ack's system - end of round 1

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
Thanks, I saw that - a huge step up from the M3 for sure, but they don't fit in here. On a related note, all those who've sent me PMs calling the M3 names - including "awful" - feel free to stand up and speak, and perhaps start a thread on it... I still don't care for this speaker at this moment, though it might work in small rooms with the right ancillary equipment; I always reserve the right to change my opinion. Meantime, I had a TOTAL blast listening to my digital == analog today. F*, that was great.
 

Folsom

VIP/Donor
Oct 25, 2015
6,024
1,490
520
Eastern WA
Fascinating... I wonder where and what gear they decided that on, because I still think the M3 makes other models I have heard sound sad. But it may be related to the equipment, is what I am thinking.
 

marty

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
3,025
4,169
2,520
United States
[*]I have gone to extremes to contain hum, and the results are black and white and quite easy to A/B:
  1. with max preamp gain, the MIT network box on the phono cable as is picks up hum, and about -10dB less of it with mumetal around it (measured head on, on the woofers)
  2. with max preamp gain again, the Pass power supply picks up a small amount of hum from the power line, and significantly less so when I put an MIT Z-Trap in series with the power cord - go figure. Lifting its ground actually makes things worse
  3. I have wrapped the entire XP-25 amplification unit with mumetal and copper shield (video shared years ago), and the decrease in hum pick up is roughly -10dB - a staggering number. The source of the hum here, as it turns out, was actually my DAC's power supply, so that has been moved off the shelf for further improvements


  1. Tasos,
    I need to thank you for your comment a while back (October 2017) regarding mumetal shielding. My phono consists of a Goldmund Studio/T3F but I replaced the crappy 24v transformer power supply on it a long time ago with a low noise B&K industrial supply. However, I was always a bit miffed that no matter where I placed that power supply (it was very positionally sensitive), my phono stage had a small amount of hum at high gain that was noticeable, particularly when the arm was lifted. After reading your note, I bought some mumetal foil (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00K0QKI8S/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1) but due other priorities, didn't install it around the B&K power supply until this week. Holy crap. The hum is totally gone! This was perhaps the most successful $100 improvement I have ever made in my system. Unfortunately, you have unleashed a sleeping giant. One can only wonder what other benefits await with some judicious use of mumetal foil above or under some of my other traditional components. To be clear, I do not suffer hum anywhere else, but the question is, will improved EMI mumetal shielding yield even better sound? Hmmm... (not hummm!) It looks like some fun experimentation awaits in the New Year. I only wish my other planned upgrades were as inexpensive. Those Spectral 500s surely are not. Again, thanks for the great tip.
    Marty
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
Hey Marty, glad I could help. So here's the deal: mu-metal + copper shield is an absolutely incredible way to kill environmental noise (hum or UHF). What you did with the transformer is what I also did with the Pass phono's own power transformer as well, regardless of the fact that it sits in a box far away from the main amplification unit, with the end result being much like your own experience here. I bet you will be doing a lot of exploration with shields in 2018 :)

Just last night, I finished wrapping the Alpha DAC's analog output section in copper, as seen below (there is also a shield underneath; you may also notice the two mu-metal shields between the transformer and main circuit board). Also shown below is the MA-X phono's MIT network box wrapped in copper with mu-metal underneath (and the necessary ground wire cannot be seen, but it's there). Not shown are all of my other MIT cables' shielded boxes, including the speaker cables' - with all shields routed to a common ground. All in all, it would be an understatement to say that I cringe at the lack of proper noise guards especially within phono preamp and DACs; and wrt DACs, I fret at the layers and layers of noise-generating stuff piled on top of each other in some of them, with a helpless analog section right next, to wrap up that abomination of a circuit execution (can you hear me say Formula Aqua???).

Yes, the back of my rack looks quite unusual, if not ugly, but here form follows function, and the results are unmistakable. For example, the metallic nature of cymbals out of this DAC right at this moment is something I have not yet heard anywhere else, as is the distinct duration of long-running notes within a complex music passage (not just a trailing note at the end of a track). Just food for thought on how noise can mask the music; it would be an understatement to say I am re-discovering my entire music collection.

alpha-shield.jpg mit-max-shield.jpg
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,521
10,687
3,515
USA
Ack, Thanks for posting these photographs. They really help to illustrate the lengths to which you have gone to address these issues.

Do you think MIT is aware of these issues with their cables? I must assume they are, but cost considerations are a factor. I wonder if the same issues plague my Transparent networks. I agree with you that given the cost of some of these products that it is incredible that better noise reducing measures are not implemented in the design as a basic goal. And given your wrapping technique, it seems so simple to address the issue. Why do you think proper shielding is still such an issue with these high end products?

