The review of the SOtM tx-USBultra was on line only minutes when the questions arrived
whether it would pay to use it in-between the SOtM sMS-200ultra and the DAC.
Well, that looked to me like washing your cloths twice…..
Let me clarify: the sMS-200ultra is a streamer slash network audio interface by SOtM.
It essentially is the standard sMS-200 with an added reclocking board.
See the link below this video or at the end of this video for a review of both versions.
When I reviewed the sMS-200 I immediately bought it.
Then the Ultra edition came out and I thought it might bring improvements but not to the
extend it did.
The sMS-200 is very good hifi, the sMS-200Ultra is from another planet, as you might have
seen in my video review.
It immediately took the place of the standard sMS-200.
So why would you place the tx-USBultra in series with the sMS-200ultra?
"Because it further increases the sound quality", according to SOtM.
OK, let's set up a test.
It wouldn't make sense to use either the sMS-200Ultra or the tx-USBultra powered by
the switching mode power supply they come with since I know the clear improvement audiophile
power supplies bring, being the SMPS based sPS-500 by SOtM or the sBooster.
My Uptone UltraCAPS LPS-1 doesn't supply the necessary 9 volts DC.
This time the SOtM distributor didn't supply the SOtM power supply for I have the sBooster
at hand.
The difference between the sBooster and SOtM - if there is a difference - is such that
I wouldn't buy the SOtM if the sound quality is the only criterium.
The SOtM does look a lot better, especially when combined with the Ultra products.
To get back to the review: I borrowed a second sBooster power supply.
So now the SOtM sMS-200Ultra was fed from an sBooster too.
It received audio over the AudioQuest Diamond ethernet cable via an sBooster powered TP-Link
switch from The Roon Rock running on a sixth generation Intel NUC i3 that is powered with
the standard power supply.
In the standard setup a AudioQuest Diamond USB cable was used to connect it to the Mytek
Brooklyn DAC.
The interlink to the amp was the Crystal Cable Standard Diamond.
Watch my video " Tweaking my network audio interface" for more details.
The link is below this video in Youtube and at the end of this video.
This setup sounds so well that it would take a lot of money to find a second front end
that sounds as well.
When a Dutch retailer criticised the Brooklyn by saying that his customers found the difference
between MQA and non-MQA files on the Brooklyn very small and that they didn't like the
Brooklyn anyway, I claimed that it would come frighteningly close to a Meridian UltraDAC.
The dealer was a Meridian dealer but not a Mytek dealer, of course.
My Dutch colleague Jaap Veenstra of alpha-audio.nl was interested in that comparison so I agreed
to take my setup to his listening studio.
He had arranged a Meridian Reference 818 v3 pre-amp and DAC, the UltraDAC was not available
and this was close enough to make the point.
The conclusion in a nutshell was that there was a sound character difference so it's
a matter of preference whether you like one over the other.
And, of course, my setup is a stack of boxes while the Meridian is a neat one box solution
while the pre-amp functions of the Meridian far exceeds that of the Brooklyn.
But it also costs more than double.
For those that master the Dutch language I'll put the link in the show notes.
The test simply puts the tx-USBultra in and out the chain between the sMS-200Ultra and
the Mytek Brooklyn.
Since I have only one AudioQuest Diamond USB, I used the USB cable that came with the tx-USBultra
to connect it to the sMS-200Ultra and used the AudioQuest between the tx and the DAC.
The idea being that the last cable to the DAC has the highest quality.
IN my setup 1 any switching mode power supply is connected to a mains filter not to disturb
the mains going to linear power supplies that feed sensitive digital and analogue audio.
Please bare in mind that at this level everything and anything can have it's influence.
Well it must be clear that I didn't expect much of it, it's just that you, the viewers,
and SOtM persisted.
And I am glad you did.
For it appears indeed that even more quality is hidden in those damned bits.
Now let me be clear: if the jump from the sMS-200 to the sMS-200ultra was an increase
in quality of 100% or so - if you can express his in percentages - the quality increase
adding the tx-USBultra is another 30 percent.
Not that I want to be negative, I am very positively surprised such an increase is still
possible.
As long as you don't have the wrong expectations.
Now, what exactly did improve further?
The stereo image became larger while more in focus.
Percussion came with even more speed and more detached from the background, the tonality
in the lows got even better, voices became even more real and the background was even
blacker.
If you consider the sound quality the sMS-200Ultra offers - I have amazed quite a number of very
experienced listeners with it - the extra quality the tx-USBultra adds is amazing.
It does wonders on modern recordings, like Loners by Caroline Rose, but also on classics
like Space Oddity in MQA by David Bowie or vingt chansons d'or by Charles Aznavour,
also in MQA.
Of course, the period sound remains but because you can listen deeper into the music, it fascinates
even more.
I might even hear more detail than the artists then did.
Of course, the laws of diminishing returns apply here too.
Remember the tx-USBultra is a thousand euros without the power supply.
But let me give you an example where it can save you money or even your marriage.
The sMS-200Ultra already made the lows more defined and more tonal.
The tx-USBultra even goes one step further, leading to a better low end in my room.
I of course sit at the sweet spot when judging equipment but not always on other occasions.
Using the Ultra's made the area where proper lows can be heard a lot wider.
I often hear people say that buying expensive equipment without room treatment is a waste
of money.
I strongly believe that when you place your speakers properly - see my video on speaker
placement - and have the right combination of equipment, there is no need for acoustic
treatment unless you live in a fish tank - those quasi-modern houses where the living has glass
walls on two or three sides.
The next time you visit such a house, please note that coughing or walking on high heels
already causes an unpleasant sound that masks any conversation.
If that is the case, a stereo will sound bad too.
But if in the room an acoustic piano can sound good, then why not a stereo?
Audio is all about learning and I have learned that in the end our auditory system is capable
of so much more than we can understand.
I rather have an sMS-200Ultra than MQA for the effect is so much bigger.
But why not stack it: use the sMS-200Ultra with the txUSBultra AND MQA for it really
all stacks up to a quality I would not have believed possible for this kind of money only
a few years ago.
And I keep searching - assisted by your questions and advises - for even better quality at a
lower price, as long as it is done responsibly.
So subscribe to this channel or follow me on Twitter, Facebook or Google+.
See the show notes for the links.
If you liked this video, please consider supporting the channel through Patreon or Paypal.
Even a dollar a month is appreciated.
The links are in the show notes, just as the link to a description of my three setups.
Help me to help even more people with their stereos by telling your friends on the web
about this channel.
I am Hans Beekhuyzen, thank you for watching and see you in the next show or on theHBproject.com.
And whatever you do, enjoy the music.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét