HOLO Audio MAY DAC

[John Hughes]

1 hour ago, lpost said:

It's just contrary to what Jussi stated: There shouldn't be any PLL involved when using asynchronous USB....

 

I have no idea. I don't hear any difference with it on or off and it doesn't change the locking times for better or worse for me using USB.

I've also discussed this with Tim and he says that PLL is used with USB.  I've also disabled it for some sources using the USB and AES inputs and my ears detected only a very slight improvement with PLL.  So little it wasn't worth worrying about whether it was on or off. 

[John Hughes]

2 hours ago, scintilla said:

I expect improvements but the showdown between a D90 in DSD direct-dac mode wil be very interesting.  I am not aware of anyone else on the net that has done this head-to-head, and i am going to.  The differences are less than many imagine too.  In both DACs, DSD direct is implemented with a separate low-pass filters that are distinct from the PCM converters.  The difference then is a discrete, hand-made resistor network that is dynamically linearized in the May, vs. on-die resistors in a chip which probably also is using some form of dynamic linearization.  The output stages and power supplies are clearly wide-apart and I suspect are really what separate them in real-world sound quality.  If the AKM4499 was implemented in a May box, they might be nearly indistinguishable in direct DSD mode.  This is on-topic and I suspect will be of keen interest when I am able to put them head-to-head. At least in the form of their current implementations. I truly do not expect them to be that far apart. The D90 is the best DAC that I have had in my system to date in direct-dac dsd-mode, running 128xDSD, 7EC, poly-sinc-ext2.

I had a Topping D90 last year.  The difference between the May and the D90 was dramatic, even in Full DSD. (About a 3 month lag between hearing the topping and the May, so I am fairly confident of my results.  And in NOS mode, leaves it in the dust.   For me moving to an R2R dac made a big difference compared to any of the chip DACs.  Hopefully you will be as pleased as many of us here. 

[John Hughes]

So I've finally installed HQPlayer and am playing with it.  I've transferred my parametric EQ settings from Roon to the Pipeline setup using a txt file.  Doesn't sound the same, but I'll work with that more later.  

 

I have been able to get PCM output to 768Khz  and DSD output to 512.  When I go above 768Khz, I get garbage coming out.  What's the settings that you guys are using to get 1.5M output?  I've got a powerful PC.

[John Hughes]

I am not using my Windows PC directly, I am using a Stack Audio Link II Ropieee endpoint.  My May says its running V1.20.  Do I still need to update firmware?

[John Hughes]

Ok, I updated my May to 30.14.  And through my Stack Link II Ropieee Roon endpoint I am now getting 1.5M.  Before I updated I only got up to 1024M.  So it worked.  I am sure this highly modified Raspberry Pi does not have Intel chipsets though!

[John Hughes]

In HQP, ow many Dac bits  should be set for the Holo May?  The default?

 

[John Hughes]

12 minutes ago, Extreme_Boky said:

I would agree with you 100%, though I prefer to use an high quality endpoint as an additional firewall from the noise in the PC.  

 

12 minutes ago, Extreme_Boky said:

I have May DAC L2 and Aleph J with no AC coupling (sound-coupling/DC blocking) capacitors - apart from the tweeter X-over capacitor inside speaker cabinets. Balanced silver ribbon interconnects, silver alloy speaker cables, solid core gold plated pure copper power cables. Very revealing. The best sound I can achieve is with native sampling rates (44.1/88.2/96/192 kHz). No oversampling in software, nor hardware (inside May). This gives me completely natural sound, relaxed presentation and depth perception (layering) that is simply beautiful. The native 44.1kHz material, in NOS, should be a no-no... but it sounds amazing with May.

 

I also prefer to underclock the CPU (minimum frequency AND voltage), with a skeleton number of background OS processes, and I run my laptop on battery power <- all of which contribute by a large amount to this natural 3D presentation.

 

I know many will disagree.

 

I also have NUC11 and HQ Player, to impress friends (especially when May starts showing that 1.536Mhz number!). But people who play natural instruments/musicians in particular, easily go for that battery powered laptop sound, with starved CPU and native, non-oversampled material.

 

I am not sure if anyone else tried what I'm suggesting here..? It would be good to see what others think...

