[Drewligarchy]

I personally don't consider the Bricasti M1 SE bright. I would say it is very transparent and honest. It will expose the weakest link in the audio chain including the recording. I have 2 of them. One driving directly a pair of Bricasti M28 monoblocks in balanced mode and at the same time feeding a Wells Audio Engima (with upgrades) from the single ended outputs. Both, the speaker system and the Enigma sound excellent in my opinion and the bass depth and control from the M28 are so good. Those M28 killed my McIntosh MC-601 monoblocks hands down.
The other M1 SE is feeding a McIntosh C2300 preamp and my RSA A10 Thunderbolt Electrostatic amp that I use with the SR-009 and I do not find it bright at all. I am using WireWorld Eclipse 7 (OCC Copper) interconnects.

Musicman - very interested in your findings. We're both running 009s, but your obviously different Amps - and its SS vs Tube (also the preamp obviously).

Have you tried running the M1 directly to your A10? Do you have the network card on your SE? Are you using that or another input.

 

[musicman59]

Actually the M1 is connected directly to the A10. I am splitting the balanced signal out o the M1 to feed the C2300 and the A10 from it at the same time.
I don't have the network card because it cam afterwards and I have a couple of Aurender serves. In one system I have the Aurender N10 feeding the M1 Se via AES digital and in the other system is an Aurender N100H feeding the M1 SE via USB. Brian Zolner (Bricasti President) has been insisting me to send my units to install the Network card and get rid of the Aurenders btu have not made my mind yet because I don't have my home wired with Ethernet cat cables and don't want to go wireless.
I have heard Brian's demos system several times with the Network card and it works and sounds great. For somebody with multiple M1 SE or not a dedicated server it is a no brainer. The interesting portion is that Audirvana or JRiver are not actually the players. They are just serving the digital files to the card and the actual player is within the Network card which then has a direct connection to the digital module in the M1 SE so it is a much direct path.

I am actually goig to sale one of my M1 SE (in a very attractive price) to upgrade to the new M21. If somebody is interested and wants the Network card I can get it for that person installed at the factory also by a nice price (just a pass through cost).

 

[astrostar59]

I'd really like to try the Mojo Audio Mystique v3 balanced, but I don't see myself ever spending that much on a DAC.

There are big gains to be made in the source component. You have a top 3.5K HP in the LCD4, so I would say v close to the performance of the best 50K+ 2 channel speakers. You get my drift... not all DACs sound the same, and the difference is more marked than I realised until fairly recently.

 

[astrostar59]

Yes - agree about the USB. Using AES from the Aries which sounds better to me. Don't get me wrong, the Yggy, overall - is the best DAC I've heard with the Carbon/009 overall - I just know other DAcs can do better with certain material.

Really hard without getting a bunch into the system.

Try the Chord DAVE, TotalDAC 6 or the Aries Cerat Kassandra, the gains keep going up in that order (and order of magnitude). There is more in the DAC as a source than many realise. Granted those DACs are not cheap, but they are not the MSB Select or other 80K nonsense to get to the top of the digital mountain. Actually I heard the MSB Reference at 'only' 40k at Munich Hi-End and it was very underwhelming. So price does not always relate to performance. I would recommend the Aries Cerat Kassandra as a top contender, it is my end game after years of searching.

 

[Whitigir]

You are and will be dead wrong if you underestimate how important your Transportation Source is.

 

[astrostar59]

Yes agree. I have tried the Aurender N100H I think it was. Quite good, maybe slightly dark? I have stuck with my Mac Mini albeit tweaked up, as I have to yet hear a better contender. A good CDP can sound great as well outputting Spdif or I2S. Some guys on WB Forum rate Windows as the best system to build a music server. It is exploding this subject, as network renderers can handle the whole deal on the card. Interesting subject indeed guys. Going back to my server, it is beating any CDP I have tried to date, and has moved ahead further more recently with the latest build of Roon, which sounds cleaner than Audirvana+ (finally). And so it should, those guys have big budgets, Audirvana is tiny by comparison, though respect for holding ground on it till now.

A thing that hugely affects how good or how much effect various server have over the DAC is the clocking in the DAC. Many manufacturers are coming to the realisation it is best to do clocking as near the chip as possible. I always questioned the logic (up selling) of all these external clocks and power supplies, such as dCS, Esoteric and MSB at prices of 20K and up per extra box. A really well implemented input with double clocking seems to eradicate a lot of these issues. And then the avoidance of noise in the server is most important as well.

The N100 I demo'd had a SMPS I believe, and other budget constraints. Possibly the top models are superb, but you are looking at 10K+. I question if they really are worth it and do they make any difference? Might need to get a demo to find out.....

 

[Whitigir]

In my opinion, Windows is the best because it is made to welcome many changes, very open, and many developers. It does not necessarily meant to be the best based Os for Audio performances.

USB was never intended for Audio performances. It was intended for what it was, universal! As oppose to I2S, which was specially designed for High quality digital audio, every DAC that I have known is speaking the language of I2S.

