DSD512 without skips or pauses. Furthermore, you have greater options with software players including video options like YouTube, Vimeo, Blu-Ray playback, etc. My particular server draws less than 10 watts and generates very little heat. Running it 24/7, I have not had to reboot it once due to a lockup.

While my build is more complicated than many will care to undertake, it is actually quite straightforward. As I evaluated different motherboards, CPUs, RAM, storage devices, output cards, PSUs, clocks, anti-vibration devices and cables, I was able to appreciate the individual contribution of each of these items and while the individual impact of some of these components may be small, their impact is easily heard with BluDave, otherwise, I would not have bothered to include them. Their collective impact, however, is quite large and I could never see myself going back to a simple Mac or PC. If I had to point out the 2 areas that had the greatest impact, it is the PSU and the replacement of noisy clocks. This is not the place to detail the specifics of my build but for those interested, here is a link:

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/...reaming/?page=153&tab=comments#comment-724987

Having done all this, I have a few servers coming in for evaluation including the Zenith SE and the new Antipodes DX Gen3. I am always open to someone creating something better.

Hello again, romaz,
and thanks for updating us with more information regarding both HUGO2 and DAVE/BLU2.
As someone who has just had his first auditions of both I definitely agree with you that HUGO 2 is clearly more resolving than HUGO.
Absolutely no doubt whatsoever in that respect!
But still not really in DAVE territory to me with my reference material.
Via both HEKV2 and Utopia I heard some glare and harshness in the upper midrange and treble with very busy,very complex music where a lot is going on at the same time both in strings winds and percussion.Slightly more obvious with the Utopia
Among several reference pieces I played Rachmaninov's 1 st Piano Concerto from a 24/96 recording where I was not only present when it was recorded a few years ago, but also as if by some magical coincidence it was both rehearsed and performed again here in Singapore by the same orchestra, though with a different pianist yesterday.
The recording features Yevgenev Sudbin and yesterday's concert featured Stephen Hough.
I spent basically most of my day yesterday first at rehearsals from 0930 until noon and in the evening at the concert at the Esplanade.
My ears/brain have now been properly re-calibrated to live acoustic music.
And Grand Piano!
It is easy to forget how percussive a Steinway can sound at close range.
I must add,that BIS are very good at capturing the sound of the SSO in their Esplanade Hall.
And as an extra "icing on the cake" I also heard Prokofiev's stunning Romeo and Juliet Ballet music live here a few nights ago.
I have that piece both in digital form and also in one of the very best and most transparent recordings of all, not only of that work but any classical piece in its direct to disc LP version from Sheffield Labs.
Hearing it live again after having played it several times via my electrostatic speakers, before leaving home last week , I have to add there is still a pretty strong case for vinyl and analogue.
Flow, timbral and tonal accuracy and temporal resolution are still very close to live with good vinyl imho.
Could there also be a case in its favour that unlike DAVE/BLU2 it is not really bandwidth limited???
This whole 1m taps digital theory only works with a bandwidth limited signal does it not?
And neither Rachmaninov PC 1,nor Prokofiev live were neither bandwidth nor dynamically limited live.
Anyway my first take on HUGO 2 without BLU/2 connection is that like HUGO was, H2 is very good for its size but no DAVE.
I have yet to hear it connected to BLU/2.
What do you need to have to do so?
I was honestly MORE impressed with plain rbcd via DAVE/BLU2 than I was with HUGO 2 and hi res via headphones.
And that was from only one very non-promising cd, a Karajan/BPO Albinoni/Mozart early DGG digital rbcd from 1984 which sounded much better via DAVE /BLU2 and headphones than I can had reasons to expect.
Unfortunately it was the only classical music the dealer had.But I will bring some of my reference recordings in their SACD/rbcd versions next week again.
I must admit I was more than a bit surprised at what I heard from my first rbcd auditition of DAVE /BLU2.
I honestly did not expect rbcd to be able to sound this good, EVER!
I may have to re-evaluate and change my stand on rbcd now?
I have a couple of questions too.
How would you rate the differences between DAVE /BLU2 and HUGO2 /BLU2 directly via headphones?
Do you hear similar problems as with HUGO 2 direct to headphones compared to direct via DAVE?
Or is there in your opinion enough power/body with HUGO 2 to drive HEKV2 and Utopia in a HUGO2 BLU2 connection?
On its own I found HUGO2 very resolving but still a bit thin and lean compared to DAVE.
It was particularly obvious with a recording mentioned by someone over at the HUGO 2 thread. I played Alisa Weilerstein's DECCA recording of Dvorak's Cello Concerto and especially with the HEKV2 her cello was a bit thin and lacking in woodiness and timbre via HUGO 2.
Strangly enough via the Utopia the cello sounded clearly "woodier" but fff climaxes were a bit overbright and congested.
Would you say HUGO 2 pairs better with Utopia than HEKV 2?
Enter DAVE and there was suddenly more of the woody timbre from the cello even with HEKV2.
With HEKV2 HUGO2 sometimes sounded not always quite right timbrally and tonally.
It still had a taste of "digital".
Interesting to see that you liked the R15A enough to actually buy them.Transparency/resolution is of course one very important aspect. But soundstage SIZE and sheer power are also important for realism imo.If you want an orchestra to sound reasonably believable via speakers it is not enough with a string quartet sized version. And I am sure you will appreciate your R15As with Mahler! Moreover, the problems you mention could be with the amping.
Another possible limiting factor could be the bass-amp included in the 15As?
With active bass-amping as in the 15A you add two different amping "flavours" distortion characteristics to your meal
For the most transparent sound the bass limited 50hz fullrange CLXs are still among the most transparent electrostatic speakers around imho.
But they don't do Mahler, Wagner or Zarathustra without "subwoofing".
If I read you correctly an rbcd file played via your source solution sounds better than the actual rbcd disc played via BLU2/DAVE?
If so, that contradicts Rob's own take on things a bit doesn't it?
Please keep us posted on your findings regardings sources.
Cheers Christer in Singapore

