Jump to content
IGNORED

Mytek new dac Brooklyn.


Recommended Posts

To whom It may concern.

Mytek support today have answered to many of the questions I had and the conclusion is that the Brooklyn is truly a newly designed dac from the ground up and not just a modification or upgrade of the 192 and more in-house technology is being used this time.

 

Read The Questions and answers below.

 

 

Dear Petros,

 

Please find all answers below.

 

(...) Is the ESS silicon still being used and if yes what chip?

 

Yes we still use ESS chip.

 

(...) Have you opted for an XMOS based USB receiver, something that driverless OS X support suggests?

 

The USB2 port (designed by us) will be driverless (OSX & Linux).

We use XMOS for MQA.

 

 

(...) Have you replaced the TC electronic based dsp and antilitter signal processing with something made In house part of which is the trade marked “Mytek Femtoclock Generator ™" you have announced ?

 

Yes, there is M-Clock based on Femto Clock technology.

 

(...) Even though I believe you have already answered to that question is USB OTG supported? (Thanks for the MQA by the way, a very promising feature!!)

 

It will be supported.

 

(...) Is any wireless connection feature even as a future retrofitted upgrade? Bluetooth APTX might not be all about Sound Quality but IS very handy!!

 

For now wireless connection is not supported.

 

(...) Does the optional outboard power supply suggest a future in house upgrade ?

 

It is for external power source. There will not be any upgrade of power section.

 

(...) Is the Inboard power supply Linear like that of the 192?

There is efficient switching power supply.

 

(...) And finally is the phono option of analog or digital function? I wish for the latter since the best real world phono stages I have heard so far are digital (Metric halo any Devialet)

 

There is analog input - I am not shure what you mean?

 

Best regards,

Slawomir Rybarczyk

Link to comment
  • 3 weeks later...
Yes. It is called USB Audio Class 2 (aka UAC2) and we've been chatting about it since 2010. It's important to distinguish UAC2 dacs cuz otherwise they often can't talk to streamers like Aries. And, via simple (but circumstantial and consistent) evidence it's easy to assume that if the dac's Mac USB handshake is driverless, then so is the Linux side. No chilling or stressing involved, btw, just reading and comprehending what was written. I've typed this now a couple times, and you concluded that Mac and Linux are not the same. They aren't, but in UAC2 they act pretty consistently.

 

Doesn't mean a thing: UAC 2 compliance means exactly nothing when it comes to what type of capability a Mac supports regarding DSD at higher rates than SACD compared to Linux.

 

Case in point: Linux can now do DSD256 with ALSA and the iFi iDSD Nano without any specific driver installed.

 

On Mac OS X, you need to install the driver for that kind of support through DoP because of some crippling with CoreAudio related to DSD.

 

So, your 'shortcut' about whether Linux and Mac are UAC2 compliant doesn't provide anyone with the proper information about real capabilities at all as driverless on both, Linux can do DSD256 but Mac OS X cannot do so through DoP.

 

Hence your claims that they are the same thing is bullcrap.

Dedicated Line DSD/DXD | Audirvana+ | iFi iDSD Nano | SET Tube Amp | Totem Mites

Surround: VLC | M-Audio FastTrack Pro | Mac Opt | Panasonic SA-HE100 | Logitech Z623

DIY: SET Tube Amp | Low-Noise Linear Regulated Power Supply | USB, Power, Speaker Cables | Speaker Stands | Acoustic Panels

Link to comment

Wow, Yashn, your mixing of my words has reached a new benchmark. I will assume it's a language barrier. I NEVER said they were the same thing (this is now the fourth time I have said they are NOT the same) nor did I ever say that if your DAC is Mac driverless it can do everything in Mac that it can do in Linux., Or even that trout live in trees!! I simply said that an easy first test as to whether your DAC is Linux streamer friendly (as most streamers are Linux) is to know whether it has a driverless MAC capability. It's a simple newbie test that is consistent most of the time for UAC2 compatibility. It gets you in the streamer game. It identifies if your DAC may not be streamer friendly. And I am not the only one, nor the first one, to mention it.