Since building my new transport PC, the improved performances are excellent. Yes, transport is very very important, which many people forget to look at

 

[astrostar59]

E
Whitigir
How much did you spend building your current server? Have you built it yourself? Have to compared it to the latest Aurender units?

The player software also impacts the sound.

I agree on i2S, but that format is not normally resident in a PC or Windows, so it needs a card. That card has to be spectacular to not 'mess' with the data IMO. So we either mess with the data at the PC end, or risk USB to mess with the data on the way to the DAC. There has been a LOT of dev spent on getting USB to be leading edge for audio. I was very negative about it till earlier this year, preferring to use Ethernet as a transfer protocol. But USB finally beat my DAW with Ethernet and SPDIF.

A few guys I know had top i2S chains feeding the Audio GD R2R DAC, but recently one of them got the DAVE and on that USB beats i2S squarely. Granted all this is both PC and DAC dependent. But I would say i2S is not the only way to the top of the tree on feeding data to the chip.

I2S has the 'advantage 'of separating the clock from the data lines, so 1 data line, 2 clock lines. But any modern DAC worth it's salt will clock the data and ignore the clock from the sender, so asyncronious. In other words the clock from the sender is garbage, inaccurate and unreliable, full or jitter. Most modern DAC at this level clock at the entry to the DAC. So we are left with the type of interface for the transfer. USB is dead simple, and resident to the PC or Mac or server. IMO this is why it has survived as long as it has.

 

[Rhamnetin]

Oh, Rhamnetin I’m keen to hear your thoughts of the LCd4 with the bipolar amp. All this talk is making me want to try the LCD4...

I'm returning it! The Pure BiPolar, Hugo 2, and parametric EQ aren't enough to curb the LCD-4's main flaw: dips in the 4-8 KHz range causing recession and just unnatural sound primarily for vocals. I enjoy ZMF's modded T50RPs more. Stax is really the only way to go for top of the line headphones I think...

 

[Whitigir]

E
Whitigir
How much did you spend building your current server? Have you built it yourself? Have to compared it to the latest Aurender units?

The player software also impacts the sound.

I agree on i2S, but that format is not normally resident in a PC or Windows, so it needs a card. That card has to be spectacular to not 'mess' with the data IMO. So we either mess with the data at the PC end, or risk USB to mess with the data on the way to the DAC. There has been a LOT of dev spent on getting USB to be leading edge for audio. I was very negative about it till earlier this year, preferring to use Ethernet as a transfer protocol. But USB finally beat my DAW with Ethernet and SPDIF.

A few guys I know had top i2S chains feeding the Audio GD R2R DAC, but recently one of them got the DAVE and on that USB beats i2S squarely. Granted all this is both PC and DAC dependent. But I would say i2S is not the only way to the top of the tree on feeding data to the chip.

I2S has the 'advantage 'of separating the clock from the data lines, so 1 data line, 2 clock lines. But any modern DAC worth it's salt will clock the data and ignore the clock from the sender, so asyncronious. In other words the clock from the sender is garbage, inaccurate and unreliable, full or jitter. Most modern DAC at this level clock at the entry to the DAC. So we are left with the type of interface for the transfer. USB is dead simple, and resident to the PC or Mac or server. IMO this is why it has survived as long as it has.

Dave has I2S input ?

Yes, I built my PC as also top I2S chain. It uses very expensive bridge and upgraded OCXO clocks. Great LPS, does Dave have LPS ? I keep wondering

DAC can clock by itself, but then it is also relying on USB clocks. Then, UsB has more conversion steps than I2S. The less conversion is the better, it is the same for even mechanical, the less is the better.

USB is not that simple as you think, it needs a conversion at the PC with precision clock, then it need conversion at the Input module with Precision clocks.....this Module and it clocks is what outputting I2S into your DAC! Oh, and then Isolator, and powersupply for this module! You need to look at USB interface again and see where you are missing the point.

This link is to the thread with Pc build for this i2s. I can also build it for USB, only need a bridge and upgraded clock, but I am not using it now
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-importances-of-good-pc-as-digital-transport.880884/

 

[musicman59]

Yes agree. I have tried the Aurender N100H I think it was. Quite good, maybe slightly dark? I have stuck with my Mac Mini albeit tweaked up, as I have to yet hear a better contender. A good CDP can sound great as well outputting Spdif or I2S. Some guys on WB Forum rate Windows as the best system to build a music server. It is exploding this subject, as network renderers can handle the whole deal on the card. Interesting subject indeed guys. Going back to my server, it is beating any CDP I have tried to date, and has moved ahead further more recently with the latest build of Roon, which sounds cleaner than Audirvana+ (finally). And so it should, those guys have big budgets, Audirvana is tiny by comparison, though respect for holding ground on it till now.

A thing that hugely affects how good or how much effect various server have over the DAC is the clocking in the DAC. Many manufacturers are coming to the realisation it is best to do clocking as near the chip as possible. I always questioned the logic (up selling) of all these external clocks and power supplies, such as dCS, Esoteric and MSB at prices of 20K and up per extra box. A really well implemented input with double clocking seems to eradicate a lot of these issues. And then the avoidance of noise in the server is most important as well.

