HOLO Audio MAY DAC

[Ozan Bolat]

On 8/13/2021 at 4:00 PM, ETWok said:

My Holo May has arrived from Hong Kong. Had burn in of 24 hours. Have just been comparing the width of the sound stage between Hegel H190’s built in DAC and that of the May. I find that at the moment, there is hardly any difference between the two. 
 

When people say the sound stage of May is wide, does it mean the instruments on the extreme sides are further away from the speakers?

 

3-5 hundred hours of burn in will see widening of the sound stage? What’s your experience?

I'm not sure at all about this 500 burn in thing and rather think after 24 hours you should consider that if you don't like it or think it as worthwhile, this is it.

 

I have a Spring 3 : might be different but I would not rave about sound stage width but rather about precise localisation in DSD mode (big difference with PCM IMO) : here, that distant voice I heard wandering is now from a man who is not moving but his voice is surrounded by reverb ; here right hand of the keyboard and resonances from the piano body caused by left hand are distinguable just as in live, here there's air and distance between the baryton and the accompanying piano (he's clearly not leaning on it !)

The DAC having a fantastic density, even the most left or right instruments or, say, the right hand of that accompanying piano on the left speaker, have so much flesh that there's a presence on the sides of the sound stage which is beyond what I experienced previously but I would not call this sound stage width per se.

 

[Ozan Bolat]

1 hour ago, GoldenOne said:

Nope 30.12.
If you use 30.14 then any USB source that functions properly should work.

30.12 is where intel works fine but everything else either doesn't work or appears to work but actually has some underlying issues.


But yeah, given how good the May's usb implementation is and being fully galvanically isolated (not just the 5v/gnd lines like some dacs), I've found that USB source really doesn't matter. I even sold my SMS200 Ultra.

If concerned then one could put an ifi iGalvanic between the may and their PC for reclocking/further isolation as it's fully transparent to the host and so 1.536mhz works fine through it if you're on intel
 

I'm still curious to see your review of the Spring 3. With that DAC, choosing DSD 256 HQP 7EC modulator over 1.536mhz PCM is a no brainer, IMO thus 768 KHZ is enough to get the best out of it.

I understand one wants to find out by himself but please enlighten us :

do I and Miska and others on other forum have different appreciation criteria?

is the PCM implementation so much better in the MAy that it beats DSD 256 7EC while you would admit it doesn't with Spring 3?

if I recall correctly you say in your review of the MAy that differences between DACs used DSD was smaller so it would be interesting to know your opinion : for someone who prefers DSD 256 with S3 is there any worth buying a May over a S3?

I'm on vacation at the moment so I have known my S3 only for a week but before my departure the S3 was so much above my expectations that I wondered if I should be happy or regret I did not spend on a MAy

[Ozan Bolat]

2 hours ago, ted_b said:

You tell us. There is no bigger DSD fan than me but on the May I love PCM staying PCM and playing at 32fs. Ymmv

I'm looking forward hearing @GoldenOne's findings : does this holds true for the S3 as well in his opinion. Not in mine's or Miska's as far as S3 is concerned

[Ozan Bolat]

3 hours ago, KenMoreira said:

Which is best for SQ.  spring 3  kte

DSD64X 
{filter Wide)  ( suggestions here would be great too}
with Sinc  L  and ASDM7EC 

or 
1.5 Mhz PCM with Sinc L and LNS15

my i5 cannot do higher than 64x without cut-outs. 

The one thing I would sacrifice first is Sinc L that I don't like anyway and that probably accounts for the issue you state of tracks taking forever to start and for eating all your cpu. You should aim for at least DSD 128 even if that means choosing 5EC instead of 7EC. BTW I have to do so with my M1 for DSD sources going 256 with convo and it's not really frustrating while it was with other DACs I tried. I use sinc S as much as I can (typically with well recorded classical with space cues), ext2 otherwise. This might be assuming too much but maybe what you appreciate in the beefy and slow sinc L would be better addressed by convolution.

[Ozan Bolat]

4 hours ago, toddrhodes said:

This is my setup:

 

DAC bits can (should ? it probably doesn't matter but) be left to default with SDM that is your sole output I understand

[Ozan Bolat]

8 hours ago, wanta911 said:

 

Opinions can only be based on personal experience and in my case - count me in as a semi-sceptic on the issue of burn-in. I don't discount the premise out of hand but I do question the number of hours that sometimes get quoted and at what point the burn-in is psychological versus mechanical. I read on Audiogon where someone said that their Holo DAC went to "another level" @ 3,000 hours of playing time.....it's posts like this that give this hobby a bad name.

 

Burn-in is also used by fanbois on forums to try and discount another person's dislike of a particular piece of equipment that they themselves DO like or recommended: "oh you need to burn it in for 500 hours and then it will all fall into place". I bought the original Auralic Vega DAC when it first came out and in my particular setup at the time I found it fatiguing after an hour or so each time I used it. Forum advice went from 250 to 500 to 750 to 1000 hours of burn-in each time I noted my dissatisfaction. After 1000 hours, it sounded exactly the same as it did within the first 2 hours - like a pencil being pushed into my ear drum 🤣. In hindsight I can understand that system matching and/or the infamous ESS Sabre glare was to blame (yes I do subscribe to that in older applications).

 

I am not discounting the argument for burn-in on an R2R DAC as it makes some sense, at least compared to a Delta Sigma application and I am not discounting out of hand some of the impressions here, as they at least all seem to be around the same time frame. The logical side of me questions exactly what is burning in after say 50 or even 100 hours and it will be interesting to experience it for myself when my Spring arrives later this week 🤙

How does burn-in on an R2R DAC makes some sense, it would not with other DACs ? Am I missing something for I very early on found out that the S3 is much better SDM 256 fed than PCM 1536 fed and thus have never burnt in the R2R part specifically...

As of the burn in, at the moment my S3 (somewhere in the 300 hours ? 400 ? lost track) is continuously fed though I'm not listening to it : guess it appears like I subscribe but if I'm asked to describe benefits.... euh... not sure there's been any since the very few first hours and that how much I enjoy the S3 depends more of my personal shape. I'd say it took about 1 day or 2  for either the DAC to burn in (less than 50 hours) or my brain (a few hours of listening free of concerns such as PCM vs SDM, which filters etc) to dig the S3 was in another league than other DACs I trialed, thanks to how natural the timbres are and how all parts of the soundstage are equally dense

[Ozan Bolat]

1 hour ago, Extreme_Boky said:

I had very nice XLR (balanced) interconnect cables that I listened to for a couple of years. A friend of mine heard it and compared it with his interconnect cables, and decided that he'd love to have the exact cable as mine. So, I made another one for him - exactly the same. But, it sounded terrible. The newly made cable was flat, did not have that beautiful spatial and relaxed presentation like the one I listened to for a couple of years. I had to dissect the cable to show it to him; to convince him that the cables were identical... I just asked him to be patient and listen to it for a while 😊

 

May DAC uses a very large number of electrolytes, as well as power supply decoupling capacitors (film capacitors, 1uF). I suppose the dielectrics in both capacitor types will change if exposed to DC... and that change will be gradual over time, i.e. - not that noticeable. In addition, the May's analog class-A output stage burns a lot of current at all times (total power dissipation is 60W !!). I'd expect that parts used in this stage would also change the sound somewhat over a longish period of time. This is why I would burn May 24/7 with a load at its output (it could be as simple as a 300 - 400 ohm resistor, or pair of resistors if using XLR balanced output). 

 

The real proof would be in blind A/B comparison between a brand new May, and the burnt-in May. 

 

 

yes, but no difference between PCM and SDM sections then ; correct?

[Ozan Bolat]

4 hours ago, Miska said:

 

I don't agree with Rob Watts in general with most things. Not on this either.

 

For me, subjectively, DSD side has more authority, weight and kick (as I've explained earlier, with a bit different words). Without becoming congested as easily. But I wouldn't state it is about noise floor level as such.

