[hattrick15]

Interesting stuff Jawed, albeit slightly advanced beyond where I feel a need to understand at times. You have given me a lot of useful information in the past about noise and how to address it, mainly by PM, which I appreciate. With regard to the testing that you suggest, that might well be one more for @ray-dude who seems to have a healthy, almost @romaz like, appetite for testing. As @Triode User put it recently, you can lose the will to live a little with extended testing and, like him, I am in full sit back and enjoy mode.

I had two overriding objectives with my system which were both more difficult to achieve than I thought they would be. The first, as you know, was to get my file playback up to and past the level of the Blu CD. I got there in the end and now I quite clearly prefer file playback to Blu II CD in terms of sound quality, let alone convenience. (@AndrewOld - there’s simply no need to say it!)

My second objective was to get my speakers to sound as good, or better, than my HE-1000 V2 plugged directly into BluDave - a tall order indeed. I have achieved this at last and the sound quality that I am getting now is really quite astonishing and more even than I was aiming for. But it has taken more time and certainly cost more than I would have liked.

One component in achieving this, and I hate to admit it, was the ferrites that @marcmccalmont generously sent to me to complement the CA cables that we both have. I can’t recall exactly what he posted about all that now, but I know from the PM’s that we have exchanged that we are hearing very similar results in our systems. The other final piece of the jigsaw was the SotM sCLK-OCKX10 Master Clock for the tX-U. That together with the necessary sPS-500 power supply means that I now have a trifecta of little black boxes! Having spoken out on here against multiple black box solutions as well as ferrites more recently, it is not easy for me to admit all this publicly, but I feel obliged to do so and take any stick that might come my way.

Having said all that, it all sounds so incredibly good that I don’t care. If all my name dropping here seems like an Oscars acceptance, it is probably because I am done now and therefore unlikely to be posting as much moving forwards.

Before you stop posting, can you detail your audio chain of components? I'm also on a quest to get my file playback up to (or past) the level of the Blu CD. I'm close, but looking to see what your solution ended up being to see what I might try next. Thanks.

 

[Malcyg]

Before you stop posting, can you detail your audio chain of components? I'm also on a quest to get my file playback up to (or past) the level of the Blu CD. I'm close, but looking to see what your solution ended up being to see what I might try next. Thanks.

Yes, ok. The simple audio chain is:

Zenith SE > SOtm tX-USBUltra > BluDave - the tX-U is enhanced by a Master Clock and > represents a USB connection.

The most important step was the Zenith SE server which enabled me to continue to use Roon whilst cutting out the PC and the data round trip through the network which removes a lot of noise. I think you do similar here yourself but with a different server - ROCK if I recall correctly? This got me very close to the Blu CD - file playback had slightly better focus and sharper timing with a deeper, more controlled bass but it lacked some subtlety and finesse compared to the CD. It’s hard for me to explain, but this subtlety and finesse gave a greater sense of air and a more holographic, 3 dimensional quality which made the soundstage seem deeper and more realistic. I’m not good with audiophile terminology, but percussion sounded more accurate, cymbals had no digital harshness.

I then ran the output of the SE into a SOtm tX-USBUltra. This brought out the subtle aspects that the SE had previously lacked by comparison to the CD. At this point, I was preferring files to CD because it combined the best bits of both. Another positive was that I had always considered streaming Tidal (or Qobuz previously) to be inferior to playing local files but now, the gap was closing quite significantly and, at times, it was hard to tell them apart. In fact, on occasion, Tidal was just as good.

The final piece was the introduction of the SOtM sCLK-OCKX10 Master Clock. I am still getting used to this, but it has already taken it to the point where I now quite clearly prefer this chain to the CD. The Master Clock requires its own power supply, hence 3 black boxes, and I would far prefer to have it all in one box myself. I don’t see why I can’t, but it is what it is right now.

I have no ferrites at all on the two USB cables between SE > tX-U > BluDave and I do have ferrites on the two BNC cables between Blu and Dave.

It may seem a slightly complex route, and it’s certainly more than I expected when I set out, but I expect to keep all aspects of the system in place for as long as they - or I - last.

