Jump to content

TheAttorney

  • Content Count

    251
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    United Kingdom

2 Followers

About TheAttorney

  • Rank
    Sophomore Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    UK

Recent Profile Visitors

2297 profile views
  1. From many posts here at AS, I have no doubt than super switches and super ethernet cables can make a big difference to networked hifi. And several people have raved over the PhoenixNet, so I'm sure it's one of the best. But some still say that disconnecting the network entirely from the server (after buffering the music file) sounds best of all. So even the best switch/cable is still not perfect. But as I stated in earlier posts, I've bypassed all that cable spaghetti by using a WiFi dongle that connects by WiFi to the broadband router in another room. This dongle's impact on SQ is
  2. My MU1 goes AES direct to a DAVE DAC/headphone amp. But I think it's an oversimplification to imply that PhoenixNet or Sablon are the only things that have great synergy with the MU1. For example, a while back someone raved over the Shunyata Omega AES cable. I would have liked to try that one, but its price was way more than I'm prepared to pay for a single cable. From what I've learned so far, the MU1 is affected by much the same surrounding components as any another digital device I've come across. I had wished it wasn't so. Because the MU1 had successfully isola
  3. My MU1 Impressions - Round 4. Cables and tweaks. AES Cable. In my earlier rounds I had confirmed to myself that the AES cable is critical to MU1's performance. It's not that a stock cable will sound bad, more a case that a top cable really brings out the goose-bump factor. The £900-ish AQ Diamond sounded great, but was a bit too cumbersome for my liking, so in the meantime I lived with the sensibly priced Sommer microphone cable. But I was missing that goose-bump factor, so I tried a local dealer for some Shunyata cables - none were readily in stock for demo, so instead I trie
  4. My MU1 impressions - Round 3. Look&feel and practicalities. The MU1 in real life looks just like I expected from the photos. It doesn't scream heavy weight "high end" extravagance. It's more about simple, restrained elegance. Grimm wisely chose well to give the gold disc a very matt finish so it doesn't look too blingey against the matt black enclosure. That restrained gold disc helps give a Japanese Zen-like vibe to the minimalist enclosure. With the display switched off in standby mode and cables hidden round the back, the MU1 doesn't even look much like a hifi
  5. I haven't specifically tried the 3200 version, but the 2666 version worked fine in my NUC7i7DN, despite it only running at 2400, as shown on the BIOS display. I could not find a way of changing the default 2400 RAM speed in BIOS, and I think this parameter is only adjustable in certain (probably server-level) systems. Nevertheless, the 2666 version running at 2400 sounded better than the 2400 version running at 2400, so I suspect the same will apply to your 3200 version.
  6. I did consider the Bartok. But, rightly or wrongly, I didn't see it as a true server that can fully manage a locally stored music system. I saw it more as a DAVE rival with some networking/streaming capabilities. Not a NUC rival (as I said, I could be mistaken - it's sometimes hard to unravel the differences between a streamer and a server). The Bartok is also a very large box and, in true DCS style, I'd have to fret whether to also get the upsampler for maximum performance - and that is another large box and cable and power cord and suddenly I'm not downsizing anymore. And the dealer that st
  7. Well, ultimately I'd really like a single box that I can just plug my headphones into. But there's nothing on the horizon that can do that at the high level SQ I demand. So I currently have a 2-box system, MU1 to existing DAVE DAC/amp. So nothing else planned until next year when Grimm add an optional DAC into the same integrated box, called MU2. If (and it's a big if) Grimm pull off the same magic with their DAC module, then DAVE's days will be numbered - because then MU2 could talk directly to a dedicated top end headphone amp that is powerful enough to drive even really ineffici
  8. Sorry, I was typing from memory and made some mistakes in my core isolation settings, and it's really frustrating that this site doesn't allow one to edit a post so soon after writing it. The final recommendation should have been: 2-3 systemd 0 nfm 1 gstp 1-6 irq/131 7 I.e. systemd and primary IRQ are each completely isolated, with gstp over-allocated across all the remaining cores. Which doesn't mean that other variations can't also sound great - just this this was slightly ahead on my system. Sometimes when I've tried variations, my mind g
  9. I should point out that, as of a few days ago, I've thrown money at my downsizing objective (to reduce box and spaghetti count) and replaced a whole line of components, including my NUC, with a posh dedicated server (see the Grimm MU1 thread). That has it's own linux-based system and is closed-box, i.e. nothing visible to adjust and no option to try Euphony on it. So it's a fond farewell to Euphony - I don't know whether to sell my fanless Porcoolpine NUC 7i7DN, or keep it as spare (anyone interested in buying can PM me to force my hand). As a conclusion, my final Euphony config wa
  10. My MU1 impressions - Round 2. The MU1 on home trial replaced my existing components as follows: SR7 p/s with 3 DC cables powering: NUC > USB cable > IsoRegen > USB cable > M-scaler > 2 x BNC cables > DAVE was replaced with: MU1 > AES cable > DAVE Both MU1 and M-Scaler were set to their maximum upscaling (4FS and 16FS respectively) as this sounded best in both cases. As start point, I was feeling pretty good about my NUC-based system. Although many here at AS have gone much further than I at optimising t
  11. Yes it would have been interesting - but I've tried to explain in my previous posts that my primary objective was to decide if the MU1 (plus a collection of T+A headphones and amps) gave a sufficiently impressive performance to take it (and them) for a home trial. It would have taken too much time, and would have confused me with too many variables, had I diverted from whatever defaults the dealer had prepared. So Round 1 absolutely does not conclude whether MU1 is better or worse than the best that Statement could potentially offer. OTOH, if Roon on Statement is so unimpressi
  12. Fair enough, but the point about the MU1 is that you HAVE to use AES (or the recently added rca socket spdif) in order to use it's all-important FPGA output that provides all the magic. Whereas the Statement has a great USB output, so in both cases we were giving each server the best chance - even if DAVE may treat them differently. FWIW, the supplied USB cable was a pricey TQ Diamond and the AES was a pricey Audioquest Diamond. Also supplied was a no-name, but solidly made, AES to BNC converter cable that connected to DAVE's BNC input. This didn't sound quite as
  13. My Grimm MU1 impressions - Round 1 I took my DAVE and HEKse's to the dealer last Saturday. To get a reference point, we first attached DAVE to Innuos Statement (via USB and running latest 2.0 o/s and latest 795 Roon). This sounded very good, although, compared to the memory of my Euphony NUC, there seemed to be a very slight "digital" aspect to the presentation - not at all bright, just a touch unnatural - which could have been due to one of Roon's typical SQ characteristics that I remember from the past. Next, replace Statement with MU1 via AES. This sounded better, wi
  14. As has been posted not so long ago.... This 2666 speed Apacer sounds better than the 2400 that we had before (and the 2400 was considerably better than Crucial RAM that originally came with my NUC). There's also a 3200 version that I haven't tried. This for NUCs, which generally do not support ECC. If your server supports ECC RAM then there are even better Apacer models around that have been described before on this and similar threads.
  15. The 3 rails power NUC, IR and M-Scaler. I have no doubt that a DC 4 powering DAVE would be a major upgrade, but it is also a majorly big and expensive box that does nothing to help me downsize ☹️. Not out of the question in the future if I stick with DAVE, but I may not stick with DAVE if the MU2 DAC component turns out to be as good as its makers expect. It's "common knowledge" that wifi is bad for hifi. But Euphony Stylus on my NUC has an option to disable networking during play (after buffering the music tracks) - and I can't reliably tell the difference whether wifi is active o
×
×
  • Create New...