Look what's arrived this week......

[simon g]

....a Bricasti M3MDx+N


I've come to the conclusion, based upon a few years experience, that there is much to commend having an integrated DAC/streamer, rather than separate boxes. I think that this has much to do with the streamer and DAC board being physically close to each other enabling an effective I2S interface. Could be talking total round objects though; it's just that this arrangement has produced better results for me.

I wanted to move forward on my streaming/DAC solution. I've tried a dcs Bartok; yes, very nice but the cost/performance ratio just doesn't sit well with me. Auralic Vega? No, don't like their ESS based sound. I've always liked the look and reported sound of the Bricasti models, with the M3 seeming to be the optimum value proposition (within their range, of course!). The 'new' Mdx digital board also looked interesting. OK, the M3 certainly isn't inexpensive, but not really silly money either. So, I decided to buy one and try for myself (I'm not one for dealer dems. much preferring to try in my own home and system).

Early days, but it is immediately impressive. Very easy to operate and has a general quality feel to it. SQ is excellent, as you might expect. I'll be comparing against my existing (very good indeed) streamer/DAC; the T+A MP2500R. They are noticeably different, that's for sure. Time will tell. I'll update my thoughts over the next couple of weeks or so.

 

[Southeastern]

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts. I've been looking at going to a one box solution but havent found affordable perfection yet. These are well priced so hopefully it cuts the mustard. With it being American, it hopefully will come with that typical smooth and big boned yank sound.
It certainly looks better on the inside than it does on the outside!

 

[tackleberry]

I quite like the look, I’m assuming alu knob? Twin AD1955…..

 

[DUVET]

Shallow I know but sound aside I am always partial to a dot matrix display

 

[simon g]

I rather like the pro/industrial/puposeful look. Of course, a large display also helps, now that eye sight isn't what it was

This is audibly a very serious bit of kit. As noted above, it's quite different to my T+A. I'm always amazed when many say that they can't hear much of a difference between DACs. I did read in one review of a comment on 'purity of tone' with this DAC. I can certainly understand that comment, having now been listening for a few days.

The network interface works very well. No dramas at all. Instantly seen by Roon and all good (I have uograded to Roon 2 and no oroblems with seeing the player with the new Roon, if anyone was worried about this aspect)

More to follow

 

[tuga]

I'm always amazed when many say that they can't hear much of a difference between DACs.

To be fair, most DACs use off-the-shelf D/A chips which tend to make them sound more alike, and many people can't afford DACs with custom D/A conversion.

 

[tuga]

I did read in one review of a comment on 'purity of tone' with this DAC.

It's hard not to laugh at such comments. What does "purity of tone" mean in the context of audio playback?
For starters you need "pure of tone" recordings. Good luck finding an handful...

 

[Lawrence001]

It's hard not to laugh at such comments. What does "purity of tone" mean in the context of audio playback?
For starters you need "pure of tone" recordings. Good luck finding an handful...

Are things really that bad, maybe I'm just not fussy or don't have golden ears but I have lots of nice recordings that sound natural on my system.

 

[Cable Monkey]

I’ve just gone in the opposite direction! After a few happy years with a streaming DAC I was all in on the flagship device in the Teac range with an eye on the Esoteric range. Then the streaming module died in my Teac NT-501 and I realised that a good DAC will always be that but streaming is transitory with devices only a few years old not much more than brushed aluminium doorstops now. So I have opted to separate the two again. My next DAC is in the house and I am eyeing various streaming solutions with the view that if they do drop out of software support or choke on an update (like mine) then they can be updated with a later model.

 

[simon g]

I’ve just gone in the opposite direction! After a few happy years with a streaming DAC I was all in on the flagship device in the Teac range with an eye on the Esoteric range. Then the streaming module died in my Teac NT-501 and I realised that a good DAC will always be that but streaming is transitory with devices only a few years old not much more than brushed aluminium doorstops now. So I have opted to separate the two again. My next DAC is in the house and I am eyeing various streaming solutions with the view that if they do drop out of software support or choke on an update (like mine) then they can be updated with a later model.

I do get what you're saying, but should the M3 network interface fail and not be fixable (unlikely) then the DAC will still be fine. I could always add a separate streamer to feed the DAC.

If you're after a decent network bridge then the Bricasti M5 might be worth a look? I had an Auralic Aries G1 for over a year; it performed very well indeed.

 

[Southeastern]

Purity of tone is easy to understand for people who have access to their right brain.

Some folks don't, and are very left brain orientated, some completely, which I guess has some minor benefits in some fields, but on a whole, any extreme will never give a balanced view of something.

Music itself comes from the right brain.

 

[Lawrence001]

Purity of tone is easy to understand for people who have access to their right brain.

Some folks don't, and are very left brain orientated, some completely, which I guess has some minor benefits in some fields, but on a whole, any extreme will never give a balanced view of something.

Music itself comes from the right brain.

I was wondering if purity of tone was defined by measurements as I probably don't care about it if it is.

 

[Sotosound]

It's hard not to laugh at such comments. What does "purity of tone" mean in the context of audio playback?
For starters you need "pure of tone" recordings. Good luck finding an handful...

That rules out my 'Derek And Clive Live' album.

 

[Strider]

It's hard not to laugh at such comments. What does "purity of tone" mean in the context of audio playback?
For starters you need "pure of tone" recordings. Good luck finding an handful...#

I have to say that there are a couple of accreditations given to 'hi'fi' (High Fildelity) that grinds my gears when people describe the sound from their hifi is 'natural', 'neutral', has 'good tone', 'honest' etc.
Yep, they like the sound of their system an to their ears it sounds right, however unless you're listening the the recording straight from the mastering studio using the same monitors/headphones then you don't have a benchmark to compare replay, it's a perception and not a facsimile to the original recording.
I'm not being disingenuous to their auditory abilities or knocking their kit though - my setup is so far from the master tape its laughable.

 

[andrew s]

Purity of tone is easy to understand for people who have access to their right brain.

Some folks don't, and are very left brain orientated, some completely, which I guess has some minor benefits in some fields, but on a whole, any extreme will never give a balanced view of something.

Music itself comes from the right brain.

If you can't access your right brain you'd be blind in your left eye .
Regards Andrew