Mytek Brooklyn Thread

Discussion in 'Dedicated Source Components' started by watchdog507, Mar 6, 2017.
  1. watchdog507
    The Brooklyn is a versatile product it's a DAC, a Phono Amp, it has Preamp functions including analog and Digital Volume and it's a Headphone amp. All well and good but in my opinion it shines as a DAC and that's how I've used it and how most users use it. I believe in separates and optimizing functions. The Brooklyn has never had glowing reviews as a headphone amp the Brooklyn + who knows.
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2017
    knopi likes this.
  2. Mojo777
    I can report that the headphone amp in the DAC + is much improved this go around. More control, balance, with no hint of distortion even at high levels. Sounds great using the balanced adapter
     
    captblaze likes this.
  3. captblaze
    I would agree. and playing through speakers is improved with better resolution and wider presentation
     
  4. exdmd
    I own a Brooklyn DAC+ and the headphone amp is OK but my HD 800 S sound better using the DAC+ with a Vali 2. You don't buy a DAC+ for the headphone amp but the ability to play MQA.
     
  5. captblaze
    most higher end Senns do better with tubes pushing the juice. that is a given, but in terms of comparison between the original Brooklyn and the plus, the plus is an improvement.

    as for MQA, Tidal for Windows decodes MQA in software, so you don't necessarily need a DAC to do that
     
  6. Left Channel
    Oh how I hate to open this can of worms again, but just to clarify...
    • Tidal does MQA software decoding, resulting in 1x "unfolding" and up to 24/88.2 or 24/96, and
    • an MQA "renderer" like the AudioQuest DragonFly makes further use of that software decoding, but
    • a full MQA hardware DAC requires an undecoded bit perfect stream, and produces 4x unfolding and up to 24/192.

    To use the Brooklyn/Brooklyn+ with a Tidal MQA stream, the instructions are to turn off Tidal MQA decoding and turn on bit perfect pass-through.

    References:
    * MQA Decoding Explained | AudioStream
    * MQA Playback | Bob Talks
     
    Wildcatsare1 likes this.
  7. captblaze
    I truly understand that, but I doubt if you had 20 people listen to the 2 (software vs. hardware decode) you would get a 50% correct in a truly blind test. do I have proof of this, no... I just have a lifetime of real world experience and that experience has shown me that a very small sample of humans have keen enough hearing for it to matter. I own a + and I use it for a full decode of MQA. that doesn't mean when I do a software decode into my Woo WA-8 the sound it produces is any less enjoyable than through the +
     
  8. Left Channel
    Not saying I can hear a difference, but some say they can. On a different DAC that has a Distortion Compensation feature, I prefer to have that enabled when playing MQA. Just sayin'.

    Personally I usually prefer Qobuz over Tidal, and managed to subscribe from the US. A large portion of the Qobuz catalog streams in hi-res.
     
  9. captblaze
    I would have tried Qobuz, but they were region restricted when I last tried. I also tried Deezer and Spotify and for me the best value is with Tidal, although I will give Qobuz a try
     
  10. Left Channel
    The Qobuz Sublime+ hi-res tier is no value, that's for sure. But this is how you do it: clear your browser cache, then VPN to a UK server, open http://www.qobuz.com/gb-en/discover and sign up. Use PayPal to avoid fees. Download the app. Then turn off VPN, and you're good-to-go.
     
  11. DelsFan
    It's not a question of software vs hardware decode, it's a question of
    - nothing at all; vs
    - software only decode (first unfold only); vs
    - software decode coupled with, at the DAC, the final two levels of unfold.

    MQA (website) claims with the second and third unfoldings at the compatible DAC, the improvement is greatest; perhaps 80% of the improvement is heard from the second and third unfolds.
    MQA claims one can get a better result with just one unfold, compared to listening without MQA at all. Maybe this isn't a big deal; maybe only a few people can tell the difference, maybe it is a slight improvement (as they claim), maybe any noticeable improvement depends heavily on whether you are listening on your personal audio system or budget home system or high-end home system.

    Without having assembled my system yet, I'd surmise (so, draw a tentative conclusion using one's brain, but without having done significant and formal research):
    - If you have a portable player for jogging with $5 or $50 earbuds, the first unfold might not make a hill of beans difference.
    - If the educated and diligent audiophile has a tolerable portable player - plus the reasonably priced MQA compatible Dragonfly Black (so, the listener now gets the benefit of all three unfolds) - and some quality earbuds, AND before their jog they are quietly sitting on the park bench (look both ways for Aqualung), I'll surmise they could probably hear the difference if their only goal at the time is... to see whether or not they could hear the difference.
    - During their jog, maybe the particular listener would have only the comfort of "knowing" they are sending "good" audio to their ears - but couldn't actually tell the difference.

    Surmising for home systems:
    - Budget equipment, no power conditioning or interconnects or improved room acoustics - and one vs zero unfolds - maybe no one can tell anything with any consistency.
    - How about streaming with all three unfolds with a high-end system under somewhat optimized conditions? Based on current information and not (yet) trying it myself: Respected reviewers of the best equipment available, since the advent of the Linn Sondek turntable, to the advent of crappy CDs, through to the pretty good digital reconstitution we have today... say they can always hear an improvement with MQA.
    Maybe they are mistaken during NOT blind testing. Maybe they are lying. Maybe they are just shills for The Man: the people who advertise with their publications.
    I'm saying:
    - Most people who post on the internet that MQA doesn't work have never heard three unfolds on any system, quality or not.
    - I find it hard to believe well-respected audio journalists are just lying in order to sell us an outright bill of goods.


    Since I will be doing a lot of hopefully high-end listening (dedicated electrical circuit, HE-1000 headphones, tube amp, etc) via the Tidal stream, the big deal to me with the Tidal Masters selections is not whether MQA works a little, a lot, or not at all. The selling point for me is: I "believe" I am at least listening to a hand-picked hopefully "best" recording of whichever song or album I'm listening to - as opposed to who knows what cheap reissue or remaster, whose engineer's purpose was to mix something that sounded good on earbuds and in teenagers' cars.

    Oh darn, I came here in order to ask a question elsewhere. Sorry for the rant.
     
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2017
    Wildcatsare1 likes this.
  12. Left Channel
    MQA = million questions asked. Let's get back to the Brooklyn+, assemble our systems, then discuss.

    My most recent take on MQA is here, and there are very long threads here and here. We may have finally worn ourselves out there, but it's easy to wake up hornet nests by poking with a stick.

    Or for some fresh meat with a side of tasty vitriol, try "MQA is Vaporware" and "Is Audiophiledom a confidence game?" over on CA.
     
  13. exdmd
    Not all MQA releases on Tidal are excellent. Many are exceptional though and well worth the $20 a month to me for the range of music available. I am happy with the Brooklyn DAC+ and HD 800S. Just waiting for Justin to build my Kenzie amp to complete my system, hopefully, for a while.
     
  14. ahmadfaizadnan
    I am not sure if this has been asked before but has anyone compare it with manhattan ii?
     
  15. sawindra
    different beast...MII has the ESS9038Pro chip, and higher voltage rails, avoids dc-dc converters in the analog paths...best DAC I have owned..
     

Share This Page