The Cascade is now the second under the flagship model. According to MSB itself, "The Cascade sounds better than the Select 2, yet its price is between the two. “ sounds like a true “bargain”. Let's first examine the exterior of this new flagship. It's noticeably smaller in width and depth, but thicker due to the new curved body and feet design. I think the overall case material is less, but CNC work time might be more due to the more complex 3D shape. However, I don't believe the narrower and shallower body creates more internal space, so whether the original transformer size will also need to be resized remains to be seen. The finish on the body, to my mind, is less refined than the Reference. The Ref feels noticeably smoother, while the new model has a slightly grainier feeling.
After turning Cascade and reference on, my initial listening experience was how come the reference sounds soooo bad? The sense of scale, soundstage, and bass are so diminished. The visual quality is like the difference between a 4K TV and a tube TV. I subconsciously turned up the volume, and as the Ref's volume increased, the soundstage, scale, and bass all returned, but the volume indicator showed I'd already increased it by seven steps. This suggests a significant output difference between the two DACs. After several comparisons, I found that, at the same preamp volume settings, the Cascade's average sound pressure was 3-4dB higher, and the volume adjustment was a whopping eight steps different. This is a significant difference, significant enough to impact the sound experience. According to MSB's official website, the Cascade's output voltage is even slightly lower than the Ref's, so why is the volume 3-4dB higher? Audiophiles who understand this, please explain.
While I don't understand the reason, I believe this design approach facilitates side-by-side comparisons of the Cascade, making it feel noticeably bette with the same volume. If this is truly MSB's intention, I feel it’s kinda….dodgy.
Okay, given roughly the same average sound pressure, what's the difference in sound? I can still say the Cascade has higher resolution, with all instruments appearing more clearly. But beyond that, there's no difference in scale or soundstage width between the two. In terms of sonic depth, the Ref sounds a bit deeper, while the Cascade is more up-close.
To me Cascade is too much of making everything so detailed, sounds like every sound element is shouting load for your attention. Think about a good painting, usually there is a focus element in the frame, In order to achieve this, some elements need to be less detailed, some colors need to be more subtle etc. so in general there is contrast between the important parts and supporting parts. The Reference's sound is exactly like this.
In general the Cascade, I think it does offer detail and resolution quality improvement, but To me, it’s loosing the whole focus that I love about reference. If you like everything so detailed with high resolution, you should definitely go for it. But if you appreciate more classic image of contrasts between the main element and background elements, give a try of reference. At the end, I would say it’s preference of taste, there is no night and day difference between the two, and I’m not wowed by the new product.
After turning Cascade and reference on, my initial listening experience was how come the reference sounds soooo bad? The sense of scale, soundstage, and bass are so diminished. The visual quality is like the difference between a 4K TV and a tube TV. I subconsciously turned up the volume, and as the Ref's volume increased, the soundstage, scale, and bass all returned, but the volume indicator showed I'd already increased it by seven steps. This suggests a significant output difference between the two DACs. After several comparisons, I found that, at the same preamp volume settings, the Cascade's average sound pressure was 3-4dB higher, and the volume adjustment was a whopping eight steps different. This is a significant difference, significant enough to impact the sound experience. According to MSB's official website, the Cascade's output voltage is even slightly lower than the Ref's, so why is the volume 3-4dB higher? Audiophiles who understand this, please explain.
While I don't understand the reason, I believe this design approach facilitates side-by-side comparisons of the Cascade, making it feel noticeably bette with the same volume. If this is truly MSB's intention, I feel it’s kinda….dodgy.
Okay, given roughly the same average sound pressure, what's the difference in sound? I can still say the Cascade has higher resolution, with all instruments appearing more clearly. But beyond that, there's no difference in scale or soundstage width between the two. In terms of sonic depth, the Ref sounds a bit deeper, while the Cascade is more up-close.
To me Cascade is too much of making everything so detailed, sounds like every sound element is shouting load for your attention. Think about a good painting, usually there is a focus element in the frame, In order to achieve this, some elements need to be less detailed, some colors need to be more subtle etc. so in general there is contrast between the important parts and supporting parts. The Reference's sound is exactly like this.
In general the Cascade, I think it does offer detail and resolution quality improvement, but To me, it’s loosing the whole focus that I love about reference. If you like everything so detailed with high resolution, you should definitely go for it. But if you appreciate more classic image of contrasts between the main element and background elements, give a try of reference. At the end, I would say it’s preference of taste, there is no night and day difference between the two, and I’m not wowed by the new product.
