chris_jl

You are correct. MQA is a licensed proprietary encoding standard, so only licensed products can decode it. So, in the context of the Holo May the unfolding must be done upstream - in your case by node 2i, in my case by Roon. So, back to the question of whether playing back a native 96/24 version of a given recording versus a MQA version of the same recording. I suspect they would be very hard to distinguish. But they should both be an improvement over a 44.1/16 version. I think what other posters have been highlighting is what a huge improvement the May gives to playback of 44.1/16. I don't think anyone is saying it lifts 44.1 to the level of a good 96/24 recording (or MQA for that matter) Chris.

If you think about the way an R2R DAC is designed, it is optimised for processing a 16 or 24 bit PCM signal at a wide range of sample rates from 44.1 to over 1M (in the May's case). An R2R DAC needs to do no pre-processing of the PCM signal prior to conversion. Contrast this to a Delta Sigma DAC which must pre-process a PCM input (ie reduce the bit width and increase the rate) prior to feeding the signal into the demodulator. Conversely, an R2R DAC needs to pre-process a DSD signal prior to presenting it to the R2R stage. In other words when you present a DSD signal to and R2R DAC you are asking it to perform extra conversion work. So, to my ears, the May is at its very best processing PCM signals at any sample rate that is presented to it. It also does a great job with DSD - but then so do good Delta Sigma DACs ? If we are comparing the same recording in 44.1/16 PCM vs 96/24 PCM vs DSD (with a suitably high bit rate) the comparison is still going to be difficult unless you know how the recording was originally mastered. If it was originally recorded at 96/24 then it will sound better in this format than the same recording in 44.1/16 format. I'm not going to stick my neck out on DSD though!

In my view the key to great sound from the May is to always use it in NOS mode. And whilst most CDs sound stellar in 44.1 there are plenty of CDs which are improved by oversampling. I just do the oversampling in Roon or HQPlayer rather than let the May do it.

Hey John, Great Christmas present! Like you I listen to the May exclusively in NOS mode. And until hearing the May, I had dismissed a lot of my red book CD recordings in my library as pretty ordinary. I now have a different view. Not only do many of them sound really good in 44.1K but if you do upsampling with HQPlayer or Roon (keeping the upsampling to a multiple of 44.1 and keeping the May in NOS mode), the May seems to be able to get at even more subtleties from the original recording. Give it a try... let me know what you think. cheers, Chris

Likewise.... Crux Audio.

These are two questions I can't really answer. Heavy metal is one genre that I don't listen to that much. For classic rock, however, and any other music with complex rhythm and attack, the May is exceptionally clean. And the second question I can't really answer either because I have not compared it to the Spring.

I have had the Holo May Level 2 in my system now for the last six months or so. It is the first DAC that I have owned that I am really happy with and the first DAC that comes close to the very best vinyl recordings. (Happy to share my vinyl setup, if that is of help). I have experimented with plenty of DACs over the years (most recently the Chord Hugo TT2) and still have two ESS Sabre based DACs in my system. They all might measure spectacularly well, but I can't fall in love with them. The Holo May is a different matter and presents music that puts a smile on your face. My listening tastes are predominantly classical and jazz - with some rock. The Holo May excels with solo piano, large orchestral works (where it reproduces massed violins better than any other DAC I have heard) and small ensembles (jazz or chamber). I realise this is a very subjective view, but if you similar musical tastes to me, I think you will absolutely enjoy the Holo May. cheers, Chris

I'd echo these comments. I have a Holo May R2R DAC driven from a Mac Mini via USB. Yes, the jitter rejection characteristics of the May are impressive, but what is more relevant is how it sounds. It is as close to analogue as any DAC I have heard (and that's via USB). But as importantly, the USB interface puts pretty much no restrictions on the level of upsampling that can be applied by Roon or HQPlayer and no limitation on format - which is not the case on other inputs. So, in response to the OP, I'd say we have come a fair way in terms of the jitter performance of USB interfaces over the last few years.

G'day Tom, The Lowthers go back to the mid '60s. They were the Dual Position Acousta model. When the family came to Australia in 1968, the speakers came with us. But they didn't really like the change to a Sydney climate and the suspension on PM6 drivers started to break down in the heat and humidity. I tried valiantly to keep them going but they beat me in the end.... sadly. These days my system is a bit more 'conventional'. It still has a 'British' flavour with Origin Live TT and tonearm and B&W speakers. But the Radford is still going strong and I have a 30W single ended power amp that I designed and built using the 845 triode - love it. It seems that you have a similar interest in single-ended designs ! cheers, Chris

Hello everyone! Here's a quick intro: I started my journey into HiFi 50 years ago when my father bequeathed me his system. It consisted of a Thorens TD150 with SME 3009, Empire cartridge, a Radford pre-amp, Radford STA15 power amp and Lowther speakers. It was his pride and joy. I still own the Radford STA15 - I've rebuilt it and it still sounds incredible to this day. I was extremely lucky to get this introduction to the world of recorded music and it's been a fascinating journey ever since. I look forward to exchanging views and ideas with the community. Happy listening, Chris