 

[Malcyg]

Hello again, romaz,
and thanks for updating us with more information regarding both HUGO2 and DAVE/BLU2.
As someone who has just had his first auditions of both I definitely agree with you that HUGO 2 is clearly more resolving than HUGO.
Absolutely no doubt whatsoever in that respect!
But still not really in DAVE territory to me with my reference material.
Via both HEKV2 and Utopia I heard some glare and harshness in the upper midrange and treble with very busy,very complex music where a lot is going on at the same time both in strings winds and percussion.Slightly more obvious with the Utopia
Among several reference pieces I played Rachmaninov's 1 st Piano Concerto from a 24/96 recording where I was not only present when it was recorded a few years ago, but also as if by some magical coincidence it was both rehearsed and performed again here in Singapore by the same orchestra, though with a different pianist yesterday.
The recording features Yevgenev Sudbin and yesterday's concert featured Stephen Hough.
I spent basically most of my day yesterday first at rehearsals from 0930 until noon and in the evening at the concert at the Esplanade.
My ears/brain have now been properly re-calibrated to live acoustic music.
And Grand Piano!
It is easy to forget how percussive a Steinway can sound at close range.
I must add,that BIS are very good at capturing the sound of the SSO in their Esplanade Hall.
And as an extra "icing on the cake" I also heard Prokofiev's stunning Romeo and Juliet Ballet music live here a few nights ago.
I have that piece both in digital form and also in one of the very best and most transparent recordings of all, not only of that work but any classical piece in its direct to disc LP version from Sheffield Labs.
Hearing it live again after having played it several times via my electrostatic speakers, before leaving home last week , I have to add there is still a pretty strong case for vinyl and analogue.
Flow, timbral and tonal accuracy and temporal resolution are still very close to live with good vinyl imho.
Could there also be a case in its favour that unlike DAVE/BLU2 it is not really bandwidth limited???
This whole 1m taps digital theory only works with a bandwidth limited signal does it not?
And neither Rachmaninov PC 1,nor Prokofiev live were neither bandwidth nor dynamically limited live.
Anyway my first take on HUGO 2 without BLU/2 connection is that like HUGO was, H2 is very good for its size but no DAVE.
I have yet to hear it connected to BLU/2.
What do you need to have to do so?
I was honestly MORE impressed with plain rbcd via DAVE/BLU2 than I was with HUGO 2 and hi res via headphones.
And that was from only one very non-promising cd, a Karajan/BPO Albinoni/Mozart early DGG digital rbcd from 1984 which sounded much better via DAVE /BLU2 and headphones than I can had reasons to expect.
Unfortunately it was the only classical music the dealer had.But I will bring some of my reference recordings in their SACD/rbcd versions next week again.
I must admit I was more than a bit surprised at what I heard from my first rbcd auditition of DAVE /BLU2.
I honestly did not expect rbcd to be able to sound this good, EVER!
I may have to re-evaluate and change my stand on rbcd now?
I have a couple of questions too.
How would you rate the differences between DAVE /BLU2 and HUGO2 /BLU2 directly via headphones?
Do you hear similar problems as with HUGO 2 direct to headphones compared to direct via DAVE?
Or is there in your opinion enough power/body with HUGO 2 to drive HEKV2 and Utopia in a HUGO2 BLU2 connection?