For your system, it may be worth getting a tX-U on trial and seeing what you think.

That’s it - hope that helps.

 

[esimms86]

Interesting stuff Jawed, albeit slightly advanced beyond where I feel a need to understand at times. You have given me a lot of useful information in the past about noise and how to address it, mainly by PM, which I appreciate. With regard to the testing that you suggest, that might well be one more for @ray-dude who seems to have a healthy, almost @romaz like, appetite for testing. As @Triode User put it recently, you can lose the will to live a little with extended testing and, like him, I am in full sit back and enjoy mode.

I had two overriding objectives with my system which were both more difficult to achieve than I thought they would be. The first, as you know, was to get my file playback up to and past the level of the Blu CD. I got there in the end and now I quite clearly prefer file playback to Blu II CD in terms of sound quality, let alone convenience. (@AndrewOld - there’s simply no need to say it!)

My second objective was to get my speakers to sound as good, or better, than my HE-1000 V2 plugged directly into BluDave - a tall order indeed. I have achieved this at last and the sound quality that I am getting now is really quite astonishing and more even than I was aiming for. But it has taken more time and certainly cost more than I would have liked.

One component in achieving this, and I hate to admit it, was the ferrites that @marcmccalmont generously sent to me to complement the CA cables that we both have. I can’t recall exactly what he posted about all that now, but I know from the PM’s that we have exchanged that we are hearing very similar results in our systems. The other final piece of the jigsaw was the SotM sCLK-OCKX10 Master Clock for the tX-U. That together with the necessary sPS-500 power supply means that I now have a trifecta of little black boxes! Having spoken out on here against multiple black box solutions as well as ferrites more recently, it is not easy for me to admit all this publicly, but I feel obliged to do so and take any stick that might come my way.

Having said all that, it all sounds so incredibly good that I don’t care. If all my name dropping here seems like an Oscars acceptance, it is probably because I am done now and therefore unlikely to be posting as much moving forwards.

OK Malcyg, you’ve gone and opened up Pandora’s Box. As far as I can tell, you’re the only posting person on the internet at this moment (worldwide, no less) to admit to owning the SOTM sCLK-OCKX10 Master Clock. The other Master Clock owners that I’m aware of have the Mutec Ref 10. This begs a few questions:

1)why did you go the SoTM route rather the Mutec route? System synergy with the tX-U or were there, perhaps, other reasons(like not having to buy the Mutec MC-3+ usb)?
2)are you using it in your system without the Mutec MC-3+ usb(i.e., Master Clock into tX-U and then tX-U into Blu2)? Does this obviate the need for an MC-3+?
3)I assume that you’re running the Melco N1 into the tX-U into Blu2, etc. Yes?
4)did you also purchase BNC cables(50 or 75 ohm?) from SoTM to connect the Master Clock to the tX-U?
5)With apologies to Marvel Comics and Spiderman(and you, of course), does this make you Doc OCK?

and finally(mercifully):
5)does this give you the Oscar for Three Black Boxes Outside Ebbing, Missouri?

OK, so after typing up my post and hitting Reply, I see that Malcyg has already answered my questions about his signal chain. Mea culpa.

 

[Malcyg]

Should have been reply to @esimms86

Yeah, that happens!

I was persuaded into trying the tX-U by Romaz who told me that it did wonderful things to his Zenith SE although, of course, he also runs the Mutec Ref 10. I was sceptical but I tried it and I liked it. In answer to your questions, I went SoTM instead of Mutec for three reasons:

1) The hope of better synergy with the tX-U
2) The hope that it may avail newer technology than the Mutec being a brand new design
3) I couldn’t find a UK dealer for the Mutec which makes it harder to do a ‘try and return if not impressed’ arrangement

The 3rd one is not the least important by the way, quite the contrary. I only ever buy something if I get agreement that I can return it if not satisfied. Same applied to Blu II and Dave.

I don’t actually understand your questions about the cables or MC3+, but I run it as per my previous post - SE>tX-U>BluDave. The tX-U connects to the Master by way of a BNC cable - and no, I do not have any ferrites on it! Not yet anyway! Oh, and the cable is just a generic 50 ohm cable at this point.

