[Asr]

Quote:

ive posted a few impressions of GS-X vs. Master 8.  
basically the master 8 is slightly brighter than the gsx but both are fairly neutral with a similar sound signature. the master 8 has a bigger soundstage and more air, the gsx slightly warmer. but overall both sound pretty much dead neutral.

 
Nothing against your post, but unless you compared the amps on at least two different sources, you can't fairly evaluate the GS-X vs any other amp. As I mentioned before, using only one source won't tell you much about the GS-X when it adopts the sound of the source. If you found it "warmer"-sounding it's more likely that was your source you were hearing and the Master 8 has an imposed "colder" sound.
 
I heard the GS-X MK1 on more than 5 different sources and got a different sound with it on each one, and the MK2 on 2 different sources and found it to act the same way.

 

[magiccabbage]

  Quote:
 
Nothing against your post, but unless you compared the amps on at least two different sources, you can't fairly evaluate the GS-X vs any other amp. As I mentioned before, using only one source won't tell you much about the GS-X when it adopts the sound of the source. If you found it "warmer"-sounding it's more likely that was your source you were hearing and the Master 8 has an imposed "colder" sound.
 
I heard the GS-X MK1 on more than 5 different sources and got a different sound with it on each one, and the MK2 on 2 different sources and found it to act the same way.

And your conclusions? you have a very impressive inventory - well done! 

 

[Asr]

And your conclusions?

 
You mean sonic conclusions of the MK2 - i.e., impressions? I never really formed any, the only thing I can say is that the amp likely scales up with very high-end sources and it's even more likely that I didn't hear even close to what it's capable of achieving.
 
I guess the most I can say is that it was a lot like the MK1 - perfectly clear, pristine, holographic, and fast. And where other amps tend to roll off treble, the GS-X (MK1/MK2) didn't.

 

[Canadian411]

 
ive posted a few impressions of GS-X vs. Master 8.
 
basically the master 8 is slightly brighter than the gsx but both are fairly neutral with a similar sound signature. the master 8 has a bigger soundstage and more air, the gsx slightly warmer. but overall both sound pretty much dead neutral.

 


So both Audio-DG MASTER 8 and 9 are half price and as good as GSX-MK2 ? Which is more powerful ?

I am looking to replace Burson HA-160DS <-- very weak,

 

[negura]

 


So both Audio-DG MASTER 8 and 9 are half price and as good as GSX-MK2 ? Which is more powerful ?

I am looking to replace Burson HA-160DS <-- very weak,

 
You can check that yourself. Master 9 is more powerful in W. This being the GS-X thread, my subjective opinion: there's no contest which one looks better. But I am sure there are some that may prefer the AudioGD.

 

[Dubstep Girl]

 

   
ive posted a few impressions of GS-X vs. Master 8.
 
basically the master 8 is slightly brighter than the gsx but both are fairly neutral with a similar sound signature. the master 8 has a bigger soundstage and more air, the gsx slightly warmer. but overall both sound pretty much dead neutral.

 


So both Audio-DG MASTER 8 and 9 are half price and as good as GSX-MK2 ? Which is more powerful ?

I am looking to replace Burson HA-160DS <-- very weak,

 
they are basically the same performance-wise, hard to tell the difference really except for the treble and the soundstage. the master 8 is slightly less powerful than the gsx mk2, but the difference is tiny, like 7 vs 8 watts or something like that (used HE-6 for that), has more than enough power for everything else. 
 
not sure on master 9.
 

  Quote:
 
Nothing against your post, but unless you compared the amps on at least two different sources, you can't fairly evaluate the GS-X vs any other amp. As I mentioned before, using only one source won't tell you much about the GS-X when it adopts the sound of the source. If you found it "warmer"-sounding it's more likely that was your source you were hearing and the Master 8 has an imposed "colder" sound.
 
I heard the GS-X MK1 on more than 5 different sources and got a different sound with it on each one, and the MK2 on 2 different sources and found it to act the same way.

 
oh they had the same source. both of them. they would both adopt the sound of the mytek 192. 
 
after noting the differences, it was pretty easy to tell with all the headphones, the hd 800, lcd-x, lcd-3, t1, th-900. all had slightly more treble and soundstage on the master 8, and the gsx mk2 was always slightly more neutral and just a tiny tiny bit warm in the mids, not really a coloration, but a sort of laid-backness to it. 
 
still at first, its hard to tell the difference. both are just as good and are generally neutral overall.

