[fuzzybaffy]

  Hey!  Great news!  Additional Grace-blessed power supplies are now available on their website:
 
http://www.gracedesign.com/products/m9XX/m9XX.htm
 
- Dave

 
Nice... been waiting for those. Thanks for the tip! 

 

[fjrabon]

And @fjrabon
 - Correct me if I'm wrong... did I read somewhere that Grace was working on a power down function for a future firmware update? 

Looking forward to receiving and listening to mine! The pictures of the internals on page 13 over on the Massdrop discussion board are pretty sweet. However, I especially liked the Mini Mouse headphones a few posts prior. 

I the there was speculation they *could* do that. But I don't recall anybody from grace saying that they planned on doing it. I do remember seeing that they ruled out a hardware switch for several non-obvious but good reasons. (Many of the same reasons they don't have an analog input)

 

[Siriphum]

Hey, does Massdrop plan to start this drop again ??? I had listen to my friend's unit, it sounds great. I do love its sound signature more than my Mojo

 

[olek]

Sat yesterday for some time comparing m9xx and DACMini dac portions side to side analytically, for the first time, amping with Gustard H10 and listening through 400i for 'headphones test', and for speakers going with my favorite KEF LS50 amped with Audio-GD Precision 1.
 
First thing first, both DAC's are outstanding. Still, there are unmistakable differences in the sound. DACMini has more ... 'raw force' in its sound, lows are extending deeper and hitting harder, sound is more dynamic and hard hitting, probably I should use words 'more forward' here, but it is so hard to describe sound in words. m9xx, in comparison, is more ... refined, to the point of sounding a bit compressed at times. Sub-bass does not hit as hard, overall dynamics are slightly reduced, and sound is less forceful and not so forward. Sounds like a bad thing? Not quite. Interesting fact is that during this test I liked different dac's depending on the setup.
 
If I may be allowed to make a far-stretched parallel here, I would say that difference is a bit like difference between two screens, where one is tuned on a side of being a bit too vibrant, making colors pop, but losing some 'in-between' color nuances, and other is tuned to be a little more subdued, with colors not impressing viewer at a first glance, but allowing to represent nuances of color and light a bit better. And I am not talking about screens tuned very differently (one screaming, another gray and dull), but just a bit apart, with enough difference to notice, but both being pretty close.
 
Speakers test - I preferred DACMini, because it made music more exciting, hard hitting, filled room with great bass from my small speakers (no sub-woofer in my setup). m9xx in comparison sounded a bit pale and tiny bit compressed - still very good, but slightly less enjoyable in this setup.
 
Headphones test - everything changed in it. DACMini was hitting a bit TOO hard and sub-bass was a bit TOO strong on some tracks (like Norah Jones "After the fall"), and overall sound was so lively, that it made me miss intricate details in it. Overall verdict was 'lively, but slightly unrefined'. m9xx, on the other hand, was perfect, allowing me to hear everything, all the details, in a very enjoyable and musical form, not sounding compressed at all, and sounding just right.
 
So, synergy is important, and it is hard to predict what will work better in particular setup

 
Those are my opinions after yesterday's test. I reserve the right to change them at any time

 

 

[ViperGeek]

  If I may be allowed to make a far-stretched parallel here, I would say that difference is a bit like difference between two screens, where one is tuned on a side of being a bit too vibrant, making colors pop, but losing some 'in-between' color nuances, and other is tuned to be a little more subdued, with colors not impressing viewer at a first glance, but allowing to represent nuances of color and light a bit better. And I am not talking about screens tuned very differently (one screaming, another gray and dull), but just a bit apart, with enough difference to notice, but both being pretty close.

 
Excellent analogy!  While I can't comment on the aptness of it, I do think comparing sound to picture/color is brilliant.  I've experienced similar observations when comparing DSLRs.  Without going too OT, the C-family of cameras tend to be more vivid, pop, and are crowd pleasers, while the N-family of cameras have truer colors, a smoother gradation between colors, and are more film-like (or in our world, more analog).  Your analogy above allowed me to precisely understand and "visualize" your listening impressions.
 
- Dave

 

[HiFan]

Have you tried DSD or on the fly conversion? I have some portable DACs that could do this. DSD mode seems to be better on my devices.

 

[ViperGeek]

  Have you tried DSD or on the fly conversion? I have some portable DACs that could do this. DSD mode seems to be better on my devices.

 
Yep.  Tried both 2.8MHz (DSD64) and 5.6MHz (DSD128) via DoP and they sound great.  Very SACD-like.
 
- Dave

 

[sghound]

   
Yep.  Tried both 2.8MHz (DSD64) and 5.6MHz (DSD128) via DoP and they sound great.  Very SACD-like.
 
- Dave

 
 i find the L/R reversed on my dsd playback.
 
grace will fix it with firmware.

 

[xanlamin]

  Hey, does Massdrop plan to start this drop again ??? I had listen to my friend's unit, it sounds great. I do love its sound signature more than my Mojo

 
I just got this amp today from the recent Massdrop. Wow! It's very beautiful sounding. I had to crank it up to 80 to drive my T40RPmk3 but...oh boy...how sweet it sound!
Definitely better sounding than Mojo.

