ironsienna

Can you also please have a listen on the Weiss Medus? There is currently NO review about this DAC anywhere and it would be a first for you to review this product.. Thanks a bunch!!!

By the way, in order to give a description of the sound difference between the two versions, compared to the sound of different headphones, I can describe the sound of 1.5.9 more like the sound signature of Sennheiser 650 whereas 1.5.10 sounds more like AKG 701.. If that makes any sense... Although some times I have this feeling that I get from the cold Etymotics ER4p on male singers from 1.5.10, but not to such extreme.. I personally prefer the Sennheiser!

I completely agree with you DamenS. Wouldn't it be wonderful the 1.5.11 to keep the detail of 1.5.10 but restore the mid harmonics and bass of 1.5.9??

I can identify myself belonging in the 1.5.9 fun club too!! I find the sound of 1.5.10 cleaner and more uncoloured on lows and lower mids, but there is something off on the higher mids and highs. As another member stated here, I too find male vocals sound weaker and not involving... Even if the sound of 1.5.9 is more coloured, I prefer it because it makes the vocals more organic, like listening from vinyl... Now, the thing is that truth some times is not very beautiful to bear, so even knowing that 1.5.10 provides a more faithful reproduction, I think I will stick for the moment to 1.5.9. My system: Mac mini 2009 running MacOS 10.8.2,-> USB int mode, non upsampled -> Weiss Medea+ (let the MEDEA's internal hardware up-sampler do the work)-> Kimber Select 1036 ->Supratek Sauvignon -> Supratek Malbecs with EL34 -> Tidal Piano Classic speakers.

My Weiss MEDEA+ with USB connection works fine with integer mode... It seems that his DACs that support USB work fine... Now, I have no idea if he is ever going to support integer mode with FW...

You can always mod the interface to your liking...

Isn't it such a wonderful hobby we have? Each one of us having his own opinion concerning on what good sound is and some times so different! I personally can't live without a tube preamp. I have a MEDEA+ DAC Tidal Piano Speakers and Kimber 1036 interconnects. The Medea allows for controlling the sound level with a remote control and l can change also the gain from a rotary dial on the back of the dac which makes it the perfect DAC to go preampless.. When I connect the dac straight to the amps ( have tried several different ones) I get the open sound a preampless setup can produce with incredible detail. When I add to the mix my current preamp though(Supratek Sauvignon), the sound gets that "meat" it lacks without it. The detail is not in x-ray levels as without using preamp (even though it is still incredible), but the sound becomes holographic and more dynamic as if the dynamic range on the same songs is increased. The soundstage expands well behind the speakers and you can essentially feel the singer being in the room, with weight and mass. Without the pre, the singers float in the air.. With the pre they have body, flesh and blood...

Im sorry sir but you apparently haven't heard how a good valve preamp can sound and in what incredible ways it can flesh out the sound of an otherwise boring system...

I can't get the claim of some people that "accurate reproduction" is the only way to achieve the best sound when playing music. Isn't true transparency to the source something more like "listening to the electronics that recorded the music" rather than "listening to the music per se before been recorded"? I find this distortion that you mentioned compulsory in order to achieve this illusion of "real" music played in the room. Even though it is an illusion it sounds more like the real thing. I dont want to listen what the engineer listened in his mixing room. I want to listen what the musicians listened in the recording room. And this added distortion achieves this to some degree. I really can't wait too for the day when all the distortion harmonics that add "pleasure" to the sound have been identified.

Thank you for your reply Chris and congratulations for your site, I may be new to the forums but I am an avid reader from the very beginning. My concern of using bus power in products like these is that the galvanic isolation is essentially removed. It is stated in the manual of the EDEL in page 13. http://www.abc-pcb.com/abc_docs/U2S192-DS-103E.pdf From the manual: "Bus-powered option is selected by closing jumpers SW2 and SW3. In this case, there is no galvanic isolation between the USB side and the user application side, all parts are powered by the bus. This set-up is useful for easy testing or using the board as a simple USB to S/PDIF mobile interface." So it seems that the developers are favouring external power use as long as it is clean. My point is that in high end DACs where really good quality power supplies are used, I really can't see the benefit of using BUS power, something that will arise the need of the computer to send super clean power in order to achieve an optimum performance and also provide galvanic isolation as the on-board galvanic isolation is essentially removed. In such products, doesn't the use of on-board galvanic isolation and clean power makes the product immune to sound changes from the lack of computer-side galvanic isolations and power regulations? I would also really appreciate if you can let us know the product that used this card that you heard. Was it bus powered or was taking the power from the DAC?

I quite disagree that this is just an evaluation board. In several forums it is compared with the best out there and the clocks it uses are very fine. I am very tempted to use it in personal DIY project. And the point is that it uses the XMos chip. I would be really interested for your opinion, why in such an implementation the USB power is preferable to the DAC onboard power. And also why don't you consider it appropriate for high end use.

Not everyone: USB Audio interface | ABC PCB

Weiss MEDEA+ does not require power via USB cable in the version with built in asynchronous usb input.

Thank you very much Chris for another excellent review! Because of a review of yours I purchased my Weiss 202 a year ago! I was in a process to upgrade my system to Medea+ but your current review of the EMM has given me more options! Have you heard the MEDEA+? Can you compare the sound of the MEDEA to the Dac2X? You are generally comparing the sounds of EMM and Weiss, but I believe MEDEA has a completely different sound and it has nothing to do with the rest of the Weiss DACS.. Thanks again for your time and effort! It's always a pleasure to read your reviews!!