On its own I found HUGO2 very resolving but still a bit thin and lean compared to DAVE.
It was particularly obvious with a recording mentioned by someone over at the HUGO 2 thread. I played Alisa Weilerstein's DECCA recording of Dvorak's Cello Concerto and especially with the HEKV2 her cello was a bit thin and lacking in woodiness and timbre via HUGO 2.
Strangly enough via the Utopia the cello sounded clearly "woodier" but fff climaxes were a bit overbright and congested.
Would you say HUGO 2 pairs better with Utopia than HEKV 2?
Enter DAVE and there was suddenly more of the woody timbre from the cello even with HEKV2.
With HEKV2 HUGO2 sometimes sounded not always quite right timbrally and tonally.
It still had a taste of "digital".
Interesting to see that you liked the R15A enough to actually buy them.Transparency/resolution is of course one very important aspect. But soundstage SIZE and sheer power are also important for realism imo.If you want an orchestra to sound reasonably believable via speakers it is not enough with a string quartet sized version. And I am sure you will appreciate your R15As with Mahler! Moreover, the problems you mention could be with the amping.
Another possible limiting factor could be the bass-amp included in the 15As?
With active bass-amping as in the 15A you add two different amping "flavours" distortion characteristics to your meal
For the most transparent sound the bass limited 50hz fullrange CLXs are still among the most transparent electrostatic speakers around imho.
But they don't do Mahler, Wagner or Zarathustra without "subwoofing".
If I read you correctly an rbcd file played via your source solution sounds better than the actual rbcd disc played via BLU2/DAVE?
If so, that contradicts Rob's own take on things a bit doesn't it?
Please keep us posted on your findings regardings sources.
Cheers Christer in Singapore

I shall be interested to hear what you think after your rbcd re-evaluation Christer. Since getting my Blu II, I have bought loads of CD's and not a single new hires download so far. With CD's being so cheap at the moment and sounding so good through the BluDave, I have been picking up a lot of bargains and ripping them. Rips can sound as good and possibly even slightly better than the CD depending upon the ripping and streaming solution. Hires files still sound great of course, but the difference seems less substantial through BluDave. Certainly, rbcd through BluDave sounds better than hires through Dave to me, which is great news because most people will have a very high concentration of standard resolution legacy material.

 

[Malcyg]

I no longer use an Ethernet endpoint like the microRendu or sMS-200. They have their positives but also their negatives. My setup is now straight USB. I have found that if you decide to use a single box machine as both your server and renderer and if you carefully pick out your low power components, replace bad clocks, and power everything with the lowest noise, lowest impedance PSU you can find, this kind of setup can be superior to the Ethernet endpoints. Moreover, you also now have the flexibility of using Chord's ASIO driver for Windows which I have found to be superior in some ways to the built-in drivers that the Linux-based endpoints use. For example, with Chord's ASIO driver, you can play DSD files natively up to DSD512 without skips or pauses. Furthermore, you have greater options with software players including video options like YouTube, Vimeo, Blu-Ray playback, etc. My particular server draws less than 10 watts and generates very little heat. Running it 24/7, I have not had to reboot it once due to a lockup.