 

I'll make this easier: The corollary is this: if your DAC requires a Mac driver in the OSX world, it is also likely (in the very different Linux world that you haven't entered yet cuz you haven't bought a streamer like Aries or Aurender) it is not Linux friendly via UAC2, and therefore cannot shake hands easily with a streamer, let alone take advantage of the new Linux features. Mac is driverless? Well, then there is hope you can live with a streamer in the Linux world (but says NOTHING about your Mac world....never said it, never would). Get it?

 

Yes of course Linux continues to evolve nicely (much more so than the other two major OS's), with new included (aka default) capabilities. Latest ALSA versions (like 1.0.29) for example, has added native ALSA DSD256 and DSD512 support, both stereo and multichannel (and I'm taking advantage of it with things like the exaSound Playpoint). Several DAC manufacturers have now included their drivers in newest Linux distributions, all compatible with UAC2. It's getting very interoperable out there. My comment about the Mac driverless clue (as it relates to Linux friendliness, not Mac!!) is a simple start.

Link to comment

Anybody listened to music on Brooklyn versus DSD192 versus Manhattan? If so, let us know how the new models move the SQ forward. Thanks.

 

Dig my DSD192 fed by upconverted PCM to DSD128 using HQ Player, now that I have a quad core Mac Mini.

 

Significant to startling awesome improvement in "you are there" or "master tape" kind of quality. My @25 year old son was taken aback last weekend listening to some 1980s Peter Gabriel music upconverted with HQ Player with full filters. This is music that he heard as a baby through his entire musical life as a trained vocalist, arranger (he arranged Peter's tunes for university level vocal groups) and performer...he "heard the performances and nuances as never before" thanks to Mytek and HQ Player.

 

Want to know if I can take my library of 2,000+ files of PCM and make a substantial improvement to the music I already have, versus playing the pittance of audiophile crap (ancient retreads of stuff I have already purchased or mediocre performances of pleasant sounding stuff that gets recorded for folks who listen to equipment versus music) that is offered as HD and DSD downloads. Ignore my grumpiness on this issue, I wish labels would offer all new recordings as HD/DSD downloads...not just old and odd lot stuff.

 

Like Ted_b, dude, or anybody else with the ears and the gear, how much better is the Manhattan versus the DSD192 or Brooklyn? Forget Queens and the Bronx, for now.

 

And, if you have the cojones and the experience, compare the Manhattan/Brooklyn to to Exasound with and without some funky outboard power supply or with other contenders. Thanks, gracias, grazie...

Tone with Soul

Link to comment

I will give feedback when I receive my new Brooklyn in December. I have listened to the Manhattan and yes It is better. Not different but better than the 192 compared to which It sounds bigger wider more dynamic and most importantly more musical and enjoyable. I musr say that when the Manhattan first came out I was very sceptical thinking that It couldnt be that much better and that It was just a shinier 192 with a better power supply. Listening to the Manhattan is one of the reasons I took the step to Brooklyn which being an all new desighn is far more promising..

Link to comment

Michal and Chebon sent me a new black Manhattan just recently. I will unbox and get it warmed up in the next few weeks. I will certainly compare to the 192DSD as well as others....however, it will be awhile.

Link to comment
Michal and Chebon sent me a new black Manhattan just recently. I will unbox and get it warmed up in the next few weeks. I will certainly compare to the 192DSD as well as others....however, it will be awhile.

 

Great!!!

 

Yo Ted, you follow this tech mumbo jumbo like a sport, so is: a) the ability to offer "certified support of the Meridian MQA streaming format" hardware or software/firmware (which to me means software in the box) dependent; b) then if software, will a Manhattan be able to do the MQA dance with a firmware upgrade?; and, perhaps most importantly, c) does this MQA technology: (i) play existing files in a clean, more time coherent way; or (ii) does it only show its benefits playing recordings that have been mastered using the MQA mumbo jumbo math?

 

Sent an email to Mytek asking this question. No reply yet.

