1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice


Discussion in 'High-end Audio Forum' started by magiccabbage, May 14, 2015.
822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831
833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842
  1. Triode User
    That is an interesting thought because Blu2 owners have been using CDs played on the Blu2 as the reference to judge the sound quality of other digital streams put through the Blu2 MScaler inputs. I can see where you are coming from though with an external CD player connected to HMS via optical.
  2. jrfmd
    based on this post, I bought one
    the base is as you state but I find the treble muffled compared to taking it out of the chain

    using dave, blu2,, blue hawaii ,stax 009s -- playing itunes lossless redbook files
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2018
    seaice likes this.
  3. iDesign
    I have thousands of CDs but have either made digital copies of them or those albums are available through TIDAL. Given the simplicity of using an interface like Roon or Audirvana for searching, creating playlists, or shuffling, I have little desire to retrieve a CD and place it into the Blu Mk II. This is why I have no use for the CD player in the Blu Mk II and it sits idle. But I also must admit that I don’t want to purchase the Hugo M scaler because it does not match the DAVE and it can’t be used in (or fit under) the Choral Ensamble stand. Perhaps if I heard some compelling arguments about why the CD mechanism in the Blu Mk II is superior to ripping CDs or TIDAL (e.g. Are watermarks on streaming tracks really prevalent? Are watermarks audible? etc. etc.) then I might begin to look at the Blu Mk II in a different light— I haven’t read any arguments from Rob Watts about that. And from my point of view, the Blu Mk II is more expensive yet offers less tech and value than the Hugo M Scaler such as galvanic isolation, DX capabilies, more selectable upsampling options, more inputs/outputs etc. So a stand-alone M Scaler that either matches the DAVE or even an unbranded M Scaler in a small, universal enclosure would make a lot of sense. I even see Qutest owners saying they wished the Hugo M Scaler wasn’t their only option since it’s bigger and its Hugo branded— and I’m sure those Hugo and Qutest owners aren’t considering the Blu Mk II.
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2018
  4. ZappaMan
    the mscaler in black is very unobtrusive, hardly notice it on my desk.
  5. AndrewOld
    Just get an M Scaler! I had thousands of cds too, which I dutifully ripped, and some I still listen to using the excellent J River, but I also have Qobuz and it is amazing how many of my old cd collection, (and even more recent releases) are available in Hi Res. An M Scaler saves you £4.5k on a Blu2, vast amounts on a Choral stand, and huge hundreds on high-margin cables. It's got better galvanic isolation and solved the RF issue internally. It will keep proportionately more of it's value than the Blu2.My M Scaler looks just smashing next to my DAVE. Save £6k or more and get a better solution. If you're desperate to spend the money, buy another DAVE for your bedside,.. or a TT2/M Scaler for the kitchen ..
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2018
    Aslshark likes this.
  6. STR-1
    Does anyone know what the DAVE’s maximum power consumption is?
  7. burbster
    Regarding playing a CD versus ripped CD or Tidal. This forum had a similar debate a few weeks back. Firstly most seemed to agree that TIDAL streaming was noticeably inferior to both a CD played on the Blu MK2 and a ripped CD. When I trialled the Blu MK2 with my Dave, I spent quite a lot of time playing the CD against the ripped version of the same CD to see if I could tell a difference, I could not. However, I have spent a reasonable sum of money and put some effort in to the setup of my digital front end (Sever, switch, fibre, SSD NAS etc etc) and wonder if I would have had the same result if I was simply using a standard PC straight in to the BluMK2. I think in that scenario the CD may have been superior. (darker sounding) Anyway I opted for the MScaler and will just have to live with the Aesthetic issues!!
    iDesign likes this.
  8. musickid
    Those aesthetic issues what a hard life we have here lol. Luckily tt2/hms owners will not have to suffer. Stack em up.
  9. iDesign
    I wished DAVE owners had the same privilege. :)
  10. TheAttorney
    Well, I'm still aiming to stack DAVE directly on top of my HMS when it arrives - and treat the HMS as a kind of plinth, with the Black Ravioli feet in between being slightly taller than DAVE's stock feet..
    Although I've yet to see how that will look in practice.
    Mikey99 likes this.
  11. paul2qute
    Can't believe how gorgeous the Dave and blu 2 is in the flesh, far nicer than the hugo TT 2 and M scaler, they look plastic in comparison, don't get me wrong I've bought the hugo TT 2 but Dave and blu 2 is gorgeous, I would never swap Dave and blu 2 for Hugo TT 2 and M scaler
    Mikey99 likes this.
  12. Triode User
    I have tried that and now just have them side by side on a table which looks great.
  13. Mikey99
    I agree, both are solid and well finished, but I prefer the finish of the Dave, and the design. I am not sure how I would characterize it, maybe a throwback to early 20 th century industrial design.
  14. paul2qute
    It's pure muscle mate, I seen them next to massive pmc speakers and trust me the speakers were terrified.I reckon it takes a crane to put each Bolt in place
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2018
  15. Mikey99
    There is a video out there of an older model DAC of the same design being run over by a tank.

    vinyllp33 likes this.
822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831
833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842

Share This Page