While my build is more complicated than many will care to undertake, it is actually quite straightforward. As I evaluated different motherboards, CPUs, RAM, storage devices, output cards, PSUs, clocks, anti-vibration devices and cables, I was able to appreciate the individual contribution of each of these items and while the individual impact of some of these components may be small, their impact is easily heard with BluDave, otherwise, I would not have bothered to include them. Their collective impact, however, is quite large and I could never see myself going back to a simple Mac or PC. If I had to point out the 2 areas that had the greatest impact, it is the PSU and the replacement of noisy clocks. This is not the place to detail the specifics of my build but for those interested, here is a link:

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/...reaming/?page=153&tab=comments#comment-724987

Having done all this, I have a few servers coming in for evaluation including the Zenith SE and the new Antipodes DX Gen3. I am always open to someone creating something better.

Crikey Roy, your link is fascinating and I admire your tenacity, patience and perseverance. I'm sure that your solution will be the ultimate build for you and the satisfaction when you are finished will make it all worthwhile. It's not a route that most of us are likely to follow though - unless you sell me yours! Or is that part of the plan?

I was interested to note that you had gone full circle back to direct USB injection (I think?) rather than multiple boxes or a 'spaghetti solution' as somebody quite comically referred to it. I do think that less can be more and a good Roon core server direct into BluDave can be hard to beat.

Edit - I'm slightly confused. I must not post with a hangover in future! You still currently have SoTM black boxes, will these be superfluous once your server is finished, or will they remain in your system - I thought you were building them out of existence with your server design?

 

[DaveRedRef-III]

I shall be interested to hear what you think after your rbcd re-evaluation Christer. Since getting my Blu II, I have bought loads of CD's and not a single new hires download so far. With CD's being so cheap at the moment and sounding so good through the BluDave, I have been picking up a lot of bargains and ripping them. Rips can sound as good and possibly even slightly better than the CD depending upon the ripping and streaming solution. Hires files still sound great of course, but the difference seems less substantial through BluDave. Certainly, rbcd through BluDave sounds significantly better than hires through Dave which is great news because most people will have a very high concentration of standard resolution legacy material.

That's why the prospect of Davina really intrigues me Malc. Comparing Red Book having been created by an ADC which is every bit as good (pardon the pun) as Dave/Blu II is on the DAC side would be very interesting indeed. It will tell us how much of the distance between RB and Hires is actually 'genuine superior fidelity' and at the same time help us further understand the limits of our hearing. I am sure there is a difference in true fidelity between the two protocols but I still have very high expectations of what Analogue to Davina 705.6khz to 44.1khz to Blu II/Dave to Analogue can sound like. It won't change my CD collection of course but I suspect the true fidelity of RB will be meaningfully higher than we have yet experienced even through Dave/Blu II.

 

[Jawed]

Hires files still sound great of course, but the difference seems less substantial through BluDave. Certainly, rbcd through BluDave sounds significantly better than hires through Dave which is great news because most people will have a very high concentration of standard resolution legacy material.

High resolution music shouldn't have the timing of transients problem that M Scaler solves in 16-bit 44.1KHz, so that would imply BluDAVE should not sound better than DAVE alone with high resolution music.

So, if DAVE alone sounds worse on high resolution, then that would imply there's something wrong with your setup or with the first stage upsampling by DAVE (the latter because high resolution music still needs some upsampling to 16FS).

The description of the difference as "significant" is pretty strange. I'm certainly not saying you're wrong or imagining things - simply that I'm puzzled.

Now playing: Drugstore - Super Glider

 

[DaveRedRef-III]

Maybe the real benefit of hires files won't start to be realised until Rob produces an Upscaler with true 18-20bit accuracy

 

[Malcyg]

High resolution music shouldn't have the timing of transients problem that M Scaler solves in 16-bit 44.1KHz, so that would imply BluDAVE should not sound better than DAVE alone with high resolution music.

So, if DAVE alone sounds worse on high resolution, then that would imply there's something wrong with your setup or with the first stage upsampling by DAVE (the latter because high resolution music still needs some upsampling to 16FS).

The description of the difference as "significant" is pretty strange. I'm certainly not saying you're wrong or imagining things - simply that I'm puzzled.

Now playing: Drugstore - Super Glider

BluDave does sound 'significantly' better than Dave alone, irrespective of the source material and I am not alone in thinking that. I did edit my post to say that rbcd through BluDave sounded significantly better 'to me' on the basis that some may not agree, but your reply was before I made the edit. I usually try to avoid over stating things, so I will make some direct comparisons and confirm whether the term 'significant' is over stating things, but I suspect not. I have removed the word 'significantly' until I have had chance to reaffirm for myself in order to avoid potentially misleading anyone.

Have you heard BluDave vs Dave alone yourself? If you haven't, you might be surprised. If you have, your own observations would be interesting.

 

[Jawed]

I've not heard BluDAVE. I have only heard DAVE properly for the last two weeks, despite owning it since February, due to my recent switch to TOSLink instead of USB.

My intention is to have a dem of Blu 2 at home with DAVE, unless I can be sure that a dem somewhere else will have DAVE properly setup (optical). I suppose that will be next summer or later, due to the high demand for Blu 2.

I wonder if it's possible that a part of people's preference for BluDAVE versus DAVE alone, when streaming via USB, is that BluDAVE is isolating DAVE from USB RF problems. OK, so Blu 2 introduces a BNC connection RF problem, but is that worse than the USB RF problem?

Is BluDAVE able to reduce RF problems caused by USB? Or does it actually make them worse? Several people had problems making USB into Blu 2 sound as good as playing CDs. Has anyone tested for this difference with adequate ferrite filtering on the BNC cables?

In other words, if the BNC cable is properly filtered with ferrites, is there still a difference between USB into Blu 2 versus CDs played on Blu 2?

Now playing: Arcade Fire - Neighborhood #1 (Tunnels)

 

[JaZZ]

Jawed, I recall that Rob thinks hi-res doesn't make WTA filtering obsolete, as it still suffers from timing problems, even 384 kHz – which was a surprise to me (and still hard to comprehend).

 

[Malcyg]

I've not heard BluDAVE. I have only heard DAVE properly for the last two weeks, despite owning it since February, due to my recent switch to TOSLink instead of USB.

My intention is to have a dem of Blu 2 at home with DAVE, unless I can be sure that a dem somewhere else will have DAVE properly setup (optical). I suppose that will be next summer or later, due to the high demand for Blu 2.

I wonder if it's possible that a part of people's preference for BluDAVE versus DAVE alone, when streaming via USB, is that BluDAVE is isolating DAVE from USB RF problems. OK, so Blu 2 introduces a BNC connection RF problem, but is that worse than the USB RF problem?

Is BluDAVE able to reduce RF problems caused by USB? Or does it actually make them worse? Several people had problems making USB into Blu 2 sound as good as playing CDs. Has anyone tested for this difference with adequate ferrite filtering on the BNC cables?

In other words, if the BNC cable is properly filtered with ferrites, is there still a difference between USB into Blu 2 versus CDs played on Blu 2?

Now playing: Arcade Fire - Neighborhood #1 (Tunnels)

I posted many pages back when I first got Blu II mentioning that CD playback was better than hires files and I questioned whether M Scaler was optimised for rb resolution. Rob confirmed categorically that this was not the case and that hires files should derive similar benefit from M Scaler. This led me to investigate my streaming solution and confirmed that noise/interference in that environment was the culprit. I rarely use the Blu CD player now since files via USB sound as good and sometimes better than CD playback.

 

[Christer]

I shall be interested to hear what you think after your rbcd re-evaluation Christer. Since getting my Blu II, I have bought loads of CD's and not a single new hires download so far. With CD's being so cheap at the moment and sounding so good through the BluDave, I have been picking up a lot of bargains and ripping them. Rips can sound as good and possibly even slightly better than the CD depending upon the ripping and streaming solution. Hires files still sound great of course, but the difference seems less substantial through BluDave. Certainly, rbcd through BluDave sounds better than hires through Dave to me, which is great news because most people will have a very high concentration of standard resolution legacy material.