Tone with Soul

Link to comment

I am not well versed in MQA. Any demo I've heard was not accompanied by an a/b (MQA on and off) so it made little impact on me. I know that the MQA data is stored in the tag information headers for these files, and that one of its proposed benefits is somewhat analogous to that of FLAC (or even zipped) downloads; i.e creating a smaller virtual file size to enable easier streaming of hirez music (i.e. stream hirez with the same bandwidth of traditional redbook or even lossy files). I am not sure why this is anything but a temporary bandaid, as internet bandwidth will be getting larger (and speeds therefore faster) every six months! Gigapower, for example, does not cry for MQA. But that is likely only one benefit of MQA. I'm sure there are others.

 

I have no idea whether MQA playback/decoding is intended for the Manhattan platform.

Link to comment

Thanks.

 

Reading the Mytek Brooklyn promo stuff with Mr MQA Meridian Stuart speaking about timing issues with respect to DA conversion...mumbo jumbo...seems like MQA is more than about compression of hi rez files. But, when you get a piker like me reading this stuff (mumbo jumbo to me, and perhaps not to someone who knows how this stuff works).

 

Though the more I read, the more I feel like this stuff is mysterious...like, why is it so hard to make a USB input function optimally...and not require amber or green boxes to filter packet noise and jitterbugs and additional boxes, clocks, filters and $1,000 multiple cable USB cords or power supplies for the above crap?

 

Is this stuff really so developmental that manufacturers are hunting and pecking for the right way to do music on a computer????

Tone with Soul

Link to comment
Seems like MQA is more than about compression of hi rez files.

 

That's my experience with MQA after listening to some demo tracks that were MQA encoded and decoded (like Ted_B). MQA is a way to shrink the size of high bit rate PCM files to fit in a CD or MP3 sized space for streaming services.

 

Your best bet, from a sound quality perspective, is to play 24/96 PCM and DSD files. Leave MQA to the streaming services that need it.

Link to comment

I think that the MQA thing isn't what makes or brakes a 1995 euro dac at least not now. Maybe when It takes off It will matter more but so far It is available only in small demo sessions only a few people have listened to.

I understand the controversy around It and the skepticism as well but I also hope It is good, not because I have ordered the Brooklyn' but because it might be part of the reason everyday people might dig quality in sound again after 35 years and the music Industry might Increase It's income enough to support the real talents and creative musicians of the future and not just firecrackers and beautiful ladies in bathing suits.

 

Back on topic, until hopefully MQA does come and makes a difference and a statement in the streaming market (where It's future or doom lies) the real reason for someone to prefer the Brooklyn is the combination of even better ( ; ) SQ than the 192 with Its wide support of formats and universally (except windows I guess) driverless compatible custom built async USB2.0 port plus It's flexibility, under the guarantee 20 years of experience in the hardcore pro audio world and 30day money back satisfaction guarantee provide. That's what made me take the order decision and not MQA which for now is just cool but useless.

 

All else in good time..

Link to comment
Mytek mentions SDIF3 inputs; where are they?

 

Like on their earlier Stereo-192 DSD mastering version, Mytek comes from the pro world and includes these pro audio digital interfaces as a nice option for those who have SDIF-3 outputs on their Sonomas, etc. SDIF-3 is a single channel BNC connector that carries up to DSD256 audio and word clock info.

Link to comment
So the optional SDIF3 inputs need to replace some other inputs? Not much space for them.

 

Edit

 

I see the SDIF3 inputs go in place of the analog inputs on the Stereo192 DSD.

 

It looks like the SDIF-3 inputs are on the same connector as the SPDIF RCA inputs, likely toggled via a menu or internal dip switch. I see there is a dc input next to the IEC, too, so I guess this means that one can bypass the internal power supply? Interesting.

Link to comment
I think SDIF3 need to have BNC connectors for impedance matching; DSD on the RCA SPDIF inputs is for DSD64 DOP.

 

So you now know SDIF-3, that was fast. :) So what does DSD L and DSD R mean then?

 

Yes, of course SPDIF can handle DoP, that is not what I was referring to. I was telling you where I assumed the SDIF-3 inputs would go (BNC adapter or not). The back panel shows that you have either two SPDIF inputs (two channels each, btw, up to DSD128 DoP) or you have DSD L and DSD R (SDIF-3 inputs..maybe they will include bnc adapters). So that back panel screening is either saying that there will be two versions of the inputs, or that the rca coax inputs serve two functions (toggled somehow).

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...