[Tobes]

@Tobes Sinc-Mx was my favorite for a long time. To my ears, it wasn't missing out on much. Comparing Sinc-Mx to Sinc-L to me seemed a bit like the copper vs silver cable stereotype.

@kingoftown1 I think Sinc-L, LNS15, 1.536Mhz is now my favorite too!
Spacious, detailed with great realism and very solid imagery with the least amount of digital shimmer. Bass is super solid and punchy too.
The only down side is that being a very long filter it has most delay at startup/stop/track skipping - though not an issue for listening to albums or playlists without intervention.
I tried a bunch of filters after Sinc-L trying to find similar properties with less delay - but no dice.
For me its superiority is most noticeable on my speaker setup.

Edit: BTW Jussi lists Sinc-L as recommended for classical - which I don't listen to that much. I find Sinc-L excellent for Electronic, R&B, blues, Jazz, Rock, Folk - and preferable to me for these genres over other filters I've tried (so far).

If you have the compute power, compare it with Sinc-MX, ASDM7ECv2, DSD256. I suggest a female vocal that you're familiar with as a comparison.

These are the settings I mentioned using above. Seems to run fine on the M1 mini - but I prefer the PCM filter settings above. In isolation this filter setting sounds fine.

 

[shwnwllms]

Sinc-L is also non-apodising so if you notice your apodising counter going up it’s best to switch to another filter. Sinc-Mx is similar and has the added benefit of being apodising.

 

[Tobes]

Sinc-L is also non-apodising so if you notice your apodising counter going up it’s best to switch to another filter. Sinc-Mx is similar and has the added

Yes, I've read Jussi's rationale that the apodizing filters correct recording filter artefacts in some content. To be honest I haven't looked into it enough to know what I should be listening for and I can't say I've noticed anything jarring while listening.
I could use an apodizing filter to 'correct' those particular recordings, but it may not sound preferable to me anyway due to other characteristics of the filter.
Many argue against the long 'pre-ringing' represented on the impulse response of linear filters, but I find them to sound the most natural and don't hear an issue. While I've found filters that correct this 'issue', with very little 'pre-ringing', may introduce smearing, loss of clarity or other odd artefacts.

FWIW, when I posted in a thread on Audiophile Style that I was comparing Sinc-L and Sinc-Mx and that I was aware they were different due to the apodizing nature of Sinc-Mx, Jussi stated: "Yes, these filters are very different. Both types are extremely long, but that's pretty much the only common thing."
Inferring its more than the apodizing nature that differentiates these filters. Interesting.

 

[shwnwllms]

Yes, I've read Jussi's rationale that the apodizing filters correct recording filter artefacts in some content. To be honest I haven't looked into it enough to know what I should be listening for and I can't say I've noticed anything jarring while listening.
I could use an apodizing filter to 'correct' those particular recordings, but it may not sound preferable to me anyway due to other characteristics of the filter.
Many argue against the long 'pre-ringing' represented on the impulse response of linear filters, but I find them to sound the most natural and don't hear an issue. While I've found filters that correct this 'issue', with very little 'pre-ringing', may introduce smearing, loss of clarity or other odd artefacts.

FWIW, when I posted in a thread on Audiophile Style that I was comparing Sinc-L and Sinc-Mx and that I was aware they were different due to the apodizing nature of Sinc-Mx, Jussi stated: "Yes, these filters are very different. Both types are extremely long, but that's pretty much the only common thing."
Inferring its more than the apodizing nature that differentiates these filters. Interesting.

The manual explains the differences. They are all similar to Chord filters in some respect. You can watch the HQP window for the apodising count

 

[Tobes]

They are all similar to Chord filters in some respect.

I get that - in the sense that they are long, high tap number, linear phase filters.
It was Jussi who referred to Sinc-L and Sinc-Mx saying "Both types are extremely long, but that's pretty much the only common thing"

You can watch the HQP window for the apodising count

Yes, I've observed the count indicating that an apodizing filter would (theoretically) be useful, I just haven't correlated the supposed listening improvement with an apodizing filter. Not saying its not there, just haven't tested sufficiently to substantiate an overall positive effect with an apodizing filter.
Personally I'd find it a bit onerous, during normal listening, to have to monitor the HQPlayer window constantly and switch filters. Others may be more diligent.
I know Jussi says there is no drawback to using an apodizing filter when the issue isn't flagged but states "there is harm using a non-apodizing filter where content would need one". Nonetheless, I haven't heard anything that flags as obvious 'harm'. Then again in my listening session tonight - about an hour of Roon radio via Qobuz - the counter is on '0'.

