you should, i think it would great to hear your thoughts
I have tried the Esoteric N-01XD against my modified MKI before and the Esoteric outperforms my DAC thru USB, I like my DAC more with the Matrix converted to I2S though. Weāll see what this MKII can do. I heard the USB on it is much improved. They will start sending the beta units out next week, so pretty soon we will be having some fun!
2 Likes
Matches the SACDās form factor nicelyš
1 Like
Gosh, the Mk II looks so good. I have a friend trying to convince me to go Holo May but Iām fearful that will be a bit bright for me. And I really want to stay put with my modded DSD. . . but I know Iāll be so tempted by the Mk II.
I managed to pay off my house by adding a little to my inheritance, and Iām working on paying off my credit card debt. If I can succeed with that. . .weāll see. Kudos to Ted and PS Audioās teamsāthis seems a really exciting DAC.
2 Likes
Yes, same buying process as everyone. The beta units will come with beta software and if changed by the release date we can update to that software.
I own the May KTE and the modded DSD and I donāt find the May to be bright in anyway compared to the DS. I also have a Spring 3 KTE and the same is true for it. One member has repeated that so many times that some have taken it to heart. That has not been said by the many other members who own either it or the Spring 3. I didnāt find that to be true right out of the box with either unit and after well over 1000 hours on each itās certainly not the case.
1 Like
Same here, own May DAC and this is the first time I heard that itās bright, NOS DACs are known for sound staging and āmusicalityā and the May sure have that, and if you want to explore the world of upsampling, HQPlayer give you limitless personal tailoring potential. I finally settled on DSD256 upsample, so really curious what Mk2 has to offer as itās doing DSD upsampling internally. I think Iāll bite the bullet and get one to test out and compare to May DAC + HQPlayer combo. I would of been happy with the May DAC + HQPlayer if it werenāt for me watching too much music video and relying on YouTube for my musical enjoyment. HQPlayer introduced massive delay to the sound and Iām tire of messing around with the AV syncing.
Thanks for those replies. I am exceptionally sensitive to treble energy and so many components others donāt find bright, I might and sometimes do. Iām sure these DACs sound great. . . I just hesitate and as Iāve built my system around PS Audio DACs for over twelve years and think the Mk II may be a better fit for me.
Iām a disc personāI use my DSD for both digital discs via my PWT SACD and vinyl via my NuWave Phono Converter, and to have the DSD connected by I2S for these two units and match the looks of the transport are real benefits for the Mk II.
Cool. Interested to see if Mk2 can hang with or beat the May
1 Like
Thanks. The MK2 is a revelation. I have been loving it in Music Room Two. People unaware it is hooked up come in and ask what happened. They hear its improvements on familiar music without even knowing anything changed.
Extraordinary.
16 Likes
My experience with the May is contrary to others on the forum, my modified MKI DS was the clearer more real sounding, but thatās using the Matrix going I2S to the DS and May. The USB is the weak point of the DS and I didnāt use that for comparison, but Iām pretty sure the May would come out ahead there. Now with the USB input improved on the MKII and everything else improved also, I may ask my friend to bring over his May again and do another shootout, that should be fun.
5 Likes
Firstly, let me say that I am a longtime loyal PS Audio fan. Iāve been buying gear from them for close to 20 years, going back to the original 300 power device (that thing was so big). I have the monoblocks, the pre and the DSD Sr DAC with the Bridge II and the updated power conditioner and have been very happy with them all - not to mention all sorts of power cables over the years.
Secondly, my wife has been fully aware for about 3 years that as soon as the Mk2 comes out we are buying it. She has been prepped for this one for a while and understands the importance.
And lastly let me say that I know what I am about to say is somewhat shallow, but I still think it matters.
There are two big things that seem to be missing in the Mk2:
-
Streaming capability. Bridge II was a weirdly expensive upgrade to the current DAC, but if you just factor in the price as a whole it was fine. But having this important capability in the same box as the DAC is important to me. I really donāt feel like figuring out which streamer to buy, and then spending the next 5 years of my life on this forum tweaking the different settings to make it works nicely with this highly sophisticated DAC. Having it built in was beautiful and easy.
-
Display - its 2022 and I like a nice display. I donāt need something huge - the current one on the DSD Sr is fine - I was assuming a modest improvement on that in the Mk2 but instead we are getting a big downgrade. Iāll admit it, I like to see that the DAC is processing the file type that I think I am sending it. Itās an acknowledgement from the system that things are working properly. As far as I can tell you donāt have that feedback with this device and I think its a negative. I have an old Peachtree Audio integrated amp that is a nice small device that does a lot, but it has always bothered me that there isnāt some sort of indicator to show me that what I am hearing is what I am expecting to hear.
I know these things are both somewhat shallow, but for $8k it doesnāt seem like a big ask.
Iād love to know if others disagree and why - I am VERY eager to be convinced otherwise!
David
Hi David,
I think most people who would spend $8k on a DAC are in the enthusiast or audiophile group and of course in that group many (including me) are happier looking for separate solutions to their audio system.
For me at this time I much prefer shopping for a separate DAC and streamer. No particular reason other than being able to listen to other DACs or other streamers without having to be locked in to a particular device.
I do understand the need for simplicity and there are quite a few streaming DACs on the market.
As far as the display goes for me it doesnāt matter at all as I keep the display turned off except to reset the volume after a power outage.
Hope this helps
8 Likes
thing is, a big screen is only really needed to display streaming info (or DSP info in the case of DSPing DACs).
ā¦but including streaming capability creates multiple extra sources of electrical noise within the DAC, which here we are trying to avoid.
I believe thatās how the thinking goes 
3 Likes
I would also add that the large (LCD?) display, in itself, adds unwanted noise and was a factor in taking it out of the PST and future products.
4 Likes
Plus 1 on what Baldy wrote. I bought the DS without the Bridge, and never used the one in the Jr. The default of the displays is off unless Iām changing something.
3 Likes
I want a DAC to be a DAC, a streamer to be a streamer, etc.
And I dim all displays, so a display would be wasted on me.
10 Likes
I too like the new design. I want the option to have a separate streamer. And I am good with the new display.
1 Like
In my experience, get the streamer separate. Iām a PC guy now after trying a few different units and streamers,. However, It was always an upgrade to what was in in the box The best DACs I have tried have been a DAC, period.
Screen is up to you. I love it on my amp so I can change inputs etc but I donāt need it on a Dac once set up. However this thing is in beta, letās see how it sounds!. Maybe a small screen is no biggie compared to performance?
If you look at the currently posted photos from the Toronto show, youāll see the currently playing file format above the volume.