Well, yes, I have 3 black boxes now that I never wanted or intended, that’s for sure. And I’d rather be Spidey than Doc Oc!

 

[Malcyg]

Whilst I am on here posting, here is quite a funny story that those of you with wives to get past with our bits of gear will possibly relate to. I posted the fact that Marc had sent me some ferrites to try out and before I started, I fitted and listened to my original cheap Canare cables fitted out with ferrites first just to get a baseline of where I had come from. I left the Blu II on, put Dave on mute and switched off the power amp before swapping back to the CA cables but must’ve knocked the amp back on with my knee because, when touching a cable to the BNC input on Dave, there was a Pop sound from the right hand speaker. Great! So I switched everything off, connected the cables and when I powered back on, I thought I had blown the mid driver on my speaker because the right channel was very recessed when testing channels. Further testing pointed to the power amp and Tom at Chord kindly agreed to have my amp collected for testing but he said that I was the only person they had ever known who had managed to do this. We agreed that I should test another DAC into the amp just to be certain, so I stripped my rack down and had the contents strewn all over the lounge floor and I plugged my little MojoPoly into the amp using a 3.5mm to RCA Y cable.

I did the channel tests and then played some music through the amp and speakers. At this point, my wife came in and asked me what I was doing. I told her and said can you believe that this quality of sound is coming from this little black box in my hand? At that, she looked witheringly at the mess all over the lounge and said ‘In that case, why do we need all of this?’

 

[ray-dude]

It's possible to do a version of this experiment if you have Blu 2, DAVE and Hugo 2. Since DAVE has dual-data mode output and since Hugo 2 has 16FS input using its dual-data mode, you can listen to Hugo 2 with either 1 million taps upsampling from Blu 2 or 164,000 taps upsampling from DAVE. But you will need a lot of ferrites (until adding more makes no difference) on the cable going into Hugo 2, since DAVE's BNC outputs are much noisier than Blu 2's.

Malc, you have everything (except the cable for Hugo 2?) required to do this experiment, don't you? Obviously Hugo 2 has a lower quality of pulse array, so it won't represent DAVE, but it's still potentially an interesting experiment.

@ray-dude also has the electronics needed for this experiment, I believe. Qutest is the other option instead of Hugo 2.

The real problem is getting the data into Hugo 2/Qutest without adding so much RF noise that it swamps the comparison being sought.

When I first got my Blu2, this was the first experiment I set up. I wanted to distinguish how much of the SQ benefit of the BluDAVE vs BluHugo2 was the 1M taps from the Bli2, and how much was from the 20 element pulse array + PS in the DAVE vs the 10 element pulse array + battery in the Hugo2. I also wanted to compare the DAVE vs the DAVEHugo2 to get a second data point on same (but at ~160k taps vs 1M taps). The theory was that connecting Blu2 to DAVE, and DAVE to Hugo2 via dual BNC would make A/B between BluDAVE and BluHugo2 trivial (same Blu2 signal driving both), and DAVEDAVE vs DAVEHugo2 A/B testing similarly trivial (

All this was before I did any cable optimization. Driving the Hugo2 from the DAVE sounded like absolute ass (to say the least) I won't say unlistenable, but there was no point in trying to do any comparison (remember, the DX outputs of the DAVE are not galvanically isolated). That being said, I did not return to that fray after drinking deep from the ferrite spring, since I did the full BluDAVE vs BluHugo2 comparison a different way.

To the proposed experiment, looking at the DAVE block diagram (this should be tattooed on everyone's forehead, in reverse, so you always have it handy https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-dave.766517/page-204#post-12596126 ), the dual BNC inputs on the DAVE do seem to pass through the stage 1 WTA filter, so I am presuming that the FPGA continues to run in the DAVE (and generate noise), even if the WTA stage 2 filter is being bypassed by the dual BNC inputs (regardless stage 1 and 2 are both still running, generating whatever noise they're going to generate). If the hypothesis is that the FPGA generates more noise when processing data one way vs another or one type of data vs another, then there may be an impact of course, but I'm not going to guess how Rob's FPGA code runs

That being said, if DAVE is generating similar noise as the Blu2, then the "Dual BNC Cable Cluster of Ferrited Shame" may make a DAVEDAVE vs DAVEHugo2 comparison feasible (basically, what does a 160k tap DAVE sounds like vs a 160k tap Hugo2), or at least be a better stress test for the DBCCoFS. Assuming the DBCCoFS can do the job to make BluHugo2 equivalent to BluDAVEHugo2, it would be possible to get another data point in the 20EPA+PS vs 10EPA+battery learnings with a DAVEDAVE vs DAVEHugo2 experiment, which is definitely of interest to me.

