Certainly not bad. And I didn’t say “bad.” Just flat. Design is definitely one of those “eye of the beholder” things. I would simply prefer to see dCS continue its approach to design elegance, and not become another bland, straight-line box. We have plenty of those.
I could live with the design …but SQ wise, well….difficult…
Not sure I am understanding your reference. DCS? Aurender? Somebody else? I think both Aurender and dCS have very good SQ, though I think the dCS component role is more critical, and Aurender is a non-starter for me due to lack of network streaming playback.
My reference is the upnp streaming SQ from melco to dCS and second USB to dCS with melco again. Tested auralic, melco, innuos, aurender and mac as front end player over time, different cables/connections.
The test here was to find out if Aurender N10 with bnc, usb or aes beats a Melco.
Ah, understood. Thank you.
Not the Gaia model… it‘s from Isoacustic one of those whitout a screw (Bronze?)
Orea Indigo. The weight of Rossini ( 15.6kg ) works out at 3.9kg/puck ( if you use 4). The maximum load for Bronze is 3.6kg so Indigo it is.
1 Like
Excuse me - slip of the tongue.
Gaia are for speakers. In fact I meant Orea.
My Rossini and Clock each sit on a separate Fraim shelf on glass. I was wondering about how the Rossini does with the Orea’s. I experimented a little with them underneath some headphone amps
1 Like
I’m pleased with SQ improvement made by the Orea’s (Indigo for Rossini DAC and Bronze for Clock) in my set up.
2 Likes
I had them under both units, but when i got the fraim i removed them as they didn’t seem to be doing anything now.
I have since placed a thick piece of bamboo between the feet and glass of the fraim and like what i have going on
I have no audio rack, so it‘s my only choice to improve SQ ….
Thanks Dunc - more experimenting to do
T38.45 - I use an old Quadraspire rack in my bedroom which holds a generous amount of headphone gear. I am thinking of replacing it with proper furniture - thus my observation on the Orea pucks.
Best
Gregg
1 Like
Ewww, I don’t like that at ALL. The display is way too gaudy and obtrusive, and the industrial design looks like a Mother’s English tea cookie.
While I agree with you in general, the “industrial” design in person actually comes off as curved and elegant, but in a very different way from dCS. Picking the right finish helps. I get what you mean about the display, but it’s not so much gaudy as large. It’s large to be easily readable, and it works. Just the same, I wouldn’t mind it being slightly smaller. What is missing is music imagery (as it is with dCS) and info. As I said above, I don’t want my dCS equipment to look like my MSB equipment. While appearance is irrelevant to SQ, it’s part of the “pleasure calculus,” and one of the reasons to choose dCS when I upgraded my speaker system was to pick something different from what I already had.
Bill at least the MSB seems to have some relationship to mainstream 21st century design unlike this horror:
Art Deco meets four tea caddys? Yes tea again 
. Mind you us English have no idea what an English Tea Cookie might be. Is it a biscuit?
1 Like
I’m betting on the name:
MonteVerdi
Feels right for something better than Vivaldi 2.0
1 Like
If it’s called Bach we know there’ll never be anything better…
Yes, but which one? Could be awkward for product naming purposes. Maybe that’s why it tends to be avoided, unlike Beethoven or Mozart which I think of as clichés now for audio components.