Gee, you really are making a big deal out of this "review". Are you not taking it a bit too seriously?
Once you have a good setup and a good PS i would imagine ten minutes of listening would suffice. With the last electronic pot i compared to a Shallco switch (DS1666) it took only a few seconds
Have you wondered why serious reviewers take weeks to review one component?
You can form an idea right away, but it won't necessary stay over time.
In order to have an educated opinion, you should give it time to brake in first, to play different music and different combinations/setups.
Moreover to have full confidence you should always switch back and re-listen and confirm and this takes time.
My full evaluation will hopefully come within this week. I take the necessary time and steps to make sure I don't miss anything and with the hope that my experience can be useful to other people who are looking for an alternative to their volume control like I do.
this doesn't make much sense, let me try: did you mean by your comment that the volume control should be as neutral as possible to allow high playback fidelity rather than coloring the audio signal?
YES, I myself strive for maximum neutrality, and it has to be a MUST for this evaluation and as a matter of fact it is on top of my evaluation list!
true, true ...
as yet another alternative, one could always make a "discrete" version of DS1666 (or DS1882 or whichever attenuator chip is desired) with "good" cmos switches (or even discrete jfets as switches) with your choice of resistors.
Ayre does this in the K-5xe, which sounds pretty good to me; but what do I know?
With this approach, you can also easily do other than 1dB/step if you like. Doesn't somebody (maybe some Levinson product?) do 0.1dB/step?
mlloyd1
as yet another alternative, one could always make a "discrete" version of DS1666 (or DS1882 or whichever attenuator chip is desired) with "good" cmos switches (or even discrete jfets as switches) with your choice of resistors.
Ayre does this in the K-5xe, which sounds pretty good to me; but what do I know?
With this approach, you can also easily do other than 1dB/step if you like. Doesn't somebody (maybe some Levinson product?) do 0.1dB/step?
mlloyd1
Just FYI, my test compares directly Muses against DACT and Elna wired up with PRP audio resistors...maybe not fair uh?
I purposely run it against the very best because this attenuator is used on the statement XP-30 and perhaps on the XS preamplifier by Pass Laboratories which are among the finest preamp on audio market nowadays.
so a array of Cmos switches and a resistor array is better, than another Cmos switch and a resistor. To me the Cmos switch is the limiting factor paired with an unknown noise performance of switch and resistor. could be a very good performer, but so is an array of metal foils and good switches. Stefano how is the masterpiece coming...??
I thought everybody forgot about it!! ahahha
It's coming along very good. I am going to do final tests on output stage and prepare the first built soon (I will post pictures on the thread when that happens).
It's been playing for the last few months and it hasn't been disappointing me so far (thanks for asking though!)
It's coming along very good. I am going to do final tests on output stage and prepare the first built soon (I will post pictures on the thread when that happens).
It's been playing for the last few months and it hasn't been disappointing me so far
(thanks for asking though!)
I got interrupted and forgot to edit in time to finish my thought:
The MUSE is clearly a nice part. I think the DS1882 is probably 95% of the way there for less than 10% of the MUSE cost, Wayne thinks it's a nice parts and most importantly, it's easier to get MY hands on.
Sounds like a winner for me.
The MUSE is clearly a nice part. I think the DS1882 is probably 95% of the way there for less than 10% of the MUSE cost, Wayne thinks it's a nice parts and most importantly, it's easier to get MY hands on.
Sounds like a winner for me.
true, true ...
as yet another alternative, one could always make a "discrete" version of DS1666 (or DS1882 or whichever attenuator chip is desired) with "good" cmos switches (or even discrete jfets as switches) with your choice of resistors.
Ayre does this in the K-5xe, which sounds pretty good to me; but what do I know?
With this approach, you can also easily do other than 1dB/step if you like. Doesn't somebody (maybe some Levinson product?) do 0.1dB/step?
mlloyd1
The 1666 is supposedly just switches and resistor arrays. At the time i played with it i built two versions - one with a 555 and a second with a micro and an optical encoder. I think it also needed a mute circuit as it made strange noises on power-down.
This is more akin to reviewing a capacitor, rather than an entire component.
As for the habits of serious reviewers - from i hear they sometimes take months and even years for an in-depth review
Looks like the Muses!
Why would you look for something else if there is already somebody who has done all the hard work to prepare boards and code and it's readily available at a dirt chip price?
I myself got a pair of his boards for balance operation and didn't have to put a second more of work on it other than plug it in and listen to it!!! ahahahahah!!!
This is more akin to reviewing a capacitor, rather than an entire component.
As for the habits of serious reviewers - from i hear they sometimes take months and even years for an in-depth review
ahahah yes that's true...I am not going to take years of course
I had it on for almost a week, so I will give it probably a couple more days of listening (I need to listen to more vinyls with different genre) and I think I will be then ready to best describe the potential, if there is any, of this volume control.
The DS1882 has one disadvantage: it only can handle input voltages up to +/-7V, whilst the the MUSES accepts up to +/-18V.
Others like the DS1666 have even lower limits.
Therefore I wonder why companies like ARC use(d) them in their Reference preamps.
Depending on its implemention there could be a problem with its overload margin (that's always the basic advantage of every passive attenuator).
But of course chips like the DS1882 are cheap and easily available.
One advantage of every electronic attenuator should be mentioned here: they have extremly short signal paths and no contacts inside. Paired with improved technology now make them serious competitors to the best mechanic solutions....
Others like the DS1666 have even lower limits.
Therefore I wonder why companies like ARC use(d) them in their Reference preamps.
Depending on its implemention there could be a problem with its overload margin (that's always the basic advantage of every passive attenuator).
But of course chips like the DS1882 are cheap and easily available.
One advantage of every electronic attenuator should be mentioned here: they have extremly short signal paths and no contacts inside. Paired with improved technology now make them serious competitors to the best mechanic solutions....
yes, it is true that the MUSE can handle hotter much signals.
now, we have to think about the requirements again:
the XP-30 has the additional requirement to be able to drive unity (voltage) gain power stages, so its need for large signal voltage swing is understandable.
on the other hand, many of us likely don't have that same requirement for swinging such hot signals into a power amp, especially in a balanced system.
a more practical advantage to me for the MUSE part is those two extra pots that are used to set gain of an active stage. if one doesn't use them as such (i.e. just use the main pots as attenuators), are the extra pots flexible enough to be used in other ways; for example to help with balance control adjustments ?
don't get me wrong, i think the MUSE part is great.
i just think the Maxim part is also .
mlloyd1
now, we have to think about the requirements again:
the XP-30 has the additional requirement to be able to drive unity (voltage) gain power stages, so its need for large signal voltage swing is understandable.
on the other hand, many of us likely don't have that same requirement for swinging such hot signals into a power amp, especially in a balanced system.
a more practical advantage to me for the MUSE part is those two extra pots that are used to set gain of an active stage. if one doesn't use them as such (i.e. just use the main pots as attenuators), are the extra pots flexible enough to be used in other ways; for example to help with balance control adjustments ?
don't get me wrong, i think the MUSE part is great.
i just think the Maxim part is also .
mlloyd1
Yes , exactly.. And not only volume control, but whole signal path, every stage. From this point of wiev MUSES is good, but not the best what is available today. Simple to use, affordable price, maybe the best from integrated solutions what is available today for this purpose. But not the best way for volume regulation.
In XP30 the MUSES is in front of the gain stage (its gain is specified with 10dB), therefore driving a unity gain low-power amp like the F4 from First Watt will not be a problem for it. But if the MUSES is connected to the output of a gainstage (like in an Aleph P1.7) it certainly would come to its limits.