 

 

 

 

 

 

[John Hughes]

13 minutes ago, happybob said:

It's my understanding that usually an asynchronous USB transfer will not use a PLL, rather it receives the input with the transmitted data rate / clock and then sends it onward (into the DAC in this case) with a completely separate clock that's in the DAC. Am I missing something? Why does the May have a PLL at all if it can completely isolate the input and output clocks for the USB stage?

It has been established by the manufacturer earlier in this thread that the May's USB input does use PLL. Another way the May is pretty unique. 

[John Hughes]

1 hour ago, TA75 said:

Hey everyone, my first post here. Got a couple of questions which may have been answered in previous pages.. I'm about to pull the trigger on a May KTE (I guess it is worth it over the version 2?). To get a better understanding, my current system is:

 

Amp: T+A PA3100HV

Source: Innuos Zen MK3

Dac: Chord Hugo TT2

Speakers: Focal Sopra 2

 

Signal Path: Roon ---> Innuos --(Audioquest Diamond USB) --> TT2 --(Zenwave d4 rca) --> T+A -- (Atlas Mavros Grun /2 Entreq grounding boxes) --> Sopras

 

Four questions regarding May:

 

1) I don't have another shelf to run the dac and power supply separately, do you find the performance better this way or is stacked basically the same?

2) Has anyone tried footers under the dac (when placed on top of the power supply or on a shelf)?

3) Is there any upgrade to the existing umbilical chord that runs from the power supply to the dac?

4) My amp has a true balanced circuit so I'm guessing I should run XLRs from the dac for the best sound correct?

 

If anyone can give any input it will be very helpful! Also, if anyone can point out a weak point and any tips regarding my setup that is really welcome too. I'm guessing my source is the obvious spot that I should look at.

 

Cheers!

I am a big believer in footing and bases.  Usually I hear significant differences when customizing the sound with feet.  The May is one of the few pieces I've heard where the sound changes very little with footer swapping.  The did a really good job with their casing and footers!  I do have my favorite footer, the Shun Mook Diamond Resonators under the Dac, and it made a very minor positive difference.  That has more to do with the fact that the Shun Mooks have a bit of an added musicality to the sound, that is not neutral, but is very realistic/natural to my ears. 

[John Hughes]

I also got the Kitsune premium usb cable.  It's really excellent as well. 

[John Hughes]

On 6/7/2021 at 4:37 AM, Roasty said:

 

am using 

AMD Ryzen 9 3900x with a Gigabyte X570 I Aorus Pro

 

this is actually my gaming/editing rig... now am thinking if i should build a dedicated intel HQplayer machine.

I am using almost the same rig for my Roon Core, but I use an endpoint for output. 

[John Hughes]

I thought I would post my experiences now that I've had the May KTE for 6 months.  I was changing my system around a lot when I got the May with different cabling, power stuff, DDC for my secondary TV/Video input.  The sound changed some over that time, but now I think the May and the rest of my system has settled down.  

 

For me right out of the box the May was amazing, and just got better with burn in.  And I'm really sensitive to burn in, particularly with digital gear (especially since I used to design it).  I know some people heard some harshness etc. with burn in, but I did not.  

 

I also spent a fair amount of time trying HQPlayer with my overbuilt Roon Core PC with various sample rates and settings.  Ported to a Stack Audio Link II Ropiee/HQP endpoint.  For me at least, I didn't hear anything that made me want to switch from May's own NOS pathway.  I guess my pervious experience working with A/D and early DAC design has informed my tastes as to what sounds most natural and like instruments in real life.  Adding this upsampling and stuff has always sounded to be additive rather than revealing to my old ears.  This is an area where people seem to have dramatically different takes on what is real though :)

 

The May in NOS mode is the first DAC I can truly say I don't miss analog.  While it might present a reduced scale and color of some master tapes I've heard in studio, it doesn't add much 'digititis' to them either.  That is a huge admission for me as I've been very critical in the past.  

 

I do like the sound of R2R dacs, they were a big step forward for me to accepting digital. The May is in another league. 

 

I have about 2 Terabytes of high resolution audio (some of it stuff that I've a/d from third generation masters). In particular I've been trying to get my hands on real 32bit DXD and DSD 256.  I think from what I've heard 32bit DXD is the closest to the source.  24bit is just not quite there :).   But I've found that as the May has broken in, and now that my system is fully cooked, I hear a lot less difference between well made 16bit recordings and those high resolution files.  There is just a little bit of that shallowness and thinness in the 16bit, but its surprisingly close.  And I'd put 16bit through the May over just about any other digital system I've heard.  But with high rez material, the May really does shine.  More depth, resonance, meaning and emotion carries through better. 

