Grimm MU1 Streamer - Really "The Best"?
I've recently become interested in the Grimm MU1. While reviews of top end players from Innuos, Aurender and Antipodes and others are typically all very positive, the tone of the many pro reviews of the Grimm MU1 go far, far beyond, with some reviews resorting to using superlatives and gushing of positive system transformation and not being able to stop listening to material, etc.. HiFi Advice and Steve Huff (actually calls it "magic") have such reviews.
Given the delay in availability of the Innuos Pulsar which I'm told will be better than my current Zenith Mk3 + PhoenixUSB reclocker, I am interested in replacing my streaming setup with a one-box solution that includes a high-precision clock. The new streamer will continue to feed my Gryphon Diablo 300's DAC module, which I have no interest in replacing.
I'm actually a fan of Innuos, after they improved the sound of my Zenith with firmware updates and after I added their PhoenixUSB reclocker. I appreciate this commitment to improving sound quality which is why I was so interested in the Pulsar.
The trigger for considering an upgrade is not for improved sound, but rather, to solve some issues I have with too many Audioquest power cords coiled and clumped together. I will get to lose one of them and one of my USB cords with a one-box streamer. I've noticed my sound is very sensitive to positioning of my AC cords and find I often need to re-adjust the PC feeding my amp to get proper sounding vocals at center stage. One of my subs also seems to be picking up AC noise when the crossover is set above 60Hz. The second trigger is simply system simplification, removing one box. All that said I don't really have any complaints regarding sound, and the PhoenixUSB reclocker truly did improve the sound of my Zenith.
While the Grimm MU1 has it's 4X upsampling up it's sleeve with reviewers absolutely glowing over this feature and it's extreme ability to separate tones to the left, right, front, and back far better than the rest, I don't see that Grimm has gone to any lengths with regard to power supply management in the way other brands do including Innuos. The MU1's ultra-simplistic interior doesn't bug me, but the lack of transformers and power management makes me wonder....
Are there any updates from folks who have directly compared the MU1 vs similarly classed streamers from the competition? Did you find it to be as revelatory as the pro reviewers found it? And, how does it compare to other streamers with it's 4X upsampling disabled? Does it sound like it suffers from it's lack of power management? I do see that the clock should be very good...
2 TB. I have a Shunyata Sigma v2 AES/EBU. Its such an unfussy, flip it on and forget about it piece of gear and I enjoy it. If I had it to do over and if I had acquired the Grimm before my dac, I might have tried some other dacs at lower pricepoints. With the Grimm, since the dac internal clock isn’t utilized, I can’t help but think it might be more dac agnostic than most server/streamers. |
@jl1ny , +1 as well! My point lower in the thread is that many individual accounts seem to corroborate the admittedly goofy Huff. And other reviewers too. Christiaan at HiFi Advice is much better - he directly compared the general sonic qualities , all things being equal, between the Antipodes K50 and the MU1. Interestingly, he changed his tune slightly as both brands made hardware and/or software revisions over time. While he at first characterized the MU1 as being quite organic, it seems that with hardware updates he followed up and said the sound has become more neutral, and a bit more “propulsive”. He also said in a video comment that the MU1 has become more lean in comparison with the K50. Two months ago he said this on a YT comment: Hi Nick, The performance of both servers is codependent on Roon performance but the K50 also allows other server/player solutions which have different relative strengths. In general, though, under equal circumstances, the K50 sounds bigger, richer, fuller, lusher, and more relaxed. The Grimm on the other hand is more refined and precise and cleaner/leaner but arguably more transparent. Both have great focus. The measure of depth and 3D imaging greatly depends on the output format/interface. For the best depth and layering, use the K50’s AES/EBU outputs. Used in that manner, it sounds a little deeper and more enveloping than the Grimm. Tangibility is a little subjective and personal as it ties in with crispness and/or depth perception, depending on what matters most to the individual. Therefore, in terms of tangibility, overall, I would say it’s a tie between the two.
|
- Kudos to the previous poster for bringing up HiFi Advice. Christian does a great job comparing servers. He seems to specialize on digital. - Another reviewer, Hans Beekhuyzen, who actually bought the MU1, is now using it as a streamer only because of its CPU limitations it was not able to manage his music library. He uses a NUC as core now. - Also consider that if you like Roon, single box solutions are much more expensive than separating the streamer from the core. You can have a very good streamer/storage like the Melco N10, and do the processing in an i7 NUC running ROCK with a good power supply and isolated through fiber. This combo beat the 25K Oladra in several high end set-ups where it was being tested, and this is what I bought. By the way, if you read Christian’s review, read the user comments too. There are extra insights there. - I heard the latest Antipodes Oladra and did not like it. Found it super detailed but too much analytical, while the Melco N10 was much more organic (sounded analog vs digital sounding). It is the best USB output I heard. I am aware it could be a matter of personal preference. - I understand OP logic of a single box solution. I chose separate boxes for streaming because testing and future upgrading is easier, and is significantly cheaper than single box solutions too, while keeping an outstanding organic sound. - I agree with most posters. First follow your ears and then consider architecture and cost. |
@vgmbpty brings up one box vs multi box solution, whole other can of worms. This is where the rendering capability of streamers really comes into play , and I'd agree the one box solution becomes the more expensive proposition, especially if usb is preferred mode. Optimizing other ports may be less costly for streamer manufacturers, which may be reflected in streamer price.
Based on optimal usb rendering via one box solution, my choice in recent streamer purchase came down to Wadax, Taiko Extreme, both above my price level, Aurender W20SE, Innous Statement were others seriously considered, this new Statement looks very nice. All of these do usb rendering at highest level, may be others I'm unaware of. Antipodes K50 also seriously considered as it's very versatile unit. All these have first class power supplies as well. Grimm wasn't in my purview at the time.
Pricing of above units starts at something close to $20k, top flight usb rendering in one box solution costs big bucks in my view. May be reason to reconsider purchasing dac with usb as optimal port for some. Or one can go with two box solution at more reasonable price level.
At this point I'm finding streamers and dacs with optimized AES/EBU to be intriguing, not as difficult, read costly to implement as USB. The above mentioned review of Antipodes K50 compared to Grimm is enlightening. Also like the Antipodes other preferred path of two box solutions via their optimized network ports in K series.
|