Incidentally, how do you now adjust the settings on the MIT boxes for different poles of articulation? Or have you settled on one setting now that you have finished a year of tweaking your system? Finally, can the copper foil be removed without leaving residue on the cables or parts in case you ever want to resell them?
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
Peter, I am done adjusting the MIT cables, and I am pretty sure MIT knows about noise quite well - I say that because the MA-X phono box has a ground screw on it to reduce hum, which I utilize. It just isn't fanatically shielded the way I have done it. BTW, wrt the SD vs HD setting on the speaker cables, I can now prove that SD is superior, or that HD adds a bit of an edge to the high frequencies, with specific music material in an easy A/B (I posted at length my sonic impressions on page 13 of this thread, a while ago, but now have narrowed it down to specific test tracks).

All shields can be removed, and any residue can be easily removed with isopropyl alcohol.

Finally, I just don't think many manufacturers fully appreciate the extent and impact of noise around their circuit layouts, it's as simple as that. I am sure they know about power supply noise and some build extra-orinarily elaborate regulation stages, but this is not the norm, and power supplies is just one aspect of it. I am particularly appalled by unshielded power transformers in phono preamps, and Marty just proved it yet again, if my own Pass experience is not convincing enough.
 

marty

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
3,025
4,169
2,520
United States
Hey Marty, glad I could help. So here's the deal: mu-metal + copper shield is an absolutely incredible way to kill environmental noise (hum or UHF). What you did with the transformer is what I also did with the Pass phono's own power transformer as well, regardless of the fact that it sits in a box far away from the main amplification unit, with the end result being much like your own experience here. I bet you will be doing a lot of exploration with shields in 2018 :)

Just last night, I finished wrapping the Alpha DAC's analog output section in copper, as seen below (there is also a shield underneath; you may also notice the two mu-metal shields between the transformer and main circuit board). Also shown below is the MA-X phono's MIT network box wrapped in copper with mu-metal underneath (and the necessary ground wire cannot be seen, but it's there). Not shown are all of my other MIT cables' shielded boxes, including the speaker cables' - with all shields routed to a common ground. All in all, it would be an understatement to say that I cringe at the lack of proper noise guards especially within phono preamp and DACs; and wrt DACs, I fret at the layers and layers of noise-generating stuff piled on top of each other in some of them, with a helpless analog section right next, to wrap up that abomination of a circuit execution (can you hear me say Formula Aqua???).

Yes, the back of my rack looks quite unusual, if not ugly, but here form follows function, and the results are unmistakable. For example, the metallic nature of cymbals out of this DAC right at this moment is something I have not yet heard anywhere else, as is the distinct duration of long-running notes within a complex music passage (not just a trailing note at the end of a track). Just food for thought on how noise can mask the music; it would be an understatement to say I am re-discovering my entire music collection.

View attachment 37997 View attachment 37998

Have fun. But why did you choose copper foil over mu metal? My understanding is that copper foil is best for high frequencies (KHz and GHz) but has almost no protection against low frequencies whereas mu metal is excellent for EMI at 50-60Hz. Also, to address Peter's question, in my case, I use a simple foil wrap that does not effect, nor barely touches, the casework. Finally, to be clear, I think one can shield the source of the EMI (in my case the PS) or the receiving gear (in my case, the ASR phono pre-amp). Wrapping the outboard B&K power supply was easiest and it worked. I do not know if I have the fortitude and will to go into all my gear to wrap their power supplies as Tasos is pursuing. (And they call me crazy!)
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,521
10,687
3,515
USA
Peter, I am done adjusting the MIT cables, and I am pretty sure MIT knows about noise quite well - I say that because the MA-X phono box has a ground screw on it to reduce hum, which I utilize. It just isn't fanatically shielded the way I have done it. BTW, wrt the SD vs HD setting on the speaker cables, I can now prove that SD is superior, or that HD adds a bit of an edge to the high frequencies, with specific music material in an easy A/B (I posted at length my sonic impressions on page 13 of this thread, a while ago, but now have narrowed it down to specific test tracks).

All shields can be removed, and any residue can be easily removed with isopropyl alcohol.

Finally, I just don't think many manufacturers fully appreciate the extent and impact of noise around their circuit layouts, it's as simple as that. I am sure they know about power supply noise and some build extra-orinarily elaborate regulation stages, but this is not the norm, and power supplies is just one aspect of it. I am particularly appalled by unshielded power transformers in phono preamps, and Marty just proved it yet again, if my own Pass experience is not convincing enough.

Thanks Ack. That makes sense. As I have consistently contended, I prefer the lowest possible setting on MIT speaker cable networks. This was the case at Goodwin's with the top of the line "Frankenstien" boxes which I set to low and off if possible, to the trial in my own system with lower level cables, to the cables in your system. I know you have gone back and forth on this issue preferring the HD after one round of modifications, but you now seem to have reached a similar conclusion. "A bit of an edge to high frequencies" is one way to describe it. I find the higher settings just sound unnatural, and in some systems, basically drive me out of the room with the aggressive highs and fatigue causing artifacts.

