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.
891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900
902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911
  1. naynay
    I just stay in my chair,let the songs play on and drink more beer.
    Aslshark and ZappaMan like this.
  2. Amberlamps
    A question for dave owners who have also heard or own a TT2

    Say Dave's sound quality was 10 out of 10.

    Where would TT2 be on that scale, 8 out of 10 or 6 out of 10 ? Etc etc

    Where would you all put TT2 on a 10 out of 10 scale, and knowing dave gets a 10.
  3. FunkyBassMan
    As far as smoothness of frequency spectrum, transparency, sonic "openness", purity of transients, digital "black", etc., my personal opinion was that the TT2 is right there: a 9.5 at least, maybe a solid 10 or even a squeech higher.

    As far as how the music coheres like one big wave coming out of the ocean, the way the downbeat of a chorus kicks you in the butt, the way the first chords of the Sokolov version of the Rach 2 punch you in the gut like Mike Tyson, the canyon-esque deepness of the groove coming off of Bernard Purdie's drums in Babylon Sisters, it wasn't even close. The DAVE was truly an emotional experience the TT2 just couldn't deliver.

    Now this was all with the M-Scaler attached, so I couldn't help you on how the units sound alone.

    I'm aware of how unmeasurable and subjective such a response is, and even that there could in theory be euphonics involved in the analog portion of the headphone amp etc (the way some mic preamps just sound creamy and wonderful, for example), so YMMV hugely and others may totally disagree.

    PS - I should note that I was hoping to just go in and buy an M-Scaler for my Hugo2 and call it a day, so I had NO prejudice in favor of liking the DAVE. The contrary, in fact, as now I'm screwed, because the M-Scaler with the Hugo2 was even a bit worse than the TT2 (the jump from the TT2 to the DAVE was probably 5 times the jump from the H2 to the TT2 in my book) so I now have this memory of how good it can sound at the same time as knowing I can't afford it. :frowning2:

    PPS - I was listening principally through headphones. I'm certain that through great speakers, the difference would be less, because the analog distortion through that chain would add a certain coherence to the music.
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2019
    himynameis and Amberlamps like this.
  4. onlychild
    I have owned the Blu2 and if CDs are your thing, there really isn’t a better choice.

    Main reason I sold it is because I mostly listen to my music in “shuffle” mode by genre, something you can’t do with CDs or Vinyl
  5. iDesign
    Agreed. And fortunately the Blu Mk II also has the flexibility to be used with servers and streaming audio via its USB input. Blu Mk IIs are now trading under $5,500 and that is a great value— especially because you don’t need to spend thousands more on a server or computer to achieve excellent sound quality. I use TIDAL and Qobuz extensively with my Blu Mk II, and although it’s great for convenience, the audio quality is handicapped.
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2019
  6. iDesign
    Amberlamps likes this.
  7. rkt31
    A $500 laptop vs $16k streamer, the major difference may be the power line of usb. For galvenically isolated usb input, it should matter less anyway. Usb power line can be replaced very easily by a cheap device called ifi idefender. I use 4xAA NiMH battery pack for replacing 5v power line. Now coming to data line. By using laptop you are already getting the advantage of asio driver and the remaining noise of data line can be completely removed by two or three ifi isilencer in series. This transport is still lot cheaper than $16k streamer and can easily compete with it.
    wswbd and JaZZ like this.
  8. ZappaMan
    But surely the people who spend 16k, wouldn’t, if spending £500 did the same?
  9. onlychild
    The Blu2 usb input is not galvanically isolated so the USB input on mscaler sounds better than USB input on Blu2.
  10. naynay
    Certain costlier streamers have pretty much every part inside tweaked for maximum audio unlike most laptops there is no comparison.
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2019
  11. rkt31
    What tweaks ?
  12. ray-dude
    I’m finding that with digital, it all comes down to power and ground quality, and clock stability/precision. Closer you are to the DAC, the bigger the impact, but I contonue to be shocked how much things upstream continue to have an impact. The quest for the mythical digital moat goes on, but everything (still) matters.
    gnomen and miketlse like this.
  13. iDesign
  14. rkt31
    If you replace usb power line by a clean battery power, clean the usb data line, then there should not be much difference between the usb transports, as clocking will be done by the dac anyway in each case. So what tweaks of expensive usb transport will improve it over laptop ?
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2019
  15. ZappaMan
    The usb signal is transmitted in analogue form, by creating square waves, so the ability to create the most accurate square wave is important, allegedly.
    But if you see usb data as zeros and ones then, you’ll never see why everything matters :)
891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900
902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911

Share This Page