Mutec MC-3+

[PhilR]

I wonder how the USB/SPDIF converter in the Mutek sounds in comparison to the Berkeley Alpha USB, which also does galvanic isolation. The Alpha was released about five years ago, has newer and cheaper technology surpassed it yet?

[PhilR]

Still hoping someone can do an A/B with the MC-3+ and Berkeley Audio Alpha USB/SPDIF converter. Would be nice to get rid of an extra box & cable it it sounds as good.

 

Another plus would be playing DSD files, which is a no-go with the Berkeley..

[PhilR]

I bit the bullet and purchased an MC-3+ to compare with my Berkeley Alpha. My current setup is an Uptone Regen feeding the BA which feeds my Lyngdorf via AES connection as shown in my signature.

 

I tried two configurations, one with the MC-3+ alone, and the other with the Regen feeding the MC-3+. I then listened to quite a few 24/192 recordings and did a lot of back & forth comparison (so much unplugging & plugging in again!). The MC-3+ alone was definitely harder to listen to than the BA setup. That hard-to-pinpoint "digital" sound that the BA eliminates came back, meaning a little more glare and more fatiguing at higher volumes. The soundstage expanded just a bit, but that was the only positive. Adding the Regen before the MC-3+ removed some of the glare, but it still was not as smooth and analog-sounding as the Berkeley Alpha setup. It wasn't a night and day difference, and had I not already been using the Berkeley I might have been a happy camper. The Berkeley may just be a sound that I am now familiar with and would need to see a bigger improvement in that to change gear.

 

A big selling point of the MC-3+ to me was the ability to play DSD files (via internal PCM conversion), something the Berkeley cannot do. After using the setups examples thankfully provided earlier in the thread, I ran a couple of DSD tracks through it. I'm not sure if I have a configuration problem but the sound was not good. Most of the bass went missing and output volume went way down. I might have chased down a solution, but because my previous session with the 24/192 files did not show improvement, I decided to not put the time into it.

 

As always, results in this audio game are so unpredictable and what doesn't work for me may be a game changer in your system. I wish this one turned out better, it is really a nifty unit.

 

And with that said, if anyone in the SF Bay area wants to save a few bucks on a once-used black unit in excellent shape, please send me a pm

[PhilR]

There are others who say they preferred the MC-3+ USB over the BADA. Apart from that - and because we discussed the quality of your (and my own) Lyngdorf TDAI 2200 as a DAC earlier - I realised just now that statements like this do not have a lot of value. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate what you did and shared but for anyone with a different setup it is comparing apples and oranges. What would be the outcome if you had used a modern, high end DAC?

 

In comparison to my Chord Hugo for instance, the TDAI (as a DAC) combined with the Berkeley Alpha sounded digital, harsh, analytical, edgy and above all not musical. Even with a forced extra A/D-conversion the Hugo sounds much more refined and controlled. A complete other league. My advise to everyone, if you can, judge for yourself. There are just to many variables. You can only trust observations from others if there is a big consensus about a product and even then, it may not work in your system.

 

Exactly. Both of these units are doing a great job, I think the ultimate success of one over another is completely system and ear dependent. My next step is to be happy listening to music for a while and wait for some more affordable DACs with network renderer inputs to hit the market so I can avoid USB altogether.