 

I sat down the last couple of days and listened to some of my favorite music closely.  First time in a while. And I've never heard my system so little.  Meaning, it got out of the way and revealed more in tracks that I know intimately.  More vocal prowess and inflections in singers.  Some tracks with acoustic bass and drums revealed more interplay and resonances between channels, rooms and instruments. Just more real than I've ever heard it. 

 

So of course, I am now looking hard at a new amplifier.    The journey never ends!  Lol

 

[John Hughes]

5 hours ago, YALA said:

I ordered and received my holo may kte a month ago now. Thanks to Anadialog for his advice. Thank's to my very professional seller "magnahifi in europe (thank's to Jos)". I find it much better than the dac of my tweeked oppo 205 (better than suggested by anadialog). Before, I had a Denafrips terminator, the holo is far better. I was interested in terminator plus and mola mola tambaqui. I had a demonstration of the tambaqui dac at home on my own system. It's a good dac but I opted for the holo and I don't regret it because for me it is better on my system for a little over half the price. I am connected with I2S from my oppo to the dac using an hdmi to i2s adapter. I am using an primaluna evo 400 tube préamp, two emotiva xpa-1l power amps and focal 1038-be2 speakers. I will soon be getting two tube power amps and new speakers. What more can I say, I am absolutely delighted with this dac and now I think I will stick with it. If in addition he has to improve with the burn-in ... I found the dac I needed and I'm really happy.

I'd love to hear more about a comparison between the Tambiqui dac and the May.  I know Twittering Machines did a bit of a comparison in their review, but love to hear more perspectives. 

[John Hughes]

27 minutes ago, Extreme_Boky said:

Thanks for that info. 

 

As with any digital circuitry, those converters will benefit a lot from a very low noise power supply. I strongly suggest that you consider a low noise linear power supply + regulator. Or - a battery supply. Those converters you mentioned have a single rail +5 V DC input - getting a 6V battery pack would be ideal in this case. You'll like the resulting sound improvement a lot - guaranteed!

Yers, this is very true.  I have added even inexpensive linear power supplies to HDMI to AES converters and it improved the sound.  Here is a Link to one of the more reasonable and well made vendors. (Sorry for the long URL.

 

https://www.jameco.com/shop/StoreCatalogDrillDownView?isModiftHistory=true&langId=-1&storeId=10001&catalogId=10001&modifyType=1&uid=ic5b8ww5&history=ic5b8ww5|subCategoryName~AC-to-DC%2BLinear%2BRegulated^category~4535^categoryName~cat_45^prodPage~25^page~SEARCH%2BNAV

[John Hughes]

It's in the manual (attached).  The May uses the same pinout as the Denafrips and PS Audio.  The delay you are experiencing is common with the i2s, its the PLL Lock.  If you disable the PLL Lock the delay will clear up.  If you have an HDMI cable thats about 1/2 meter or so, changing cables probably won't address that.

 

I've also used the USBridge Signature with Shanti. Its good. I'm using the Stack Audio Link II  with LPS now which runs a custom version of Ropieee. I definitely prefer that. 

 

I use USB from the May to the Link II directly for Roon. 

 

I use an Nvidia Shield as my second source for video.  I have tried 3 different USB to i2s converters so I don't have to switch USB cables for sources.  A cheap one from Ebay, the LKS USB-100, and the Kitsune Edition Singxer U2.  The cheap no name did work, but the audio was not that great.  The LKS made a nice upgrade, and is fairly inexpensive.  The Kitsune SIngxer U2 is definitely the best of the three.  I tried the Link II connected to the U2 and I would say it was too close to call vs direct USB connection to the May.  And the PLL Locking issues were worse adding in any of the DDCs.  So I'm not using it that way.  

May-Manual-English-V1.2.pdf

[John Hughes]

12 hours ago, darioG said:

Is the SQ of Stack Audio worth the extra £700 with LPS compared to the Allo USB sig, Shanti?, I am only going to use as Roon endpoint, so other features are wasted on Stack Audio!. If not a lot of SQ difference, I will stick with Allo. Unless find Stack and LPS second hand :)

 

If I turn off PLL lock I2s , will the effect be jitter?  Is the PLL just buggy with I2s, don't have issue with usb PLL locking...