To that point, I'm in speaker positioning/speaker cable/power optimization mode right now with my setup (alas, new speakers do that to you). I am planning on swapping my DAVE out for my Hugo2 at some point as I continue to try to dig into how much of the BluDAVE vs BluHugo2 delta is the PS vs pulse array DAC. I'll give the above a go. If the I can get to a reasonable place without more ferrite mucking (or is that mucking ferrites) between the DAVE and Hugo2, happy to poke around some more.

 

[Jawed]

To the proposed experiment, looking at the DAVE block diagram (this should be tattooed on everyone's forehead, in reverse, so you always have it handy https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-dave.766517/page-204#post-12596126 ), the dual BNC inputs on the DAVE do seem to pass through the stage 1 WTA filter,

Yes, 1FS to 16FS inputs (44.1KHz to 705.6KHz) go into WTA 1. But WTA 1 only produces 16FS output. So there's nothing to do if you feed Blu 2's output running at 705.6KHz.

so I am presuming that the FPGA continues to run in the DAVE (and generate noise), even if the WTA stage 2 filter is being bypassed by the dual BNC inputs (regardless stage 1 and 2 are both still running, generating whatever noise they're going to generate). If the hypothesis is that the FPGA generates more noise when processing data one way vs another or one type of data vs another, then there may be an impact of course, but I'm not going to guess how Rob's FPGA code runs

Yes, the theory is that less work done by the FPGA means less noise. Processing for WTA 1 is by far the largest portion of the FPGA's work.

That being said, if DAVE is generating similar noise as the Blu2,

This is a key point, since we know that Blu 2 generates noise that requires serious filtering (which is why Rob put galvanic isolation on the output of Blu 2). And from your experiments you know that DAVE feeding into Hugo 2 sounds bad and this is logically at least partly because of FPGA noise.

then the "Dual BNC Cable Cluster of Ferrited Shame" may make a DAVEDAVE vs DAVEHugo2 comparison feasible (basically, what does a 160k tap DAVE sounds like vs a 160k tap Hugo2), or at least be a better stress test for the DBCCoFS. Assuming the DBCCoFS can do the job to make BluHugo2 equivalent to BluDAVEHugo2,

Ah yes, that's a good benchmark, hadn't thought of that.

it would be possible to get another data point in the 20EPA+PS vs 10EPA+battery learnings with a DAVEDAVE vs DAVEHugo2 experiment, which is definitely of interest to me.

There is another aspect to this experiment that could be considered an unwanted variable: Hugo 2's FPGA is very low power (the same FPGA is in Mojo). Hugo 2's pulse array, even though it's 10 elements, might actually benefit from the low power WTA 2 etc. processing inside Hugo 2. The low power FPGA may "interfere" with the pulse array less than the bigger FPGA in DAVE.

@Triode User with 2 DAVEs wouldn't have this unknown when doing this experiment...

Now playing: Rationale - ReUp

 

[hattrick15]

Yes, ok. The simple audio chain is:

Zenith SE > SOtm tX-USBUltra > BluDave - the tX-U is enhanced by a Master Clock and > represents a USB connection.

The most important step was the Zenith SE server which enabled me to continue to use Roon whilst cutting out the PC and the data round trip through the network which removes a lot of noise. I think you do similar here yourself but with a different server - ROCK if I recall correctly? This got me very close to the Blu CD - file playback had slightly better focus and sharper timing with a deeper, more controlled bass but it lacked some subtlety and finesse compared to the CD. It’s hard for me to explain, but this subtlety and finesse gave a greater sense of air and a more holographic, 3 dimensional quality which made the soundstage seem deeper and more realistic. I’m not good with audiophile terminology, but percussion sounded more accurate, cymbals had no digital harshness.