I am curious to learn how you prove that SD is superior.
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
Have fun. But why did you choose copper foil over mu metal?

Sorry, bad wording on my part... the copper foil is sitting ON TOP OF mu-metal - a double shield, one “over” the other. Indeed, the two shields operate at different frequency ranges.
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
I am curious to learn how you prove that SD is superior.

Specific sections in certain tracks, with violin and wind instruments, and specific frequency ranges all in the treble. HD is just not natural.
 

marty

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
3,025
4,169
2,520
United States
Specific sections in certain tracks, with violin and wind instruments, and specific frequency ranges all in the treble. HD is just not natural.

Just my 2 cents. Totally agree w ack and Peter on this. HD on MIT boxes is unnatural and more of a parlor trick. Robert Harley may like it, but I found that its best to leave all MIT boxes in their most neutral setting, with bass emphasis off on the SHD boxes. As far as the "Frankenstein" speaker console boxes by MIT, I have played with them at length and preferred all controls in the off position. All you need to do is play a superb recording of a solo piano for confirmation. Anything other than "off" corrupts the sound of a piano recording and renders it more "hi fi" as opposed to natural. I respect Brisson's engineering, but one has to be careful with MIT in drawing the line between genuinely good engineering and marketing hype.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlapEcho

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,521
10,687
3,515
USA
Just my 2 cents. Totally agree w ack and Peter on this. HD on MIT boxes is unnatural and more of a parlor trick. Robert Harley may like it, but I found that its best to leave all MIT boxes in their most neutral setting, with bass emphasis off on the SHD boxes. As far as the "Frankenstein" speaker console boxes by MIT, I have played with them at length and preferred all controls in the off position. All you need to do is play a superb recording of a solo piano for confirmation. Anything other than "off" corrupts the sound of a piano recording and renders it more "hi fi" as opposed to natural. I respect Brisson's engineering, but one has to be careful with MIT in drawing the line between genuinely good engineering and marketing hype.

I'm glad that someone else noticed this effect and how unnatural it sounds. I also heard what I think is some manipulation of phase with the HD setting and mentioned this to the dealer. They agreed that the higher settings can sound like a phase shift. It's all very strange and a departure from transparency. Some have called these boxes tone controls and, interestingly, some have said that as you move up the line with Transparent Cables that similar manipulation occurs with regard to the high frequencies. In other words, the more expensive the Transparent cable, the less attenuation of the high frequencies, so the better cables sound less "rolled off". I have not heard that myself.

I will say that both MIT and Transparent have some pretty impressive marketing claims and budgets.
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
As far as the "Frankenstein" speaker console boxes by MIT, I have played with them at length and preferred all controls in the off position. All you need to do is play a superb recording of a solo piano for confirmation. Anything other than "off" corrupts the sound of a piano recording and renders it more "hi fi" as opposed to natural.

I think I may have originally called the top of the line speaker console a "Franken-cable", but regardless, the HD sound is distorted and unnatural, with a fake appearance of more detail and higher transient speed (MIT's claim) - AS IF they are adding extra harmonics (and keep in mind that an ideal square wave can be expressed as the sum of all odd harmonics, so the more alleged harmonics, the faster the sound may appear), though this is all just conjecture on my part.
 

DaveyF

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2010
6,129
181
458
La Jolla, Calif USA
I think I may have originally called the top of the line speaker console a "Franken-cable", but regardless, the HD sound is distorted and unnatural, with a fake appearance of more detail and higher transient speed - AS IF they are adding extra harmonics (and keep in mind that an ideal square wave can be expressed as the sum of all odd harmonics, so the more alleged harmonics, the faster the sound may appear), though this is all just conjecture on my part.

Here's the thing of it, IMO. MIT and Transparent have always tried to hit it with "out of the park" pricing on their upper echelon cabling. You cannot do that from a marketing perspective unless you have something to fall back on when questioned about the value....and that something is a " box with some knobs on it". This marketing strategy is an old one, and yet audio fools fall for it constantly. The easiest way to not fall for this ---is to use your ears. Someone told me recently that a'philes buy with their eyes and not their ears! Too bad that so many hucksters know this!!!!!:(:(
 

marty

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
3,025
4,169
2,520
United States
Here's the thing of it, IMO. MIT and Transparent have always tried to hit it with "out of the park" pricing on their upper echelon cabling. You cannot do that from a marketing perspective unless you have something to fall back on when questioned about the value....and that something is a " box with some knobs on it". This marketing strategy is an old one, and yet audio fools fall for it constantly. The easiest way to not fall for this ---is to use your ears. Someone told me recently that a'philes buy with their eyes and not their ears! Too bad that so many hucksters know this!!!!!:(:(