So, I started with a standard Rasperry Pi 4 using the Standard Allo recommended firmware (is that called Diet OS?  I can't quite recall).  This was before I was using the May.  Then I got the Allo USBridge Signature with Shanti LPS.  I could definitely hear the difference.  Less noise, wider soundstage, cleaner treble, deeper bass.  I got the May while I was using this setup.  I used Ropieee, as I was having issues with the Diet Os. 

 

Then I got the Stack II (the LPS was a month slower in shipping at that time).  Without the LPS, it was significantly better in the ways I value:  much cleaner, with more open midrange and treble, lower noise floor, just a lot less digital grunge in the sound.   When I got the LPS I was kind of surprised in that the difference was even more than adding in the Link II.  Much deeper soundstage, inky black backgrounds, and BASS.  The bass filled out a lot on the bottom with more texture and a bit more on the low end.  Very clean sound overall too.  Plus the Stack software is very nice, the custom Ropieee implementation update automatically, and I haven't had a problem with it.  It has HQP software installed as an option in the interface as well.  I will also say that the Stack II and the power supply have beautiful, solid, heavy housings, they are much nicer to look at and beautifully engineered.

 

As to jitter without PLL, its really about audible differences, isn't it?  Some here say they've heard a difference with it off.  Tim at Kitsune doesn't believe the difference is audible. I can hear a very small difference in sound without it.  But the difference is very small to me, maybe 1/5 of what you hear between USB cables etc.  So I've accepted using it without.  Sometimes I will run a little listening test with in on and off and I continue to think its too small to matter vs the PLL locking issue.  I will say that I am particularly sensitive to digital noise and hear differences in all aspects of cables, isolation, power filtration, but this particular difference is not significant to me. 

 

I suspect that how bad this kind of jitter affects a DAC may have a lot to do with how clean the source is.  If you are going direct from a PC etc it might be more audible than my setup which has major power filtration. fiber optic ethernet isolation and using an endpoint designed to be low noise. 

[John Hughes]

7 minutes ago, damascato said:

What's the best solution for a not overly expensive streamer?

I highly recommend this for the money.  Was a significant upgrade to my Allo USBRidge signature with Shanti power supply.   When you add the LPS for the Stack II it levels up yet again. 

 

https://stackaudio.co.uk/link2/

 

[John Hughes]

13 hours ago, darioG said:

Hi

 

I went and ordered the Stack Audio 11 plus & LPS. They offer a 30 day money back returns policy on product. I did see on review Han did of the stack 1 Stack Audio Link streamer and network bridge - YouTube Hans reported that the upgraded LPS didn't make a difference to the sound.  I will compare for myself and let you know if I hear any difference on Stack 11.  I will keep hold of the Allo usb sig for now,  judging the differences you heard, I don't think will be going back.  Thank you for the info.  Daz

Nice!  I did hear a big difference, just goes to show how different people's ears and systems are.    Let us know what you think. Also, post in the Polestar area about streamers your experience.  I need to add an entry there too.

 

 

[John Hughes]

22 minutes ago, Extreme_Boky said:

Thank you for your answer.

 

I thought that, without the driver, the streaming options will be severely limited... to something like 192kHz.. or maybe even worse - to 48kHz only?

I use this streamer with the May.  It is custom hardware with a software implementation of RopieeeXL.  I connects to the May up to 1.5Mhz PCM and 1024X DSD without problems.  No drivers necessary.

[John Hughes]

10 minutes ago, camott said:

 

So yourself and maybe one or two others claim that they hear a significant difference between USB endpoints/sources while others like @GoldenOne claim that they can't hear any difference whatsoever. You both can't be right ;) Are you sure you did an apples-to-apples comparison with exact same data being fed the endpoint? (eg. same dsp/upsampling if doing so etc). I haven't really noticed any difference between an Intel PC stick with LPS and an Allo USBridge with Shanti LPS - both running HQPlayer NAA - but it's hard to A/B because the May only has the one USB input. Was hoping that there would be some clear consensus on this ...

I don't think you will get a clear consensus on digital to digital chains. I've never seen consensus on that, ever lol. And I've been involved with it for 20 years (as both an audiofool and as a digital audio manufacturer).   I do know what is plain as day for ME on comparisons.  And I don't doubt GoldenOnes ability to hear and report either.  I did keep everything the same with my comparisons between the USBridge and the Link II. I do almost all of my listening with the May in NOS mode with my Critical Listening playlist which has 16bit to 32 bit DXD and DSD up to 256.   I don't use HQP in my system now. 

 

My own theory is that the upstream is critically important and removes so much grunge and dirt that I can hear these differences a lot more easily.  I have spent decades choosing extensive power filtration on my system and finding the ideal cabling that works for me. I think if I swapped in some bog standard USB cables and plugged my system into the wall, I would probably not be able to hear these differences between digital to digital chains in this scenario (or want to listen nearly as much). 

[John Hughes]

51 minutes ago, ted_b said:

Here is what is likely the silliest question I've ever asked on these forums, and I've been asking questions on audiophile forums for years! 

 

So.....I have been spending almost all my DSD listening on the Holo May KTE using HQPlayer and upmodulating DSD content (via ASDMEC5 or EC7) to DSD256, mainly because that's as high as I can go with my server (without hiccups).  We all know the lifting requirements of real-time upsampling and upmodulating are anywhere from light duty to back-breaking failure.  So lately I've been testing some HQPlayer Pro offline remodulated DSD512 and DSD1024.  Good news is they all play fine (SDM Direct).  But I'm finding that some of these don't sound better than their real-time upmodulated DSD256 counterparts, and I'm wondering this:  could non-DSD256 rates be "not yet broken in", i.e either the USB receiver or the May's SDM thermometers involved be somewhat untouched at these rates and levels???  It's kinda what it sounds like...a bit of congestion and overall fatigue, as if not well-worn yet.  Is this an insane question?  I realize the answer is likely elsewhere (sweetspot, tolerances/boundaries not being pushed, etc) but had to ask.  I've clearly no idea how this level of electrons work!  😎

 

https://gph.is/2TBxlSz

 

This doesn't actually surprise me. My advice is don't discount this as perception bias. 

 

I assume you are going direct from PC to May?

 

Are the offline files in the same folders as your music files (so the same pathway in your PC)?

 

I'm a bit fuzzy on the details of HQP, creating offline files is part of HQP itself?  The file processing may be using different pathways inside HQP.  

 

My experience with audio mastering when I was  converting analog masters to digital was that every mastering and editing suite changed the sound of the files in different ways.  In fact, when editing in my preferred software, Soundblade, or any software, I found that when loading the original digital file and trimming the beginning or end of the track and saving it changed the sound quality, not a lot, but it was there.  That was a mind blowing moment for me. I had a few other people confirm it was well. 

 

So, on those lines, the internal pathways that HQP is using to create offline files might be different, and it might be that it was developed without the attention to sonics that the real-time pathway had.  When I was working with the creators of Amarra to develop that software, we found that the developer had to actually listen to the builds they created, and for reasons at the time they didn't understand at the time, some sounded worse/better than others.  The changes that were being made in the software weren't even to the audio engine.

 

 

[John Hughes]

1 hour ago, scintilla said:

I figured the Serene was going to be equally great and the prices are going up tomorrow.

Wait, what?  Prices going up?  Where?

[John Hughes]

3 hours ago, hemflaw said:

Hello all. I've snooped through much of this thread and still have a couple questions..

 

1) Is the assertion that (if I may paraphrase) the May DAC simply doesn't reveal differences between USB sources still holding? @GoldenOne I guess this is for you? Forgive my skepticism  -- every DAC claims to do this, has some great new design to do so, and yet, when I get it home, it sounds a heck of a lot better when you throw a (very expensive) stack of digital front-end in front of it. Has anyone tried it with statement-level digital front-ends? I'm not talking about UltraRendu level stuff, I'm talking about Antipodes CX/EX or K50, Innuos Statement level, maybe the dCS Bridge.  I'm just curious.. If this is a DAC where you can't tell the difference between a MacBook Pro and $5k or $15k worth of digital streaming/USB clean-up it would seriously be the first. All the DACs I list in question 3 respond very nicely to improvements upstream (networking, streamers, USB, etc.)

 

(I have a long back story that I won't bore you with, optimizing the digital source chain; my current tangle is 2 EtherRegens, Antipodes CX/EX, Innuos Phoenix, Antipodes P2)

 

 

2) Are we keeping a list anywhere of streamers that will pass the very high bitrates being discussed here? Most (at least in spec) do not; but it's also possible that 'DXD' or 24/384 is the highest that occurs to marketing folks to list in the spec. I noticed that a previous poster (John Hughes?) indicated the ability to play 1.536 GHz through the Stack Audio Link II; however the spec for that product if I'm not mistaken maxes out at 24/384. Perhaps it is not the only product that will pass very high rates though it's not in the spec?

 

For my part I'm trying to assess the overall cost of state-of-the-art performance from the May. The design approach is basically very a la carte: here is the best darn DAC we can build: bring your own streamer, upsampling, all of it. This is actually reasonable -- outsource the number crunching to a commodity PC. I'm just trying to figure out what I need. I'm assuming my Antipodes CX (I belive it's an i7) is not up to PCM 1.536 (or certainly DSD512) upsampling, so I'm adding the cost of the DAC, a PC powerful enough to do the EC filter / other HQP upsampling discussed here, and -- MAYBE -- a new streamer as well if my Antipodes EX won't pass these high rates.

 

In my case my DACs under consideration all do their own upsampling, which removes the ability to mess around with endless filter combos, and also simplifies things substantially. No extra PC, no learning to use the, let's call it 'basic', HQP UI.

I currently run the Uptone and Antipodes (AQ and Curious cables) digital front-end via HDMI into a PS Audio DirectStream. The candidates I'm thinking about in addition to the May-pile described above are the new PS Audio DS Mk II (forthcoming this year in theory) and the Mola Mola Tambaqui, which is a heck of a lot more money but sounds bloody incredible in my system.

 

So I guess last question:

3) Has anyone compared a fully-tricked out HQP > very good streamer > May KTE system to the Tambaqui, the dCS Bartok, or the Chord DAVE (upsampled by HQP or MS) with the Sean Jacobs DC3 / DC4?  (TwitteringMachines review of the May compares it to the Tambaquut only used the May in NOS mode with no sw upsampling)

 

I guess I'm only really interested in the complexity and overhead of an HQP/May system if it exceeds the performance of the Tambaqui.   Anyway, any input appreciated.

 So, for me, changes to the streamer etc. feeding the May via USB does make a sonic difference.  I've tried several, a Rasberry Pi4, a USBridge Signature with Shanti LPS, and the Stack Audio II with and without their LPS.  They performed to my ears from mediocre to best as listed.  I heard clear but not huge differences between them.  With the best sounding smoother, with darker backgrounds (quieter), tighter fuller bass, more clear and refined treble.  Probably its less of a change than I've heard with other gear, but it was still there.  

 

I use a NVidia Shield Pro for video which connects at 1.5M, but it upsamples most audio to 192K to that it changes to when I press play.  I use a Kitsune Singxer SU2 most times to convert the USB to AES so I can have two USB sources into the May.  (When will DAC manufacturers start offering multiple USB inputs???)  The Stack II connects to the May at DSD 1024X until music is fed to it when it turns to the sample rate of the file.  I was not able to get HQ Player Naa through the Stack to play files above 768K.  I've been told that my AMD processor on my PC is the likely culprit there though.  I couldn't find a 1.5M PCM file online to test it directly.  If someone has a link for that, I'd like to try. 

 

The Stack II will play 32bit 384K DXD files without problems with the May.  I have also played native DSD 512 files through the Stack II as well.  

[John Hughes]

17 hours ago, camott said:

Sure but it’s interesting that most of the hype about the May DAC is around it’s performance with NOS PCM, via the highly engineered R2R ladder and FPGA error correction. If you are just using DSD why spend all that money on engineering that you aren’t using?

In DSD mode how much better is it than a much cheaper RME or topping DAC? (I don’t know the answer myself). 

I had the Topping D90 and the May's DSD performance is clearly superior in every way. 

[John Hughes]

3 hours ago, mrwiggles said:

Is burn-in really a thing with this DAC? I read posts where people say that you really need 400+ hours of continuous playing (often unattended playlists just for this purpose) to really get the most out of the MAY. I am still waiting on my Pass Labs amp being delivered in a few weeks so have the time to just hook up the MAY to burn-in if that’s really required. But this feels like one of those audiophile myths that so often get debated.

 

For me the May is one of the few digital components that sounded great out of the box, and just got better with time. It didn't go through an unlistenable period like other components have. 

 

In terms of audibility, I think break in has more impact than just about any of the HQP filters do. If you hear big differences between HQP filters you will likely hear the difference of break in too.