The N100 I demo'd had a SMPS I believe, and other budget constraints. Possibly the top models are superb, but you are looking at 10K+. I question if they really are worth it and do they make any difference? Might need to get a demo to find out.....

I used to have two mac Mini all tweeked, external LPS and bunch of iFi filters and WireWorld Platinum cables then I switched to the Aurender servers and never looked back.

 

[astrostar59]

I'm returning it! The Pure BiPolar, Hugo 2, and parametric EQ aren't enough to curb the LCD-4's main flaw: dips in the 4-8 KHz range causing recession and just unnatural sound primarily for vocals. I enjoy ZMF's modded T50RPs more. Stax is really the only way to go for top of the line headphones I think...

Don't want to wind folk up in a Carbon / 009 thread. Have you tried Roons EQ? I presume you are not using the fairly crude Hugo filter EQ function?

I think there is something deeper going on. Spritzers amp may be good, but maybe the Hugo? Dunno. I have said it before but a 3.5K HP needs a very good source indeed to shine, or it will reveal all IMO.

I have an FR sweep, and tested my 009 and Carbon before I sold them. It had a pronounced 4.5-6K hump that probably emphasised the lower treble and presence region, about 3.5dB I estimated, and thus I had my EQ set to defeat that back to zero more or less. The same test on my LCD4 shows a mild dip around 5-7K of around -3dB, so the polar opposite of the 009s out of my Carbon. This no doubt reveals the polar opposites of these HPs.

I can level the LCD4 to my taste in Roon with one FR curve. It fixes it for me. Obviously tastes come into this. I will say the 009s can be unforgiving, so even on my then 20K Audio Note tubed DAC, some recordings were heading to harsh treble especially on female vocals and violins etc. My personal acceptance value for any sibilance or treble issues may be hyper sensitive, i.e. I can accept less to enjoy the piece.

Lastly, I keep saying it, but a lot of the problems in the final sound can be from the source, it has to be really good to stand the test of any high end HP, ones that reveal more in the music.

Hope this helps.

 

[buzzlulu]

Lastly, I keep saying it, but a lot of the problems in the final sound can be from the source, it has to be really good to stand the test of any high end HP, ones that reveal more in the music.

I do not want to comment on this particular situation since I have no experience with the headphones mentioned. On thing I will say since my return back to Headfi after a 15 year absence ( I'm a two channel guy) is that many do not realize that it is

ALWAYS - SOURCE FIRST.

That is where most of the dollars need to be spent. You can have the best headphone in the world - if your source is not good - then forget it.

My current headphone is the Utopia - it is easy to see it improve depending on the source. I had it on a Mojo, WM1Z, TA-ZH1ES, and finally on the big boys in my two channel system. When it is run there, on my Linn sources, it is a different animal. I have a 009S which I will most likely be pulling the trigger on and I am sure that it will sound divine. Even my first foray into Stax, the L300LE/353XLE, sounds AMAZING from my two channel sources. When considering the 300/353 is $1700 and the Utopia is $4K (without amp) the Stax setup is amazing value for money imho.

 

[Whitigir]

Source is important, and there are source that is $16,000 or $17,000 out there

Check out Aurender W20 , just one of them, for fun and giggling.

 

[Rhamnetin]

Don't want to wind folk up in a Carbon / 009 thread. Have you tried Roons EQ? I presume you are not using the fairly crude Hugo filter EQ function?

I think there is something deeper going on. Spritzers amp may be good, but maybe the Hugo? Dunno. I have said it before but a 3.5K HP needs a very good source indeed to shine, or it will reveal all IMO.

I have an FR sweep, and tested my 009 and Carbon before I sold them. It had a pronounced 4.5-6K hump that probably emphasised the lower treble and presence region, about 3.5dB I estimated, and thus I had my EQ set to defeat that back to zero more or less. The same test on my LCD4 shows a mild dip around 5-7K of around -3dB, so the polar opposite of the 009s out of my Carbon. This no doubt reveals the polar opposites of these HPs.

I can level the LCD4 to my taste in Roon with one FR curve. It fixes it for me. Obviously tastes come into this. I will say the 009s can be unforgiving, so even on my then 20K Audio Note tubed DAC, some recordings were heading to harsh treble especially on female vocals and violins etc. My personal acceptance value for any sibilance or treble issues may be hyper sensitive, i.e. I can accept less to enjoy the piece.

Lastly, I keep saying it, but a lot of the problems in the final sound can be from the source, it has to be really good to stand the test of any high end HP, ones that reveal more in the music.

Hope this helps.

Not using any of the filters since indeed they ruin the sound. That's just how the LCD-4 is, seems you identified the same dip I'm referring to. Audeze has always had that, that's their intention I suppose. I used EqualizerAPO to add to that region, and while it helps it's not enough. It's alright, I'll take those funds and listen to the SR-009S in a few months and maybe wind up with one eventually.