The manual explains the differences.

The table in the manual lists Sinc-Mx as apodizing with very sharp cutoff and high attenuation.
While Sinc-L is non-apodizing with extremely sharp cutoff and average attenuation.
Not sure if there is a more detailed explanation I missed?

 

[sahmen]

So what's the forum consensus (if there is any) on how the Holo May KTE fares against the Sonnet Audio Pasithea? I am trying to upgrade from a Sonnet Morpheus, and I already use a Metrum Ambre DAC which plays nice with the I2S connectivity on the Pasithea, and that's one thing the Pasithea has going for it in this toss-up. I wouldn't know how to connect the RJ45 implementation of the I2s connection on the Ambre with the HDMI/I2S functionality on the May, but I am hoping there is some satisfactory workaround for that.

Besides this RJ45 I2S connectivity issue, what would be the plusses and minusses of upgrading to either a Holo May KTE or a Sonnet Audio Pasitheaa? My HP Amps are the Niimbus US4 and the Pathos InPol Ear, and I am particularly concerned that my Susvara and 1266 TC be driven well, whatever option I choose. For the record I am quite content with the way my present setup handles both cans, so this inquiry is about an upgrade itch I am trying to scratch. Still I would like to see a noticeably improved difference when I upgrade from the Morpheus, so please chime in with any helpful input you might have.

I am mostly interested in modern/traditional forms of jazz, acoustic music, and forms of what is called "world music," but beyond that I am quite "omnivorous" in my choices of genre enjoyment, and would try anything on a good day.

Thanks again, for any helpful input,

 

[rangerid]

So what's the forum consensus (if there is any) on how the Holo May KTE fares against the Sonnet Audio Pasithea? I am trying to upgrade from a Sonnet Morpheus, and I already use a Metrum Ambre DAC which plays nice with the I2S connectivity on the Pasithea, and that's one thing the Pasithea has going for it in this toss-up. I wouldn't know how to connect the RJ45 implementation of the I2s connection on the Ambre with the HDMI/I2S functionality on the May, but I am hoping there is some satisfactory workaround for that.

Besides this RJ45 I2S connectivity issue, what would be the plusses and minusses of upgrading to either a Holo May KTE or a Sonnet Audio Pasitheaa? My HP Amps are the Niimbus US4 and the Pathos InPol Ear, and I am particularly concerned that my Susvara and 1266 TC be driven well, whatever option I choose. For the record I am quite content with the way my present setup handles both cans, so this inquiry is about an upgrade itch I am trying to scratch. Still I would like to see a noticeably improved difference when I upgrade from the Morpheus, so please chime in with any helpful input you might have.

I am mostly interested in modern/traditional forms of jazz, acoustic music, and forms of what is called "world music," but beyond that I am quite "omnivorous" in my choices of genre enjoyment, and would try anything on a good day.

Thanks again, for any helpful input,

There's a review of sbaf comparing the two here.

I haven't heard the Pasithea but had the May and Morpheus, comparing those 2 the Morpheus is more musical, tonally dense with better colouring and emotions in the music. The May is more technically proficient by a small margin, better extended treble/bass, wider & deeper staging and more detail, however, compared to Sonnet DACs I found it a bit dull. I'd say the Pasithea is a safer bet if you are a fan of the Sonnet house sound than May.

 

[Rayon]

Nonetheless, I haven't heard anything that flags as obvious 'harm'.

I've understood that the "harm" is basically the same as listening redbooks directly in NOS without HQPlayer. There are some errors in the mix due to (poor) mixing.

Then again in my listening session tonight - about an hour of Roon radio via Qobuz - the counter is on '0'.

The counter resets after each song.

The table in the manual lists Sinc-Mx as apodizing with very sharp cutoff and high attenuation.
While Sinc-L is non-apodizing with extremely sharp cutoff and average attenuation.
Not sure if there is a more detailed explanation I missed?

Jussi's (HQPlayer dev) explanation for cutoff and attenuation

Apodizing means that it cleans up those mixing errors from redbook. Well mixed redbook and most Hi-Res don't have those.

 

[Tobes]

I've understood that the "harm" is basically the same as listening redbooks directly in NOS without HQPlayer. There are some errors in the mix due to (poor) mixing.

The counter resets after each song.

Jussi's (HQPlayer dev) explanation for cutoff and attenuation

Apodizing means that it cleans up those mixing errors from redbook. Well mixed redbook and most Hi-Res don't have those.