 

[negura]

   
they are basically the same performance-wise, hard to tell the difference really except for the treble and the soundstage. the master 8 is slightly less powerful than the gsx mk2, but the difference is tiny, like 7 vs 8 watts or something like that (used HE-6 for that), has more than enough power for everything else. 
 
not sure on master 9.
 
 
oh they had the same source. both of them. they would both adopt the sound of the mytek 192. 
 
after noting the differences, it was pretty easy to tell with all the headphones, the hd 800, lcd-x, lcd-3, t1, th-900. all had slightly more treble and soundstage on the master 8, and the gsx mk2 was always slightly more neutral and just a tiny tiny bit warm in the mids, not really a coloration, but a sort of laid-backness to it. 
 
still at first, its hard to tell the difference. both are just as good and are generally neutral overall.

 
This is very interesting. I've seen mentions of the Mytek 192 being slightly bright. It things were ever as simple as 1+1, that would mean the GS-X is warmer sounding. And the Master 8 more transparent to the source.

 

[Canadian411]

 
You can check that yourself. Master 9 is more powerful in W. This being the GS-X thread, my subjective opinion: there's no contest which one looks better. But I am sure there are some that may prefer the AudioGD.

 

Thanks for the info. As for the look, to be honest I don't find both GSXMK2 or Master 8/9 attractive at all.

I really liked the GSX but not the MK2, again it's subjective.

 

[Dubstep Girl]

   
This is very interesting. I've seen mentions of the Mytek 192 being slightly bright. It things were ever as simple as 1+1, that would mean the GS-X is warmer tinted. And the Master 8 more transparent to the source.

 
it has a long burn-in period.
 
the first few weeks, i was kinda upset with it, it sounded digital with artificial treble.
 
it slowly changed and now i would describe it the same as the gsx mk2, dead neutral and just slightly laid back in the mids, maybe its just so clean and transparent theres no grain or harshness anywhere. 
 
the treble can be bright, but the setup isn't bright and unforgiving like some might think. even with the hd 800, the gsx mk2 and mytek 192 can even be slightly warm at times. almost having some tube like qualities, despite the neutrality. i guess i'll just call it musicality and naturalness for now 

 
else, how can we really describe the sound of nothingness 

 wire with gain.......

 

[negura]

   
it has a long burn-in period.
 
the first few weeks, i was kinda upset with it, it sounded digital with artificial treble.
 
it slowly changed and now i would describe it the same as the gsx mk2, dead neutral and just slightly laid back in the mids, maybe its just so clean and transparent theres no grain or harshness anywhere. 
 
the treble can be bright, but the setup isn't bright and unforgiving like some might think. even with the hd 800, the gsx mk2 and mytek 192 can even be slightly warm at times. almost having some tube like qualities, despite the neutrality. i guess i'll just call it musicality and naturalness for now 

 
else, how can we really describe the sound of nothingness 

 wire with gain.......

 
I am not sure if this applies here, but my experience with trying to find the "magic" balance in various downstreams, there was a difference between inputs and was worthwhile experimenting with different interfaces, power supply solutions and to a lesser extent cables. I found these do fine tune the sound and can also improve the SQ of the DAC. For example the PWD2 USB input I am finding a bit too laid back, warmer and not as open as an external interface via AES. That was a bit the reverse problem you initially had/have, but it could work the other way around.

 

[Dubstep Girl]

i just end up using the myteks usb and downgraded from a .75 meter audioquest carbon to a 5 meter audioquest forest due to space issues. i do use the carbon for on-the-go and for meets though.
 
maybe one day i'll get a 3 meter carbon or something but for now the forest usb works for me.

 

[preproman]

5 Meters = to something like 16 feet.  WOW that's a long USB cable.  

 

[Greed]

  5 Meters = to something like 16 feet.  WOW that's a long USB cable.  

 
Too long...

 

[magiccabbage]

yea, i use this - 3 metre Chord USB silver plus. its probably not in the same league in terms of quality though but it is handy.
 

 

[magiccabbage]

  5 Meters = to something like 16 feet.  WOW that's a long USB cable.  

whats the new DAC like? Its a pity you don't have the gsx anymore for impressions via DP-777