I then ran the output of the SE into a SOtm tX-USBUltra. This brought out the subtle aspects that the SE had previously lacked by comparison to the CD. At this point, I was preferring files to CD because it combined the best bits of both. Another positive was that I had always considered streaming Tidal (or Qobuz previously) to be inferior to playing local files but now, the gap was closing quite significantly and, at times, it was hard to tell them apart. In fact, on occasion, Tidal was just as good.

The final piece was the introduction of the SOtM sCLK-OCKX10 Master Clock. I am still getting used to this, but it has already taken it to the point where I now quite clearly prefer this chain to the CD. The Master Clock requires its own power supply, hence 3 black boxes, and I would far prefer to have it all in one box myself. I don’t see why I can’t, but it is what it is right now.

I have no ferrites at all on the two USB cables between SE > tX-U > BluDave and I do have ferrites on the two BNC cables between Blu and Dave.

It may seem a slightly complex route, and it’s certainly more than I expected when I set out, but I expect to keep all aspects of the system in place for as long as they - or I - last.

For your system, it may be worth getting a tX-U on trial and seeing what you think.

That’s it - hope that helps.

Thanks for providing all of the info. Very helpful. You are correct, I have been using a ROCK. I have also recently purchased a tX-U. Based on what you've posted, I just arranged to have a demo trial of a Innuos Zenith Mk. II STD Music Server sent to me (no SE's to be found). Your description above about the sound before you brought the Zenith into the chain matches the differences I'm hearing between CD and file playback. So, I'm hoping that the Zenith trial will match your results.

My reluctance at getting the Zenith has been that I have over 5TB of music, so didn't like the idea of not being able to have all of my music on the Zenith. I currently have my music on a Western Digital Purple 6TB Surveillance Hard Disk Drive connected via USB to the Intel NUC.

Can you share what USB, BNC, and Power cables you are using?

 

[ray-dude]

Thanks for providing all of the info. Very helpful. You are correct, I have been using a ROCK. I have also recently purchased a tX-U. Based on what you've posted, I just arranged to have a demo trial of a Innuos Zenith Mk. II STD Music Server sent to me (no SE's to be found). Your description above about the sound before you brought the Zenith into the chain matches the differences I'm hearing between CD and file playback. So, I'm hoping that the Zenith trial will match your results.

I look forward to reading your experiences with the Zenith STD.

I wasn't able to track down a Zenith SE to audition (alas, unobtanium), but I was able to spend an afternoon with the Zenith STD at my local dealer (they were shipping it out that same day, so it was not available for an in home audition). I took in my BluDAVE and Omega speakers to try to replicate the rest of my listening tests as much as I could, and had maybe 3 hours of critical listening before moving on to a very nice scotch and YG Sonja's in an absolutely delightful turntable setup (alas, the scotch has blurred my memory of that part of the day a bit

In that less than ideal setting and based on some quick listening tests, I was unable to get the Zenith STD to match the sound quality of playing Blu2 CD direct (similar to @Malcyg that a primary benchmark that matters to me). Thankfully, the Blu2 is so resolving that it makes this sort of test pretty clear and unambiguous (you won't be second guessing what you hear)

 

[esimms86]

Should have been reply to @esimms86

Yeah, that happens!

I was persuaded into trying the tX-U by Romaz who told me that it did wonderful things to his Zenith SE although, of course, he also runs the Mutec Ref 10. I was sceptical but I tried it and I liked it. In answer to your questions, I went SoTM instead of Mutec for three reasons:

1) The hope of better synergy with the tX-U
2) The hope that it may avail newer technology than the Mutec being a brand new design
3) I couldn’t find a UK dealer for the Mutec which makes it harder to do a ‘try and return if not impressed’ arrangement

The 3rd one is not the least important by the way, quite the contrary. I only ever buy something if I get agreement that I can return it if not satisfied. Same applied to Blu II and Dave.

