I have had the Neo version of my sMS-200Ultra in my system for about a month now. As I posted earlier, my initial impressions of the Neo were very positive, I definitely prefer it to the original version. With the system back into what I consider a good balance, my plan was to stop tinkering and simply enjoy the music. This is exactly what I have been doing through September, but as often happens, it is when you stop A/B testing and fiddling with the kit, that you start to notice things. Overall, the system is sounding great, the SOtM / Mutec kit is providing a far more balanced presentation, details, dynamics, the lot. Things are really coming together now. Just one little niggle. I had one weekend in early September where I had some decent listening sessions, I listened to a variety of music, and was just plain happy that things were sounding good, the Neo was definitely improving things. A couple of weeks later, another weekend with some decent listening time, and something was bothering me. With some tracks I was again finding the treble a little harsh, maybe even distorted. It seamed to depend on what I was listening to, so I did wonder if it was just a case of issues the source material, but it seemed a little strange that sometimes all sounded good, other times not so good. Last week something occurred to me, I was happy with the system when back with the microRendu, this was during August when the SOtM kit was back in Korea for the Neo upgrade and clock cable mods. During this time I tried the mR with the SOtM sPS-500 power supply, I found that I defiantly preferred the mR powered by the Uptone LPS-1, but the point is that it also occurred to me that the reason I did not like the sPS-500 providing the power was a sense of some slight distortion and HF harshness, exactly the issue I am now finding with the Neo.
So on Sunday I tried an experiment. In fact, this is re-trying something I did back in the Spring. I took the sPS-500 out of the system I powered the sMS-200Ultra and tX-USBultra from a 12 volt rechargeable battery pack that I have. Now this is not "high end" kit, it is a £20 battery pack with a cheap and spindly Y cable, the DC cable alone for the sPS-500 is many times more expensive. When I tried this before, in an attempt to tame the overly bright pre-Neo sMS-200ultra, it seemed to make little difference. With the more balanced sounding Neo, the difference seemed very clear to me, the HF distortion and harshness that was troubling me seemed very much diminished. Later on Sunday I managed to persuade a friend to have a listen. We played three tracks, I switched the power supply to the battery and played the same tracks again. My friend had no idea what I was changing so this was a blind test. Their verdict was something along the lines of "they sound pretty much the same but I thought that 2 was a bit clearer". OK - this is hardly a statistically significant double blind test result, but it was significant to me that a third party, who had no prompting about my HF concerns, preferred a £20 battery pack to the £500 sPS-500. I left the SOtM kit on battery power for a while on Sunday, and I much enjoyed this as a set-up. The thing is, battery power is not considered the best for digital audio, these devices need a very low output impedance that battery power does not provide. Yet despite this, both myself and my clueless buddy preferred the SOtM kit with battery power. It is a case of something in the HF being a little niggling, just that little bit annoying, which then detracts from enjoyment of the rest.
I had a plan that I would simply enjoy the system for a while, then maybe try the dCS Network Bridge, depending on how that comparison worked out, I would then maybe get some Paul Hynes SR-4's if I had decided to stick with the SOtM kit. I have now changed my mind, if I do the comparison with the dCS NB now, I am sure that I will inevitably focusing on the HF distortion issue, so may prefer the dCS for this reason alone, whereas this is an issue of the power supply, not the sMS & tX. So I have decided to take the plunge, order the SR-4's now, and hope for the best! Although I am pretty confident this one will work out well. Interestingly, @octaviars proposed that I should go with SR-4's many months ago, now I am sure as I can be that he is right, soon I will find out for sure!
So on Sunday I tried an experiment. In fact, this is re-trying something I did back in the Spring. I took the sPS-500 out of the system I powered the sMS-200Ultra and tX-USBultra from a 12 volt rechargeable battery pack that I have. Now this is not "high end" kit, it is a £20 battery pack with a cheap and spindly Y cable, the DC cable alone for the sPS-500 is many times more expensive. When I tried this before, in an attempt to tame the overly bright pre-Neo sMS-200ultra, it seemed to make little difference. With the more balanced sounding Neo, the difference seemed very clear to me, the HF distortion and harshness that was troubling me seemed very much diminished. Later on Sunday I managed to persuade a friend to have a listen. We played three tracks, I switched the power supply to the battery and played the same tracks again. My friend had no idea what I was changing so this was a blind test. Their verdict was something along the lines of "they sound pretty much the same but I thought that 2 was a bit clearer". OK - this is hardly a statistically significant double blind test result, but it was significant to me that a third party, who had no prompting about my HF concerns, preferred a £20 battery pack to the £500 sPS-500. I left the SOtM kit on battery power for a while on Sunday, and I much enjoyed this as a set-up. The thing is, battery power is not considered the best for digital audio, these devices need a very low output impedance that battery power does not provide. Yet despite this, both myself and my clueless buddy preferred the SOtM kit with battery power. It is a case of something in the HF being a little niggling, just that little bit annoying, which then detracts from enjoyment of the rest.
I had a plan that I would simply enjoy the system for a while, then maybe try the dCS Network Bridge, depending on how that comparison worked out, I would then maybe get some Paul Hynes SR-4's if I had decided to stick with the SOtM kit. I have now changed my mind, if I do the comparison with the dCS NB now, I am sure that I will inevitably focusing on the HF distortion issue, so may prefer the dCS for this reason alone, whereas this is an issue of the power supply, not the sMS & tX. So I have decided to take the plunge, order the SR-4's now, and hope for the best! Although I am pretty confident this one will work out well. Interestingly, @octaviars proposed that I should go with SR-4's many months ago, now I am sure as I can be that he is right, soon I will find out for sure!
1000 Pro - KEF Blade - iFi Zen Stream - Mutec REF10 - MC3+USB - Pro-Ject Signature 12
