Musetec (LKS) MH-DA005 DAC

@sns Yes, I agree that if someone is looking for an all in one box solution then the Bricasti is an option together with the Aurender A20, Mark Levinson, Mola Mola etc.

But we all know that having at least a separate preamp will sound better. The 005 responds very well to high end preamps, which you would think the opposite would be true because high end preamps will reveal all the warts in downstream equipment.

I have auditioned the 005 with some of the best SS preamps in the World, including my own SMC-VRE-1 (out of production), Vitus Audio SL-103 ($30k) and Viola Sonata ($40k).

I have also auditioned among others Constellation, Simaudio and Solution but found the above preferable.

The 005 was never found lacking in any respect which is usually the case with a lower quality product.

It's definitely not "organic" or vinyl or tube like, it's real, warts and all. When did you ever come from a concert and say "Wow, that was really organic!", Never.

Instead it will faithfully reproduce Jagger's Souf London accent and Karen Carpenter's Drawl. Plus razor sharp electric guitar and the greatest cymbal reproduction from ant DAC I've ever heard. Listen to Cream's Toad or some Hi-Rez Jazz.

Getting back to the Bricasti, it's x8 oversampling which I believe will inhibit the use of HQ Player, which I understand to be the best CA program. Oversampling is not  a purist audio feature either. Old school believes the original signal must remain so.

Anyway many people will love the pseudo ML design and built by some ex ML employees, and of course it's American!

@sns ​@charles1dad

"Screaming deal"? Perhaps so, but not so fast, please. Yes the Bricasti has a built in streamer and an analog volume control. But are these appropriate to the fine quality of the DAC function on the unit?

In the first place I’ve searched far and wide and cannot find a review or evaluation of the streamer function itself on the Bricasti M1se. The "se" denotes the streamer edition. Then, searching far and wide in this and other forums I find a general consensus that built in streamers on expensive DACs generally are usually judged to be inadequate compared to separates. I am making no judgment on the Bricasti streamer function. But I wonder, really, whether it proves itself satisfactory to audiophiles who are into 5 figure DACs. And I wonder if it would be satisfactory to @sns particularly. Now, someone may read this and tell us that the included streamer outperforms the Aires G2. One never knows for sure. Then perhaps: screaming deal.

Like most things in digital audio, streamers are developing at a rapid pace, even faster than DACs. I agree that the addition of a built-in streamer might help a DAC’s sales, even for some who would use it to get started but with plans to upgrade. On the other hand there are now some very good inexpensive streamers available to get started with. (My first streamer with the 004 was my stock Oppo 105, and it was actually pretty good.) And when you upgrade they can be sold. The Bricasti M1 MDx without the streamer is $10,000. The streamer adds $1000.

IIUC the knob on the Bricasti M1 is not a volume control, but it is on the M1se.  A remote with volume and balance is available for the Bricasti for a steep upcharge. I have only been able to price it in sterling at 549 VAT incl. But again, if you’re running a 5 figure DAC will that be satisfactory? As @lordmelton writes, a preamp does a lot more than control volume and select inputs. None of the several reviewers of the M1 or M1se that I read has written of using the built-in volume control for their review.

I do not mean by any of this to detract from the exceptional sound quality of the Bricasti DAC as reported here, and I accept that as a given. What remains, for me is only the question of value for $$. That’s what brought many of us here in the first place.

It's definitely not "organic" or vinyl or tube like, it's real, warts and all. When did you ever come from a concert and say "Wow, that was really organic!",

I suppose that there is a vernacular issue with the use and meaning of terms. To describe an audio component as organic is in my opinion perhaps the highest compliment that could be paid in reference to it sound quality and presentation. It’s my way of expressing the sound is utterly natural and the antithesis of artificial and contrived.

So it seems the term may convey different meanings to different people, not an unusual occurrence. In the past seven or eight weeks I have attended 4 live performances  involving acoustic instruments. A classical piano and cello recital and 3 jazz shows in small venues.

Organic and utterly emotionally  engaging aptly describe  what I heard and “felt”.  I definitely want every audio product I have in my system to be “organic”. Again for me, the highest of compliments and praise.

Charles

@lordmelton Totally agree on preamp front, I'd still use separate pre if I owned Briscati. Analog volume function on B would only be of value if one was lacking good quality pre.

@lordmelton @charles1dad I generally stay away from the word organic in describing sound quality, but understand it's meaning when others use it. I generally use natural or use 'performers in room' to convey this attribute. As for the 005 specifically, I find @lordmelton  description to be entirely correct in that it does have extreme level of resolution, transparency that exposes all of a recording. For me it fits the definition of 'performers in room', which also fits my definition of natural or organic. Now, if organic is to fit Charles defintion it may not conform to that level of naturalness. That level of natural may require a bit more warmth than 005 has to give, both @jjss49  and myself, and it seems @lordmelton  all agree the  005 pretty dead neutral, JJSS having heard a bit more of this nature with Briscati, my present conclusions, and L admittance in prior post. Yes, the 005 moves me emotionally and has this organic nature, just may not fully flush it out vs. some other dacs. No dac can be perfect, which means playing off set of compromises, 005 set of compromises is nearly perfect for me, may not for another. I fully expect someday I'll be replacing 005 with another dac, don't know when, but I'm quite certain dacs will continue to evolve towards both higher resolution and more natural timbre/organic/natural sound.

@melm  You are correct, we cannot know the quality of the built in streamer in B, but overall sound vs 005 can be determined. The issue for fair comparison is quality of the streamer used with 005, with so many variations available hard to compare fairly to any dac with built in streamer. We must take at face value the PARTICULAR comparisons available to us and make subjective evaluation. And this is where I'd balance the comparison in 005's favor. With non streaming dac we can pick and choose from myriad streaming choices, we have greater ability to flavor our sound in various ways. With presumed streaming innovations ahead of us we have opportunity for even greater performance in future. No doubt greater versatility with 005  vs Briscati, or any discrete streamer dac vs steaming dac.

@charles1dad

Well, describing sound in words has always been difficult. Wise writers have given us some guidance from time to time. "Organic" and "musical" are too often used by audiophiles simply to mean, "it has a sound that I like." I have used "musical" at times, including in this thread, but I have given it a specific definition drawn from an old writing in UHF Magazine. I suspect that "organic" when it is not used simply to mean "I like it" may actually denote "yin" as popularized by the writings of Harry Pearson. But yin was regarded by HP as a coloration and not an asset. So too IMO expressions like it sounds more analogue, or more like tubes.

We are left then with: it makes the music sound more like unamplified instruments in real space, or not. For the most part this limits the music to classical, most often performed without the benefit of microphones and loudspeakers. I was intrigued by your post suggesting jazz shows like that. Did I get that right? If so, kudos to them and to you.

Around here that writing has been done best IMO by @dbb which is why his thread deserves a bump from time to time.