Yes, I think Jussi suggests that the 'mixing/mastering errors' indicated by the counter mostly manifest as some brightness or HF distortion.
Whether this is noticeable or bothersome in a particular instance probably depends on the type of material and likely the characteristics of the system and listener's preferences.
Recordings may well exhibit similar characteristics regardless of mastering errors.
So far I haven't found the Sinc-L filter to sound fatally flawed on any recordings - which is not so say another filter may sound slightly better in a particular instance.

FWIW I've been listening to the 'Poly-sinc-gauss' filter with my HP setup recently and quite like what I'm hearing. I previously tried some of the other gaussian filters but skipped over this one.

 

[Davidv100]

Hello Holo Audio May community,

My DAC is currently an old PS Audio Digital Link III Mod Cullen IV.
After long hesitation between buying a Gustard R26 or A26, I am now considering to buy a Holo Audio May.

Holo Audio May seems great (especially when reviewed by Goldensound).

Now, I also understand there is (or was) a very annoying issue with a sound gap when switching from one sampling rate to another, for example in a playlist with sources having various PCM sampling rates.

As main reviews are now about two years old, I would like to know if this issue is still existing.
Or has this been solved by an upgrade ?

Other question : Is it true that the Power layer should remain always on for better warming and sound ?
Because I understand this is a 60 Watt continuous power draw - which doesn't bode well with our Planet nowadays.

Thank you very much.

 

[Rayon]

Now, I also understand there is (or was) a very annoying issue with a sound gap when switching from one sampling rate to another, for example in a playlist with sources having various PCM sampling rates.

I've understood that this happens when using something else than USB and PLL is ON. This is probably the case with any DAC that hass PLL. Personally I'm using USB and I have never encountered this issue (or then I just haven't noticed anything).

How would you connect to May?

 

[Davidv100]

I've understood that this happens when using something else than USB and PLL is ON. This is probably the case with any DAC that hass PLL. Personally I'm using USB and I have never encountered this issue (or then I just haven't noticed anything).

How would you connect to May?

Yes, USB only for now, out of a wired connected iPad (Apple Music Hi Res with Lightning/USB).
But may be I2S latter (when this link becomes more common).

 

[Rayon]

Yes, USB only for now, out of a wired connected iPad (Apple Music Hi Res with Lightning/USB).
But may be I2S latter (when this link becomes more common).

May's USB implementation is really good (on lvl2 and lvl3/KTE). Personally I see no reason to use anything else if you can use USB. At least how I see it.

 

[Davidv100]

May's USB implementation is really good (on lvl2 and lvl3/KTE). Personally I see no reason to use anything else if you can use USB. At least how I see it.

Thank you Rayon,
And, in a few words (because I guess you have already given your feed-back many times - sorry about that),
- Still happy with your May ?
- And issue that I should be aware of ?
- If you had to consider another DAC what would it be ?

Thanks

PS: I scrolled through all your posts. You seem happy May be only temperature concern ? Correct ?

 

[Rayon]

Thank you Rayon,
And, in a few words (because I guess you have already given your feed-back many times - sorry about that),
- Still happy with your May ?
- And issue that I should be aware of ?
- If you had to consider another DAC what would it be ?

Thanks

No problem, happy to comment. If you want to discuss further, feel free to PM.
- Still very happy with May.
- No issues personally. Just be aware of the size and that it runs somewhat hot.
- Things I would consider (haven't tried but Dave):

• Rockna Wavedream Signature Balanced
• Bricasti m1 SE
• MSB Discrete
• Esoteric N-05XD
• Chord Dave
• Weiss DAC502
• Mola Mola Tambaqui
• Maybe some Lampizator?

I would probably check this if I was you btw. Interesting comparisons there.

But then things that makes May kind of unique:

• Insanely good both in sound quality AND measurements
• Value (it's real competitors are much more expensive)
• The combination of true NOS and support for both 1.536mHz PCM and DSD1024
  • When you chain HQPlayer into May you get something incredible
    • Especially the soundstage benefits a lotfrom upsamling to higher sample rate with HQPlayer and scaling seems to continue to the highest available rates
      • The fact that May supports the highest rates in the market (I think) and is able to actually utilize them, gives it an edge over it's competitors
    • You get state of the art filters that you can run on a powerful PC, tapping into the R&D behind CPU chips
    • You get a wide variety of filters to choose from
      • The possibility to tailor the sound to your liking and setup is super nice
        • I've noticed that I like different filters with different headphones
      • This will make you an addict