HiFace, sensitive information
Jul 29, 2010 at 3:52 AM Post #76 of 425
I believe Jkeny was referring to the modded HiFace... Regal also said he heard significantly less differences between the 2 modded versions... Stock units are another story.

 
Quote:
My 44.1 and 48 sound almost the same with the foobar test, so I don't know where that leaves me?  Two large or two small.......
 
On the other hand, jkeny posted that he didn't hear a difference between the two, so I was wondering if he meant he didn't hear a difference between the stock versions or his modded versions?
 
USG



 
Jul 29, 2010 at 3:58 AM Post #77 of 425
This is what Regal actually said about the modded HiFaces...
 
The real worry is probably for the stock units, which should account for the vast majority of them.
 
Quote:
I don't think you understand that you can take a below par oscillator (clock) and feed it battery power and have significant improvements,  this is why I don't think Jkeny modded owners have much to worry about.
 
I was so pissed at the stock unit with the small clock  that I didn't spend a lot of time with it on the batteries but what I remember was the batteries mostly cured the condition. 

 
Jul 29, 2010 at 9:54 AM Post #79 of 425


Quote:
I  purchased and recieved mine in early February of this year but I have no idea when TweekGeek received it from M2Tech. Hopefully it was taken from stock acquired prior to December..........
 

 


Alexdad54,
 
How do you like the way yours sounds?  Did you notice an improvement over what you had before?
 
Jul 29, 2010 at 10:02 AM Post #80 of 425
I couldn't say as I didn't have anything before I bought the HiFace. I was assembling my PC audio-based system bit by bit, buying separately external HDD's, a netbook, an MHDT Havana DAC, several coax cables, the HiFace and Denon DH7000 phones with a KCAS amp. It sounds good but I do still find it a bit fatiguing and somewhat harsh sounding (compared to my CDP-based system) which makes me a bit concerned that perhaps I received the "small clocks"
I have changed tubes in the Havana and that has helped a bit and j Just for fun, I'm going to try connecting the HiFace directly into the DAC utilizing a good quality USB cable from the netbook and a RCA(m) to RCA(m) adapter to connect to the DAC (I have the RCA HiFace).
 
Jul 29, 2010 at 7:49 PM Post #82 of 425
Have any of you tried using the application included with the latest hiFace driver called 'display.exe'? It is supposed to show bit depth and sample rate, but it does not work with my hiFace. I wonder if this would mean I have the wrong clocks? I told Marco about this some time ago and he said he would let his programmer know. I havent heard anything since and still no driver update.
 
Jul 29, 2010 at 11:30 PM Post #83 of 425

 
Quote:
Have any of you tried using the application included with the latest hiFace driver called 'display.exe'? It is supposed to show bit depth and sample rate, but it does not work with my hiFace. I wonder if this would mean I have the wrong clocks? I told Marco about this some time ago and he said he would let his programmer know. I havent heard anything since and still no driver update.


Mine never worked.

 
Quote:
This is what Regal actually said about the modded HiFaces...
 
The real worry is probably for the stock units, which should account for the vast majority of them.
 
Quote:
regal said:


I don't think you understand that you can take a below par oscillator (clock) and feed it battery power and have significant improvements,  this is why I don't think Jkeny modded owners have much to worry about.
 
I was so pissed at the stock unit with the small clock  that I didn't spend a lot of time with it on the batteries but what I remember was the batteries mostly cured the condition.


 


Would it be incorrect to think that if you can realize significant improvements by feeding a below par oscillator (clock) battery power, you will obtain even greater improvements doing the same thing with a good oscillator?
 
USG
 
Jul 30, 2010 at 2:51 PM Post #84 of 425
So does anyone know if this issue has been sorted out yet?
 
I just purchased an M2Tech Hiface from tweekgeaks today.  I want to know that I won't get hosed with one of these inferior units.  I suppose I'll find out once I get the unit.
 
Aug 1, 2010 at 7:09 AM Post #85 of 425
Indeed, this is actually something I already mentionned earlier in the thread. I would rather go with the large MEC clock all the way, especially if I were going to mod mine...
 
Quote:
Would it be incorrect to think that if you can realize significant improvements by feeding a below par oscillator (clock) battery power, you will obtain even greater improvements doing the same thing with a good oscillator?
 
USG


According to Jkeny, the new HiFace are beeing produced again with the large MEC oscillator since beginning of July... Now, the question remains if you have bought it from a dealer, when was this unit manufactured ?
 
Quote:
So does anyone know if this issue has been sorted out yet?



 
Aug 1, 2010 at 7:23 AM Post #86 of 425
I have finally received both HiFace back.
 
First thing I tried was listening both with 24/96 material. I used some available demo files from HD Tracks and 2L for that. I could also try later with a few rip i made of DVD-A at 24/192, but so far, I am unable to spot differences between both HiFaces at this sample rate. They just sound identical to me, which makes sense, since they are both relying on the same clock at 48khz mutliples. That is while playing on my main rig, Lavry DA11 and Beyer DT48A.
 
Second thing I tried was listening 44.1khz files with the "small clock" HiFace on a more forgiving system: Lavry DA11/LD mkIII/Sony CD900ST. Listenable I would describe it... It didn't strike me as bad as I remembered, when I could barley listen to music for more than 5 minutes. The tube colorations in a certain way masked the poor timing of the music. However, switching back to the "large clock" HiFace was a revelation, even on this system. Much better mids, voices fuller and richer, a much better sense of pace and rithm, much better articulation (so apparent on voices), soundstage suddenly opens and images precisely.
 
So while not as extreme as my first experience with the small clocks HiFace, I can say with confidence that even on a not so resolving system, differences still exists. But I understand how they could be tolerable for some, and maybe why people haven't been complaining that much untill now... Just a guess though.
 
Aug 1, 2010 at 7:33 AM Post #87 of 425
Shamu, thanks for the test - it seems to reveal a sonic difference!
 
BTW, I didn't say "According to Jkeny, the new HiFace are beeing produced again with the large MEC oscillator since beginning of July"
 
What I said was a very tentative  "I'm really unsure when it changed back though - If I was pushed I would say May/June"
 
Aug 3, 2010 at 4:56 AM Post #90 of 425
I wrote them if they could send me the normal clocks so that i  can solder them in myself.
 
But I just received an automated reply that M2tech will be closed for holidays until the 23.08.2010 :frowning2:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top