I don’t actually understand your questions about the cables or MC3+, but I run it as per my previous post - SE>tX-U>BluDave. The tX-U connects to the Master by way of a BNC cable - and no, I do not have any ferrites on it! Not yet anyway! Oh, and the cable is just a generic 50 ohm cable at this point.

Well, yes, I have 3 black boxes now that I never wanted or intended, that’s for sure. And I’d rather be Spidey than Doc Oc!

Thanks for the reply and excellent Spidey sense!

Regarding the cables, SOtM is offering a single, 1 meter long dCBL BNC cables for 500 USD. You can order the Master Clock without one by just ignoring that option when you buy on line. Personally, I would first wait for TriodeUser to test it out before seriously considering the cable purchase.

Seriously though, why 50 ohms vs 75?

Re: the MC3+ , it’s another potential box in the chain. When used, it is the final item connected to your DAC(or Blu2) via USB. If your server is not optimized for or relegated to a non-USB interface, then you should theoretically be good without it.

I use an SOtM sms200Ultra in my system, and I have neither a tXUSBUltra nor a Master Clock. I didn’t pay the extra 200 USD to get the Master clock connector added to my sms200Ultra and I’m especially reluctant to pay that money now (plus pay maybe 100 to 200 USD to have my unit shipped to Korea and back). Your experience now leads me to think that the sms200Ultra, like your Zenith SE, does not need to directly connect to the Master Clock given that the Master Clock can be connected solely to the tX-U.

It does seem like a lot of money is being spent to make one’s signal chain sound equivalent to the CD player on Blu2. Please, nobody tell Andrew!

 

[Mavwong]

I had Dali Ms5, till I heard ASI Tango. Totally change my perspective about how a speaker's should sound.

I don’t think I ever said actually, I’m not sure, but I have KEF Blade 2. I had Dali Euphonia MS4’s which I had been very happy with for 7 years or more and always thought of them as my final pair of speakers. Then I got a Blu II and, when I heard HE-1000 straight into BluDave, it was quite a glorious but also sobering experience. The MS4’s days were numbered - and my wife wasn’t happy about it because she loved the Alpi finish. She was even less happy when she saw the frosted copper black blade 2’s sat in her lounge!

 

[Rob Watts]

I have wondered whether your DAC’s are more susceptible to this noise because of the amount of noise generated by the FPGA - and you have two of those in a BluDave, one feeding into another - or whether it is the greater transparency and clarity that your solutions deliver that makes the noise more easy to detect. Thinking back over my own experiences, maybe a bit of both, but certainly the latter.

I agree regarding USB cables as I heard no benefits from applying ferrites myself and ended up taking them off of mine - but I have spent a lot of effort in cleaning up my source. I only heard benefit on the BNC connection between Blu II and Dave.

Edit - I hope my question does not seem blunt or impolite. I guess I’m just so used to you posting on here Rob that I react the same way as for any other poster. You’re only the chap who has designed the best sounding device that I have ever heard after all.

From a rational or objective POV my DAC's are less susceptible to noise, as they have all been designed from the bottom up with noise floor modulation (the lack thereof) in mind; indeed, they are the only DAC's on the planet that have zero measurable noise floor modulation; and this can only occur if they are innately insensitive. But I guess when you minimize a problem, it just makes miniscule changes more apparent. And the M scaler is a particular problem, the like of which nobody has ever seen before - 528 DSP cores all running together is an extraordinary amount of processing. So it's not that Dave is sensitive, it's just that the M scaler creates much more noise. And I absolutely knew that this level of ground plane noise would be an issue; that's why putting the M scaler in a separate box with galvanic isolation was a no brainer - and everything I have done since has validated that initial decision. And I knew it would be a SQ issue because over 3 years ago I cascaded two Dave's together (this answers Jawed later post) when I achieved slightly better measurements and better depth reproduction - having said that, the SQ improvement cascading Dave's is miniscule compared to the changes that an M scaler makes. And again, the galvanic isolation within Blu 2 is effective - you didn't get to hear the earlier versions!

No your question is not impolite at all - I am after all primarily interested in enjoying music more, and that's why I post on these forums so much. So treating me as any other poster whose concern is finding ways of improving SQ and musicality I take very much as a compliment!

 

[marcmccalmont]

From a rational or objective POV my DAC's are less susceptible to noise, as they have all been designed from the bottom up with noise floor modulation (the lack thereof) in mind; indeed, they are the only DAC's on the planet that have zero measurable noise floor modulation; and this can only occur if they are innately insensitive. But I guess when you minimize a problem, it just makes miniscule changes more apparent. And the M scaler is a particular problem, the like of which nobody has ever seen before - 528 DSP cores all running together is an extraordinary amount of processing. So it's not that Dave is sensitive, it's just that the M scaler creates much more noise. And I absolutely knew that this level of ground plane noise would be an issue; that's why putting the M scaler in a separate box with galvanic isolation was a no brainer - and everything I have done since has validated that initial decision. And I knew it would be a SQ issue because over 3 years ago I cascaded two Dave's together (this answers Jawed later post) when I achieved slightly better measurements and better depth reproduction - having said that, the SQ improvement cascading Dave's is miniscule compared to the changes that an M scaler makes. And again, the galvanic isolation within Blu 2 is effective - you didn't get to hear the earlier versions!

No your question is not impolite at all - I am after all primarily interested in enjoying music more, and that's why I post on these forums so much. So treating me as any other poster whose concern is finding ways of improving SQ and musicality I take very much as a compliment!

I for one applaud your public discussion of design issues and improvements most designers would not, refreshing!

 

[flyte3333]

I am after all primarily interested in enjoying music more, and that's why I post on these forums so much. So treating me as any other poster whose concern is finding ways of improving SQ and musicality I take very much as a compliment!

Very cool to read this. Greatly appreciate your presence and patience around here.

 

[Malcyg]

Thanks for the reply and excellent Spidey sense!

Regarding the cables, SOtM is offering a single, 1 meter long dCBL BNC cables for 500 USD. You can order the Master Clock without one by just ignoring that option when you buy on line. Personally, I would first wait for TriodeUser to test it out before seriously considering the cable purchase.

Seriously though, why 50 ohms vs 75?

Re: the MC3+ , it’s another potential box in the chain. When used, it is the final item connected to your DAC(or Blu2) via USB. If your server is not optimized for or relegated to a non-USB interface, then you should theoretically be good without it.

I use an SOtM sms200Ultra in my system, and I have neither a tXUSBUltra nor a Master Clock. I didn’t pay the extra 200 USD to get the Master clock connector added to my sms200Ultra and I’m especially reluctant to pay that money now (plus pay maybe 100 to 200 USD to have my unit shipped to Korea and back). Your experience now leads me to think that the sms200Ultra, like your Zenith SE, does not need to directly connect to the Master Clock given that the Master Clock can be connected solely to the tX-U.

It does seem like a lot of money is being spent to make one’s signal chain sound equivalent to the CD player on Blu2. Please, nobody tell Andrew!

Thanks for the explanation. I shan’t be getting an MC3+.

Why 50 Ohm? The tX-U and the Master clock both come built as standard 50 Ohms. 75 Ohms is available by special order. The dealer only had 50 Ohms in stock when I got the tX-U anyway, but I wasn’t too bothered since I assumed that SoTM went with 50 for a reason so why deviate from that?

Re the Master Clock, my basic (very) understanding is that the more devices it controls, the better because of consistency throughout. You will get benefit as you describe it, although logic would suggest that connecting the sms200 may yield a greater benefit but, unfortunately, you are unable to check that out unless you can get hold of another sms200 unit with a clock input and compare. I suspect we are talking very marginal differences at that point, but I don’t know. Edit - I should add that I am not drawing any firm conclusions about the Master clock until I have run it for a couple of weeks or so. I will then take it out and compare which is how I always treat new items in order to avoid any possibility of expectation bias.

Re the CD, I have exceeded that but, without the inbuilt CD I never would have known that my streaming setup was so flawed and I never would have got to the sound quality I now have. I think quite a few others are finding the CD a very useful benchmark to check against. Likewise with the headphone output, it gave me a benchmark of excellence to target for my speaker output and targets are helpful if you want to make progress. But I’m sure that Andrew will be vindicated in a few more years!