 

I might have a track to suggest to illustrate and for everybody to try : Fever on Elvis Presley's Elvis is back.  If I play PCM (from the DCC CD) I can follow good ol' Michael Fremer who hears finger snaps, more or less fleshy depending on he used a 450 000 or 560 000 $ turntable. If I go 256 7EC (and even more so if I source from the AP SACD), Fever's rhythmic sounds like the 2 parts of castanets are hit one against the other : distinctively sharp, quite dry and woody to my ears and unmistakably (or am I mistaken ! wonder what you guys will report !) so and not finger snaps. Now I confess I had not tried PCM 1536 for weeks and I can understand how it might be judged more palatable and rewarding, especially if one's system does not involve convolution : felt like lowering volume when going from PCM to SDM, as if adding 6 dB to SDM was too much. BTW, I love Closed Form 16 M, a new favorite provided apodizing counter does not go berserk.

[Ozan Bolat]

On 9/27/2021 at 1:40 PM, Extreme_Boky said:

Well, according to Jeff Zhu, PCM and DSD DAC sections are separate paths (both discrete). So... you can draw your own conclusion from that statement.

hMM, think the things you listed for potential burn in benefit appear pretty common to both paths, don't they? However reassessing PCM 1536 vs DSD 256 on the Spring 3, I feel like now writing : it depends ; while I was 100% pro SDM before burn in. Most comfortable claim would be change of mind or special mindset this morning but can we rule out that by nature the R2R path is more susceptible to burn in while that burn in has not been R2R specific? 

[Ozan Bolat]

4 minutes ago, Miska said:

I have not noticed any burn-in stuff, the Spring's I've had for years haven't changed at all over time. Always sounded the same...

 

Which I consider a good thing, I'd hate gear that keeps drifting around...

 

Then I have to consider PCM just as another option, one I might like if and when desiring a more palatable sound for whatever reason, including the shape I'm in. However I appreciated it with closed form, not the filter with the best reputation for palatable (with tracks without apodizing issues). I like the idea there that if the idea is to keep PCM PCM then the chosen filter should be as neutral as possible : is that a correct assumption regarding Closed Form M vs often preferred/quoted M and L? 

[Ozan Bolat]

2 hours ago, firedog said:

I just listened to a 24/96 version of that track and it sounds like finger snaps to me. Acc'd to the Wikipedia album page, it's finger snaps. Interestingly, when I use HQP to play it back in DSD 256 7EC, I'd say it sounds less like finger snaps (less fleshy, more hard/sharp), but I'd still  identify it as finger snaps if you asked me. 

Wikipedia's source is hardly hard proof ; interesting that you confirm the track as revealing of PCM/DSD differences. when done right I could mistake my finger actual snaps with castanets but then on Fever there is not he slightest hint of fingers' friction prior to the snap

[Ozan Bolat]

1 hour ago, Miska said:

 

No, I think both are very similar in this respect. Important thing to note about ADI-2 is that it has been around with three different DAC chips! My ADI-2 Pro and ADI-2 Pro AE are the first generation.

 

then you mean Spring 3 is much too expensive and waste of money in comparison, especially since it does not offer ADC and other valuable options?

[Ozan Bolat]

1 hour ago, MarkusBarkus said:

...ditto. 24/96 from Qobuz. Sounds like finger snaps to me... *but* all snaps are not the same.
 

This one sounds like it was made with the index finger curled in.

You can try it at home. Index finger extended, is higher freq than curled, though snap-force has an effect too. Snap on, people...

If you want to train you'll find nice finger snaps on Peggy Lee's version of Fever and those are pretty well documented : https://www.peggyleediscography.com/p/LeeResearchFever.php . Elvis retained this orchestration idea but to my ears he did not have as good finger snappers at hand (pun intended) and resorted to castanets

[Ozan Bolat]

next time someone comes into Elvis he or she should ask him

[Ozan Bolat]

On 9/24/2021 at 1:30 AM, ted_b said:

You tell us. There is no bigger DSD fan than me but on the May I love PCM staying PCM and playing at 32fs. Ymmv

what are your favorite filters ? I reassessed PCM on my Spring 3 after burning it with a feed of SDM exclusively and to my surprise I love PCM too now while out of the box SDM sounded much better. If there's a rational different from a change of my mood, I'd point that SDM is more maths inside the computer, less physicality inside the Holo

[Ozan Bolat]

3 hours ago, KenMoreira said:

What is sdm

Sigma Delta Modulation, call it DSD if you wish