2. digital
  3. 1328422306

Bricasti M1 - where is the music

I had a chance to audition the highly-praised Bricasti M1 at my dealer. The associated gear include ATC 100 passive floor stander, ML pre and mono block. We used playback designs MPS5 for comparison and as the transport. I auditied this DAC hoping to use it as a secondary source to my Klimax.

We used primarily Diana Krell's CDs, including Live in Paris, and violin solo and concertos.

The positive:

M1 is technically excellent. The highs are extended without harshness. Mids are fairly transparent. Bass hits deep with power and definition. M1 reminds me of DAC1 and dare I say it's a souped up DAC1 in every respect (could be a good or bad thing)

The negative:

I would say the biggest weakness and ultimately my dismissal of this otherwise technically proficient DAC is its ulter lack of musicality. For example, human voice do not sound real and organic when compared with MPS-5. When Diana sings, I did not get the imagery of her singing. Like the mids, the highs on M1 leave much to be desired. For example, symbols in Living in Paris and violin solos lack the real life quality associated with those instrument. M1 sounded just like another digital DAC, displaying all the negative aspect of digital music. On the very high notes of violin, all I heard was a monotone sound, without the usual harmonics and woodiness I am used to with Klimax and what I heard on MPS-5. Soundstage of M1 feels contrived and not realistic. I did not hear the complex layering as with he MPS-5, nor did I hear as deep of a soundstage.

I believe if you like how DAC-1 sounds and wants a more refined and upgraded version of that sound, M1 may be a great choice. However, if you value real-life organic sound with music unfolding in a natural way, you may want to look elsewher
e.

Overall I was very disappointed in the M1 when I had very high expectations after reading the latest review in an audio magazine.
chesebert
kcmtsang
3 posts
 
I think #0 is a safe start as no body really hate #0.

Filter #1-#5 are "special" low delay filters. "Special" means somebody like, somebody don't. Out of these special filter, as i said, I prefer #1 for everything except 44khz. For redbook, I use #2 instead.
antigrunge
74 posts
 
I think that having a plethora of filters is nothing other than the designer's abrogation of the responsibility to listen. In the old days having sound filters (albeit in the analogue domain) was seriously snickered upon by serious audiophiles
zugisland
42 posts
 
Currently have the m1 and PBD mpd3 in my home doing an ab comparison and found them so close in sound..I stayed so far with only one filter setting on the m1 since the mod doesn't have any. However found one anomaly in the m1 favor, there appears to be a comparability issue with the PhD piece in my system since when not playing music and connected via xlr there is hissing and electronic noise coming from the pbd .I have simaudio 350p and 400m Mono s so and I've tried several other dads all dead quite except the Playback, so in my shootout the m1 is the best each I've heard, others were weiss202,zodiac gold,Bel canto 2.5 (wish I had the 3.5 ) esoteric k5 ,Hegel, and 300d sim
audioengr
3,282 posts
 
It just needs a low-jitter source and it will sound good, as most DACs will. See the Stereophile review:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/bricasti-design-m1-da-converter-specifications

The digital source master clock is actually more important than the DAC itself. This is what delivers the realizm in the vocals. Read the reviews and you will see lots of evidence for this.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
mrtennis
3,295 posts
 
at the rsik of generalizing, i would say that my experience has uncovered the following:

a solid state device is generally not preferable to a tubed device. obviously, there are poorly designed tubed components and lousy tubes.

what i am saying is that in general, take the best solid state device and you will find a tubed device that sounds better.

i have heard decent dacs, in the past, forsell and older wadias, e.g., but i have found that there was always a preferable tubed dac or player.

considering components in production today, solid state digital hardware is inferior , in my opinion to older less resolving players and dacs, and of the digital gear i have owned, i have always preferred a tube in the circuit.

when i heard the bricasti i too was underwhelmed. i'd rather own the original minmax with a brimar 12at7 or 12au7.

i suppose, in all fairness, the subject of this thread recalls the essence of the argument among audiophiles, tubes vs solid state.
More to discover