Hello Malcyg,
If what I already heard from that one DGG rbcd is a reliable indication of what really well recorded 16/44.1 might deliver via Blu2 I will let you know.
DGG was never really famous for their good sound.But some of their artists both were and in some cases still are among the best in the world.
I'll go rbcd hunting tomorrow.
I had only brought one rbcd on this trip and it was natively recorded in DSD 64 so it may not be the best choice for really serious comparisons. But I have it both as hybrid SACD and DSD masterfile.
Judging from how surprisingly good even the 1984 DGG sounded via BLU2/DAVE, I may even have to admit that rbcd via BLU2/DAVE can sound better than DSD 64?
So far on all systems and all other rbcd disc players I have played this reference file via the rbcd layer has fallen short of both the SACD layer and DSD file playing even on the most expensive systems I have used it on and trust me, they are many!
Whether BLU2 /DAVE will change that score, once and for all, still remains to be heard.
But don't you worry once heard, I won't keep my opinion a secret for very long.
Meanwhile I have a question for you . How do you rip your rbcds?
I have some rips made with iTunes on my macs. But they don't sound even nearly as good as hi res via any of my DACs.
Cheers Christer

 

[Malcyg]

Hello Malcyg,
If what I already heard from that one DGG rbcd is a reliable indication of what really well recorded 16/44.1 might deliver via Blu2 I will let you know.
DGG was never really famous for their good sound.But some of their artists both were and in some cases still are among the best in the world.
I'll go rbcd hunting tomorrow.
I had only brought one rbcd on this trip and it was natively recorded in DSD 64 so it may not be the best choice for really serious comparisons. But I have it both as hybrid SACD and DSD masterfile.
Judging from how surprisingly good even the 1984 DGG sounded via BLU2/DAVE, I may even have to admit that rbcd via BLU2/DAVE can sound better than DSD 64?
So far on all systems and all other rbcd disc players I have played this reference file via the rbcd layer has fallen short of both the SACD layer and DSD file playing even on the most expensive systems I have used it on and trust me, they are many!
Whether BLU2 /DAVE will change that score, once and for all, still remains to be heard.
But don't you worry once heard, I won't keep my opinion a secret for very long.
Meanwhile I have a question for you . How do you rip your rbcds?
I have some rips made with iTunes on my macs. But they don't sound even nearly as good as hi res via any of my DACs.
Cheers Christer

I look forward to your 'conversion'.

I have ripped all my CD's to flac over many years using dbPoweramp software with compression set to standard, which is 5 I think from memory. Since getting the Zenith SE, I tried ripping direct via its built in CD drive and was surprised to find that it sounded marginally better than my own ripped files. I don't know why this is but suspect that it may be the standard compression level on my files. dbPoweramp say that there is no difference in sound between 0 and 5 compression, but I have since read some folk swearing that zero compression flac files sound better due to the fact that less work is required to unbundlle the files which generates less electrical noise in the streamer. I have ripped all my recent CD purchases using the inbuilt mechanism due to a) much more convenient and b) apparently better sound quality. The differences are small and I certainly have no intention of going back and uncompressing all my flac files, but when I say file playback can slightly better CD playback, it is those files ripped and played back on the Zenith SE. Hires downloads of course too.

One very pleasant discovery is that I am finding that Tidal through the Roon server can sometimes sound as good as files and even better on occasion. Until now, it has always come a distant third behind files and CD's.

 

[lovethatsound]

Hi Malcyg, just out of interest have you tried ripping using WAV instead of FLAC with the Zenith SE?

 

[Malcyg]

Hi Malcyg, just out of interest have you tried ripping using WAV instead of FLAC with the Zenith SE?

No, I have never tried WAV. Like many I suspect, I went with flac years ago due to the greater tagging and organisational capabilities but it has occurred to me that now, with Roon, those aspects may be less important since Roon handles all of that and I had been thinking of trying ripping to WAV to see how that sounded. I had dismissed the prospect of sound quality differences in the past but More recently, I don't dismiss anything without trying it first.

Do you find a difference with WAV?