+1
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
Magico M3/Spectral DMA-500 update

I am currently listening to my Mahler 2nd with the BSO for the fourth time, with the M3s driven with the exact same set up as always, including the DMA-500s, and ignoring the missing lower end, I just don't hear the transparency I hear at home, nor the dynamic drama, but that could be the speakers not being able to energize a big room. So focusing on the midrange and treble, I just don't hear the same level of transparency, and it may not be the speakers, but perhaps the higher-end MIT cables, or the 4000SV's resolution, which came very close to my modified Alpha but it did not surpass it, when I had it at home... I don't know. What I do know is that I am just not wowed as I was expecting. One quite distinct thing I just noticed is that a large timpani hit around 9:10 is rendered right in the middle, when in my system is totally in the right channel, and it just didn't have the same timbral clarity or forceful impact and presence as I have it at home, especially the leading edge of the membrane impact - room muddying things up???? On the other hand, later on, timpani sound more distinct during complex passages, and that's a good sign. The clarity of the triangles is there, but definitely a little clearer from the modified Alpha.

Overall, my assessment is that I am not getting the same level of transparency and you-are-there feeling as I am used to, especially in the midrange and treble. Noise?????

EDIT: Oh, the sheer scale ability of these amps is more than evident. Wow
 
Last edited:

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,521
10,687
3,515
USA
I am currently listening to my Mahler 2nd with the BSO for the fourth time, with the M3s driven with the exact same set up as always, including the DMA-500s, and ignoring the missing lower end, I just don't hear the transparency I hear at home, nor the dynamic drama, but that could be the speakers not being able to energize a big room. So focusing on the midrange and treble, I just don't hear the same level of transparency, and it may not be the speakers, but perhaps the higher-end MIT cables, or the 4000SV's resolution, which came very close to my modified Alpha but it did not surpass it, when I had it at home... I don't know. What I do know is that I am just not wowed as I was expecting. One quite distinct thing I just noticed is that a large timpani hit around 9:10 is rendered right in the middle, when in my system is totally in the right channel, and it just didn't have the same timbral clarity or forceful impact and presence as I have it at home, especially the leading edge of the membrane impact - room muddying things up???? On the other hand, later on, timpani sound more distinct during complex passages, and that's a good sign. The clarity of the triangles is there, but definitely a little clearer from the modified Alpha.

Overall, my assessment is that I am not getting the same level of transparency and you-are-there feeling as I am used to, especially in the midrange and treble. Noise?????

Interesting update. Things don't seem to have changed much overall during the four separate auditions of the M3 at Goodwins. Did you ask to hear them in the smaller room or with a vinyl source just for something different? It is hard to say what is causing your dissatisfaction. It could be the large room, the digital sources, the cables, whatever. I guess this is just one data point with all of the other reports about the sound of the M3s. I presume you are there to audition the Spectral 500 amps. If that is true, did you ask to hear different speakers? Do you plan to audition the amps in your own system?

That timpani strike at 9:10 is curious. You should take you CD to Al's house to listen to where on the stage that timpani appears.
 

andromedaaudio

VIP/Donor
Jan 23, 2011
8,350
2,730
1,400
Amsterdam holland
I think no matter what or which cone design you listen to , panels can do things they cannot they re just a tad faster because of the construction , and the other way around to , panels dont have the impact as a full range cone can /does


As ar as i know MIT cables and also transparent ones work as low pass filters and on a megaherz scale 20 - 20 khz are of course low freq.
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
Interesting update. Things don't seem to have changed much overall during the four separate auditions of the M3 at Goodwins. Did you ask to hear them in the smaller room or with a vinyl source just for something different? It is hard to say what is causing your dissatisfaction. It could be the large room, the digital sources, the cables, whatever. I guess this is just one data point with all of the other reports about the sound of the M3s. I presume you are there to audition the Spectral 500 amps. If that is true, did you ask to hear different speakers? Do you plan to audition the amps in your own system?

That timpani strike at 9:10 is curious. You should take you CD to Al's house to listen to where on the stage that timpani appears.

Today's audition is certainly better than ever before, but again... I am keeping all parameters the same.
 

ack

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member
May 6, 2010
6,774
1,198
580
Boston, MA
I think no matter what or which cone design you listen to , panels can do things they cannot they re just a tad faster because of the construction , and the other way around to , panels dont have the impact as a full range cone can /does

Agreed. At the same time, I can understand the positive comments about the M3 - for someone who's not used to this level of detail, they will appear amazing; but to someone who is, and considering the price, that person may not be as impressed - that's me. So it's all relative, and comments should be taken with a grain of salt and within context.

Now here's the more interesting thing: Spectral's long-anticipated power conditioner should be around the corner (i.e. in the next two decades or so), and that may shift the sonic picture.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing