Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About chrille

  • Rank
    Sophomore Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hello austinpop, and thanks for your rapid response. I think I 'll stick with the ones I have . Vänskä's Mahler recordings from Minnesota have received quite mixed responses from some reviewers and I am not really in desperate need of another M2. From a performance perspective I prefer Fischer's M2 from Budapest on Channel Classics and it is also a good native DSD 64 recording. Jared Sacks balances very naturally and realistically compared to DGG's normal style of a bit too much of multimiking. Kaplan's VPO M2 though available as SACD in DSD is actually a native 24/96 PCM recording. Quite good by DGG standards ,but at least via my SACD players not as good as Channel Classics M2 on SACD. Or for that matter when played as DSD 64 download via Q/HMS. Via my home system I can play the channel M2 louder without congestion than the DGG/ Kaplan which has a tendency to congest and harden a bit at climaxes via my electrostatic speakers. But the Channel Classics M2 sounds really impressive at very loud levels too. But I may change my mind on the Kaplan one if I get to hear it in its native 24/96 version via M Scaler. I'll start by playing the rbcd layer of my SACD via M Scaler when I get home again to hear how that fares. And if it sounds good enough I may go for the 24/96 download. Good as 16/44.1 can sound via M Scaler it is still not hi res imho. M Scaler has changed my opinion of the SQ levels on quite a few recordings. Mainly for the better. But not always. Revealing as it is,it can also make the bad aspects of a recording more noticable. PS a bit OT maybe but how did you like the Maggie 3.7s? IMHO Maggies can sometimes be a very good alternative to large electrostatics for large scale symphonic music. Enjoy your TT2 /M Scaler Cheers Chrille
  2. Great review!! A model of its kind! Looking forward to your upcoming take on some of these upmarket headphones Since almost 4 months now, I am using my M Scaler with a Qutest ,not TT2. Via my old battered but still very good HD800 and a battery powered headphone amp I found the Qutest /M Scaler better than TT2 on its own with similar, actually only acoustic/classical 90 % hi res material like you used in your excellent review. No pop on my playlists really ,Austin TT2 / M Scaler even better than my choice. But I also know that DAVE/M Scaler beats even TT2/M Scaler so I am waitning for the next upgrade from Dave or a VERY heavily discounted DAVE before upgrading any further. Interesting also to read about your take on power supplies and BNC cabling. I have taken one such step with my Qutest driving it on a battery powered LPS instead of the supplied one And yes it is definitely better than the supplied one . Having read your take on these things, I am now quite keen to try something similar with M Scaler which is the only link in my chain connected to the grid while travelling. MBP on batttery via usb to Qutest on battery and battery powered headphone amp is the best travelling kit I have had so far. Bulky yes with the big heavy M Scaler. On the other hand I don't carrry it around other than on flights. But I get very good sound quality with well recorded material. PS How does Vänskä's 24/96 Mahler 2 compare to Fischer's on Channel or MTT's on SFS, musically and SQ wise in your opinion? With BIS's Sibelius series from the same venue/orchestra M Scaler makes a BIG difference,basically turning them from already very good to basically SOTA 24/96 PCM imho. Cheers Chrille
  3. Hi again and thanks for your feeedback and help. Regarding Qutest and a separate headphone amp I chose that combo over HUGO 2 for my travels after careful comparisons with my main headphones HEKV2 and HD800, not to mention Susvara . But anyway I chose Qutest because with the often complex classical full dynamic range material I mainly listen to, there just isn't enough power /current or whatever there is missing with HUGO2 to drive those will full authority and weight and effortlessly. With good powerful headphone amps I may in theory get sligthly less transparency and resolution. But will rather live with those than strain and congestion at climaxes with headphones direct to HUGO 2 and even DAVE/BLU2 which also is lacking in the same aspects. The DAVE/BLU2 combo will not drive difficult headphones very well unfortunately. I am hoping to audition TT2 in a couple of weeks if it is available in Singapore when I get there. But I think my first priority will be an M-scaler. Cheers Chrille
  4. Thanks again for your advice, I am also trying to have backup options ready if my aging main system breaks down. And frankly, the same thing that had me worried indeed happened once more last night. I am still trying to figure out exactly why my laptop sometimes seems to disconnect from my Quetest DAC. And this time around the little slider volume was at full level but the ticking on /off for Sound box was empty and completetely unresponsive ? I closed down everything and made sure the system was seeing the correct dac via both of my music player programs on start up ,and lo it worked again. The only thing I have been doing a bit disrespectfully is plugging in and out different headphones and sometimes changing rca cables between dac and headphone amp without turning things off only stopping play in Audirvana. With very limited knowledge of how things digital, really work, I was thinking this is analogue and should not affect the digital connection. But maybe I was wrong in my assumption? This morning things worked again. Talking about saving up for, having heard what M-scaling can do I am a bit tempted to add an M-scaler to my Qutest based digital system But maybe I will have to spend money on a DAP to insure I am never without music on my travels. While still at home I can always resort to analogue via LPs or digital via SACD/cd. Or just pug in my 15" mbp from 2009. Cheers Christer
  5. Thanks and to those concerned trying to help, I have an embarrassing confession to make. There wasn't really anything wrong with my mbp after all . But stupid and unattentive as I can be sometimes, I failed to check all little boxes in audio settings carefully enough the first couple of times around until I finally did so and found out that the DAC chosen was correct but the volume slider had changed down to ZERO. No wonder I got no sound. In my defence I have to say that I DID NOT change that volume setting to zero voluntarily. But I sure raised it back to full level again Anyway Cheers and thanks again Christer
  6. Thanks for your advice. I will look into how to play via an iPad or similar. But ideally I would like to keep my music-player programs Audirvana and Pure Music plus all the 4tb of music on my portable firewire harddrives, not to mention eveything else I have in my laptop.So I might just get another laptop and clone things from this one, if I can't get this one to work with my dacs via usb any more. Cheers Christer
  7. Hello Qutest owners . Could someone please advice me of a way to use mine with my headphones and headphone amp withpout connecting either to my since today nonfunctional laptop? What is the easiest most portable highest SQ hi res files including dff player solution instead of my big heavy laptop with Audirvana and Pure music? All advice appreciated. Cheers Christer
  8. Nice clip, brings back happy memories of my own years as a photographer in Kenya in the 80s. If I remember correctly the recording used here is the Marriner ST Martins in the Fields one with Brymer as solist?
  9. Hmm, I find it quite interesting ! Like you say first claiming taps don't really matter and then adding not only 1M taps but 16M for DSD. It would be very interesting to hear from Jussi why he updates his HQplayer with more taps if they don't matter??? Or do they suddenly matter? And if so? How much ?And does his version seriously compare to Rob Watts's 1Mtap Mscaler or not? And why did Mansr use only one instrument acoustic guitarr in his filter tests? In my limited experience and comparing against live acoustic music you need very complex dynamically with lots of instruments and even un-amplified voices to really hear much difference between good DACs in general. And from the limited exposure I have so far had to Rob Watts M-scaler via headphones only ,it has produced the most realistic digital sound I have ever heard. But it does so at a cost! I would be very happy indeed if Jussi's latest updated 1Mtaps version HQplayer approaches or even equals an M-scaler. That would be truly revolutionary! And it would save me a lot of money!
  10. Hmm, I have to disagree with you . For large scale works like Mahler's 8th and other similar works it is imho one of the best venues in the world. Some of my most "eargasmic" moments in life have been in the Royal Albert Hall during live Proms.
  11. Thanks for adding your very interesting article on this Forum ! Too many lack the connection to the only REFERENCE there can be in HI FI.
  12. chrille

    HQ Player

    Thanks for your responses. I may look into HQPlayer specifically as a DSD option if it turns out to outperform the way I play my DSD files currently which is via Chord Qutest. DSD sounds better than before in my system via Qutest, but still lags a bit behind the best hi res PCM to me. Tone and timbre can be very seductive with well recorded DSD, but often at the cost of a certain softness at transient/ climaxes not there live or via PCM. And then of course there is the dreaded DSD noise with anything recorded at DSD 64 , that has been postprocessed/mastered. DSD64 raw can sound very nice, but there are hardly any commercial releases without postprocessing on the market except historical transfers. PCM on the other hand can sometimes sound too hard/harsh and clinically cold compared to the real thing. I would like "the best of two worlds" combined into one. Would a Benchmark DAC 2 DAC be a good option with your HQplayer in your opinion? I am not at all interested in buying yet another DAC,only months after buying my Qutest,unless anyone here would throw a DAVE or dCs Vivaldi or similar at me at rock bottom price.
  13. chrille

    HQ Player

    Thanks for your input. I will try the 30 days version. Do let me /us know which one you prefer Audirvana or HQPlayer? I listen exclusively to acoustic music and mainly large scale classical, and I prefer Pure Music over Audirvana with all three of my DACs Benchmark DAC2 ,Hugo1 and Chord Qutest. Pure music player sounds warmer and more natural to my ears both via headphones Sennheiser HD800 and HEKV2 and most importantly via my big electrostatic speakers powered with 900 watts per channel. With Audirvana I can't play as loud as via Pure Music without a hardening of tone and congestion at loud climaxes in classical music. What I want and need is MAXIMUM TRANSPARENCY without having to fiddle with lots of different filter settings. I understand little of digital filtering theory and just want the best possible SQ at the cheapest possible price.
  14. chrille

    HQ Player

    I haven't even downloaded HQ player yet. But the impression I get of it is that one needs to be very "computer techy" to make it work obviously? I can handle the settings in Pure Music and Audirvana. But all these posts on this thread asking questions like yours has made me stay away from HQplayer. And when I or others ask questions of how it competes with DAVE/Mscaler and such,it seems Miska is recommending a Nvidiva PC or something similar at basically the same price as an M-scaler. For a music lover without the tech interest and or knowedge how to set up comlicated players like his optimally Chord's alternative is very tempting indeed. Give me,sell me a "click play", player pc upsampling way that is MUCH cheaper then the Chord very expensive alternative and sounds as superb and realistic with acoustic music real instruments at a much more competetive price!. And does Miska's much discussed,beat them all, DAC even exsist in real life???? If it is so fantastic as he claims it is,why doesn't he build them ?Why isn't for sale?
  15. When you state that you are certain that no one can hear a difernce between 100k taps and 1M taps ,what are you basing that on? Have you like some others here actually listend and compared for example Chord DAVE on its own and with a 1 M -scaler? I for one wish that for digital to sound better ie more realistic with acoustic material PC usampling like for example via Audirvana or pure Music would be the equal of Chord's much more expensive versions BLU2 and new M-scaler. My own still very limited comparisons and so far only via highend headphones and not under ideal conditions indicate that not only is there a VERY NOTICEABLE difference betwen DAVE 164k taps and BLU"'s 1M taps . And also more importantly the upsampling via Audirvana or Pure music does not sound as effortless and realistic as even DAVE on its own even when I upsample to 32/768 in Audirvana or 64 /384 wth pure Music. I for one want the SQ of Rob Watts M-scaler tech.But if I can avoid it I don't want to pay the price still asked for it . But so far there is no question of its merits to me. I have never before or after heard 16/44.1 sound as realistic as via DAVE/BLU2. Who can deliver equal SQ at much lower price??? Not only in theory but also in practice?
  • Create New...