John - Separation is a tough one. You can get improved separation by simply eliminating some high-frequencies or toning-down the dynamics. This is what many of the cheaper DAC's do, such as the Ack! or some of the tube-DAC's. The trick is to get HF extension and dynamics without sibilance. If I understood correctly, you noted that the MSB delivers more impactful high-frequencies, such as percussion, than the Wadia. The main weakness was mid and bass "body"?
Yep Steve...I know how you do focus on that hi frequency extension and I found my system had it over the Krell/Wadia. I 'saw' the guy playing the drums, slamming the high hats on the 2nd cut we played...a wild Jazz piece from South Afrcia that Brian had. The high frequency performance, alone, was enough for me to enjoy this piece more on my system, rather than the Krell/Wadia. In other words, tho the other 80% fo the frequency spectrum was handled better by the Krell/Wadia, I enjoyed the Sony/MSB more on that one. The sum of the better parts did not add up to better fun.
I turned to a couple of the guys and told them that...but I don't think they heard it like me. I was bobbing much more to the music than on the Krell/Wadia. Due to natural limitations in hi frequency response, especially with males as they age (one was about my age, one slightly younger I'd wager), it's probably more difficult to assess a plurality on that issue.
The other tracks, with far less hi frequency emphasis on them, clearly held the Krell/ Wadia in a better light. The music had more 'body', yes. The instruments and voices were clearly dilineated better...a better sense eof the performance wasthru the Krell/Wadia.
Neither system had any notable sibilance or grain. It was very non-digital sounding in that room that fine day...whichever system you were listening to.