 

[fjrabon]

   
I just got this amp today from the recent Massdrop. Wow! It's very beautiful sounding. I had to crank it up to 80 to drive my T40RPmk3 but...oh boy...how sweet it sound!
Definitely better sounding than Mojo.

important to note that 80 isn't actually all that high power wise on the m9XX.  Most people aren't used to a decibel stepped volume control.  At 80 the m9XX is basically in the middle of low power mode, and isn't even close to actually needing high power mode.  High power mode does have the benefit of allowing the USB connection to your computer to be data only, so theoretically it may provide cleaner separation of power and digital audio signal (and thus reduced noise) though in practice this doesn't seem to be too much of an issue.  You aren't really pushing this amp until you're at 95.
 
So, basically, don't worry one bit about it being underpowered for your T40RPmk3, it's got plenty of juice for those, especially if you turn on high power mode.

 

[barongearmu]

important to note that 80 isn't actually all that high power wise on the m9XX.  Most people aren't used to a decibel stepped volume control.  At 80 the m9XX is basically in the middle of low power mode, and isn't even close to actually needing high power mode.  High power mode does have the benefit of allowing the USB connection to your computer to be data only, so theoretically it may provide cleaner separation of power and digital audio signal (and thus reduced noise) though in practice this doesn't seem to be too much of an issue.  You aren't really pushing this amp until you're at 95.
 
So, basically, don't worry one bit about it being underpowered for your T40RPmk3, it's got plenty of juice for those, especially if you turn on high power mode.

 


Yea, you're right about the power. If we assume there's the ~1 watt/channel coming out at the max, then -20db down, that's at what? 1mW? I can scarcely imagine how efficient the IEMs are for people that are running in the 10s. Crazy orders of magnitude difference in the power.

 

[lvince95]

I'm afraid I'm not well versed in extreme technical audiophile lingo. I saw these descriptions on the filters on the AKM website and Grace manual. The AKM seems easier to understand when they explain quite simply (f.e the 4th filter increases bass, etc.), but their 'acoustic' and 'natural' tone seems to have the same description but different impulse response and then I become confused again.
 
Also, I can't for the life of me imagine how the m9xx described filters sound like. And the m9xx has linear/minimum while the AKM websites do not describe it that way, so it's kinda difficult (for me) to find out which filter on the AKM site corresponds to a filter on the m9xx.
 
Has somebody managed to make sense of the descriptions and is able to describe it in layman terms? E.g bass, mids, highs, decay, speed, roll-off, brightness, harshness etc.
 
I only know what aliasing is with regards to graphic processing, and nothing about audio processing and how it affects what I will hear. Reading the m9xx manual descriptions, I can't figure out how it will affect the sound...
 
Manual:
 

 
AKM site:
 

 

[fjrabon]

  I'm afraid I'm not well versed in extreme technical audiophile lingo. I saw these descriptions on the filters on the AKM website and Grace manual. The AKM seems easier to understand when they include graphs and explain quite simply (f.e the 4th filter increases bass, 5th filter makes 'powerful' sound, etc.), but I can't for the life of me imagine how the m9xx described filters sound like. And the m9xx has linear/minimum while the AKM websites do not describe it that way, so it's kinda difficult (for me) to find out which filter on the AKM site corresponds to a filter on the m9xx.
 
Has somebody managed to make sense of the descriptions and is able to describe it in layman terms? E.g bass, mids, highs, decay, speed, roll-off, brightness, harshness etc.
 
I only know what aliasing is with regards to graphic processing, and nothing about audio processing and how it affects what I will hear. Reading the m9xx manual descriptions, I can't figure out how it will affect the sound...
 
Manual:
 

 
AKM site:
 

I don't think these are actually the same filters that are employed by the m9XX.  I think the m9XX uses custom versions, primarily for anti-aliasing and anti-modulation distortion control more than to actually change the sound.  Unfortunately the bifrost 4490 is the only other amp I know of that uses this chip and it doesn't seem to allow you to use the filters at all, so it's hard to find a point of comparison.  My reason for thinking this is that Grace actually goes out of their way on a couple of the filters to say the effect shouldn't be directly audible, unlike how they're described by AKM as changing the sound.  

 

[lvince95]

 
I don't think these are actually the same filters that are employed by the m9XX.  I think the m9XX uses custom versions, primarily for anti-aliasing and anti-modulation distortion control more than to actually change the sound.  Unfortunately the bifrost 4490 is the only other amp I know of that uses this chip and it doesn't seem to allow you to use the filters at all, so it's hard to find a point of comparison.  My reason for thinking this is that Grace actually goes out of their way on a couple of the filters to say the effect shouldn't be directly audible, unlike how they're described by AKM as changing the sound.  

I see, that actually makes a lot of sense the more I think about it.

 

[sheldaze]

 
I don't think these are actually the same filters that are employed by the m9XX.  I think the m9XX uses custom versions, primarily for anti-aliasing and anti-modulation distortion control more than to actually change the sound.  Unfortunately the bifrost 4490 is the only other amp I know of that uses this chip and it doesn't seem to allow you to use the filters at all, so it's hard to find a point of comparison.  My reason for thinking this is that Grace actually goes out of their way on a couple of the filters to say the effect shouldn't be directly audible, unlike how they're described by AKM as changing the sound.  

I have the portable CEntrance DACport HD, which I believe uses the same chip.
However I was convinced (by others) that implementation would be so different as to make it impossible to tell which mode was in use by CEntrance.