2. pc-audio
  3. 1328246582

Mach2Music mini and Amarra : Huge disappointment

I invite all the fellow Audiogon members than own both the Mach2Music Mini and Amarra to share they experiences.

Mine has been a huge disappointment .

The sound I get from the Mach2Music mini even with the advantage of playing Hi-Res files is mediocre at best and way inferior to the sound of a common CD.
Mach2Music tech support after checking that every setting is correct and everything is as it should dropped the ball. They blame the mediocre sound I'm complaining about on Amarra newer version of software they say more stable but sounding not so great.......

To me It doesn't add up. When there are problems the old music start playing: It's someone else fault. May be it's just that the Mach2Music mini is not so great as some say to start with.......

After spending over $4000 on the Mach2Music web site purchasing all the best available upgrades to possibly get the best possible sound from this computer based system, including their top of the line cables (power, USB, Firewire) an optional solid state SSD hard drive besides their special sandwich case to reduce vibrations and the expensive software Amarra, I get instead the sound you would from a cassette player.........at least that's how it sounds to me in my audio system....

My audio system as you read below is of high quality and well balanced where everything from acoustic treatment to power treatment has been closely matched starting from a dedicated room 20x24x9H fully treated with massive use of acoustic diffusers Gikq7 and bass traps Soffits and Tritraps by GikAcoustics.

Audio components connected to the Mach2music mini are:

DAC : dCS Debussy 24/192
Pre: BAT VK52SE upgraded with 6H30DR supertubes Reflector 1987.
Amp: 2x BAT VK600SE Mono
Transport ; Oppo 95
Speakers ; Magnepan 20.1
Speaker cables : MIT Oracle Matrix HD90
Interconnect : MIT Oracle Matrix XLR
Power: 2x Torus RM20 (one x each amp on two dedicated 20 amp circuits)
Power cords all MIT Oracle ZIII
Audio rack Adona Zero reference
All internal and external stock fuses replaced with HiFi Tuning Supreme.

I rarely write on the forum but this is too big of a screw up to pass and I hope to save to somebody the frustration I went thru.

Besides if some of you has a very positive experience with other computer based systems please share . Help is always appreciated.

I hear good things about Solos by Meridian or the USB Thumb reader by Bryston and I'll probably move on one of the two.... life continues......

so if you'll see my Mach2mini for sale on Audiogon in the near future you already know why..............................
128x128alessandro1
pettyofficer
462 posts
 
So when are we going to actually start DESIGNING a New
Format known as Computer Audio? Taking all of your
complaints with Computers- it looks like Computer Audio is
an ad hock conglomerate held together with Bandaids, Rubber
Bands, and Chewing Gum. NOW you figure there is something
wrong with it, ONLY AFTER leading us down this path! A Tool
not designed for High End Sound Quality? New Formats (And
their equipment) ARE designed for Sound Quality- if not High End! Manufacturer's design it FIRST for Sound Quality,
only then do we listen- only then do we buy it = SUCCESS!
Your way = FAILURE! No more bandaids from Bryston, or anyone else! Design the Format right the first time- for
once! No more AD HOCK PIECEMEAL FORMAT FAILURE!!! You don't
have a New Format - DESIGN ONE, GET ONE!!!
hfisher3380
167 posts
 
My goodness Pettyofficer, I'm not quite sure exactly what you are expecting. No new format releases with a huge selection immediately available. Name me one that has. CD, DVD and Blue-Ray launched with precious few selections but they caught on and became dominant in the marketplace. Whether a new format sticks depends purely on whether the market buys into it. Computer audio is here to stay - the only question is whether high resolution computer audio will become and remain a thriving market. The only way it will is if the record companies see profit to be made. That is the way the world works.

My prediction is that it will remain a niche market - just like pretty much all high resolution music. The sad truth is that only a tiny minority of the general population actually cares about sound quality - and it has always been thus.

In the meantime, you can go on with your silly little protests and continue your brow-beating and repetitive arguments, none of us really cares. Some of us will take advantage of high res downloads and some won't. It likely will never be a mainstream market but many of us will enjoy it nonetheless.
edorr
714 posts
 
Pettyofficer, I don't quite understand your rambling about formats. Existing lossless formats (Flac, Wav etc.) are capable of storing and transfering information at exactly the same resoltion as in the recording studio. There may be issues with computer based audio, and lack of high rez content, but the "format" is not part of the problem.
pettyofficer
462 posts
 
Computer Audio fails for some, and succeeds for others, is
because of an inconsistency in design. Computers were never designed to reproduce High End S.Q. Every single
Music Format was designed for Music from the ground up:
Analog Records, Analog Tape, Cassette, 8-Track, CD, SACD,
DVD-Audio, and Blue-Ray Audio. Ditto for the Equipment to
playback these Formats- Computer Audio not so much!
Computers designed for Mastering at Recording Studios- NOT
THE SAME! Same as a DELL or an ASUS, or even an APPLE- who
are you kidding? New Format, only one NOT designed for Music- to replace all other Music Formats? Using a Tool
for other than it was designed for- absurd! Using it to
replace the rest of your Tools- insane! Failure inevitable!
chadeffect
586 posts
 
I have no idea why pettyofficer keeps on about the format?The file is the format. If the file is copied from the "master" it is the same whether it's a flac,aiff,wav.

I think your gripe is about hardware. But thats just as it has always been. it's about which hardware you choose. Forget the format issue. The file can be any resolution you ask for. It makes little difference to download 16/44.1 or 24/96 or 24/196. The record label won't care how many bits it is!

Your problem seems to be about the hardwares tonal qualities. I would not worry about that. A little research & set up is all thats needed. Think of all those phono stages, arms,motors & cartridges people complain about. It's the same issue, Just its a computer & operating system this time
More to discover