And it will do so with a good source.
I donāt have a Muso, but it is meant to work with a upnp server, so if thereās a CD ripped on your PC/Mac and shared, your Muso should be able to find that and play something at CD quality rather than at Spotify quality.
1 Like
Even wireless, Tidal beats Apple Music and Spotify Premium on the Muso 2
1 Like
I have had my Muso 2 for around 8 months now. I pretty much only stream from Spotify (Premium) and listen to Hi Res radio. Initially I was slightly disappointed with the sound as you are, but I have found that some forms of music seem to sound better than others which has led me to believe it is simply the way some tracks are recorded and streamed via Spotify. Some electronic music or music with good bass sounds superb so I have no doubts the unit can perform. I must try Tidal as a comparison.
1 Like
I have a two week old Qb 2 (ā¬850) and I can concur that the sound is very disappointing. I have a Bose Soundlink 2 (ā¬110) and the sound of the QB 2 isnāt much better. Iām surprised that people are saying the sound is so great.
When I use Boom 2 on my MacBook Pro the sound is somewhat fuller but without that (such as online radio, or when connecting a turntable) the sound is thin, muffled and ver, very ordinary.
Iāve read through the replies here and I just donāt get it.
Different strokes for different folks. Different ideas of what constitutes correctness. I have a top of the range $1.5k Bose soundbar and it produces a lovely big sound that greatly enhances TV viewing. But itās not exactly a balanced sound. My far lower cost Qb2 wonāt do a Bose wall of sound but itās a lot more balanced and detailed and much more enjoyable for musicā¦ if set up right.
Iād say Bose products, not strictly hifi though they may be, are un rivaled kings of getting a consistent sound in near any environment. The Muso range is, like the more expensive hifi pedigree it comes from, fairly fussy about placement with dramatic changes in performance depending on positioning. I can grasp how that might not work for some people.
3 Likes
I have a musoand qb2, the qb2 sounded awful out of the box and I was gutted. But 4 months on kicking out music it sounds great. I guess the take home is it needed run in time. Just saying that was my experience.
2 Likes
Personally I would not keep anything that doesnt sound right out of the box. It might improve in time but nothing should sound wrong out of the box unless itās faulty. Devices like the Muso or QB are high end lifestyle products and should work in any environment to a satisfactory level. Not saying better placement wonāt improve them but it should not be essential. If it is then I would question their design decisions.
8 Likes
Update. The sound coming from the Qb2 literally was flat, colourless and sometimes slightly distorted. After a lot of fiddling about, googling, disconnecting, reconnecting, purchasing software I have managed to get things right in the end. Now my Qb2 seems to be working fine but it was āa difficult birthā as they say.
Do you know what the decisive change was, for the benefit of anyone with the same problem finding this thread, and to give closure to everyone who tried to help? 
1 Like
I have a 2010 MacBook Pro running OS 10.13.6 and iTunes 12.8.2.3. There seemed to be issues getting the Mu-so to connect to our wifi network. A reset of the Mu-so seemed to help as well as making sure the right speakers were selected in System Preferences. I had to select them multiple times. I think there are still issues with how my laptop connects to the network, but that doesnāt seem to be an issue with the Mu-so. It seems to make a difference when adjusting the volume in iTunes, in that I click on the network icon next to the volume slider and adjust the volume in the pop-down that appear.
Yes, Iām using Airplay. Almost all of my files are AAC. Now things seem right.
Iāve had my mu so for a month now, I was going to return it but stuck with it. I find that some songs sound great and some not so much so it must be down to the recording. I tried all the various inputs but all sound the same. I have decided to keep it now as Iāve got used to the way it sounds. As someone else said, some makes make all songs sound ok, you can definitely tell the difference with the mu so. I must say that it sounds a lot better now than when I first got it so overall Iām happy now!!
2 Likes
Thatās not unusual with good hifi, and tends to become more the higher you go. I believe not so much because poor recordings sound worse than with lesser systems, but because good recordings sound so much better than they used to, making the difference more obvious.
2 Likes
Do you buy hifi? A lot of speakers I buy are nearly unlistenable out of the box. My current system was, in the first 2 hours just unbearable. This is pretty normal.
Lower cost items like iPods are not that hi fidelity. Ergo, not that sensitive. You canāt have hifi that is extremely sensitive to the most minute microdetail in a delicate analogue signal and yet have it be non sensitive to environmental conditions that change as things bed in, build up their operating charges, etc. So you are likely to have consistent performance from an iPhone on day 1 and day 1000 but not on something that was crafted around handling delicate signals or has moving parts (voicecoils) stiff from the factory or time in storage.
Iād say that if a person expects everything to sound good out of the box, they must spend time buying only commoditised low end gear or just be incredibly unhappy with every purchase.
Yes I buy hifi and not one component I have ever bought sounded bad out of the box. Speakers get better but not by huge amounts everyone goes on about.
1 Like
I totally agree. Iāve only ever bought 5 or 6 systems, and all were bought on the basis of how good they sounded at audition stage. The fact that all seemed to improve over time was a bonus. How anyone could spend Ā£ā000s on hifi that sounded poor out of the box is beyond me.
3 Likes
@feeling_zen āPoorā , āunlistenableā, āunbearableā , etc.
The words you chose to describe the sound of your HiFi gear are perhaps a tad strong, arenāt they ? 
If any piece of HiFi equipment sounded that bad out of the box, no one would accept to buy it.
Well , I wouldnāt.
I bought equipment ranging from āaffordableā to āexpensiveā, and I bought all that equipment NEW.
Never experienced poor sound.
Of course YMMV
1 Like
Iād use those words to describe every expensive pair of speakers I ever bought in their first 24hrs. None of them sounded even close to a run in pair.
I was really worried about the Muso Qb mk2 for the first couple days. But they all rounded out, and honestly, whatās a few days?
I agree we might have different criteria. To me, a lot of stuff right out of box new sounds no better than a $300 midi system. Now some things, I agree are very consistent. The sound you get from a Bose system is about the same on day 1 as it is on day 1000. I think a lot of massed produced low end stuff just isnāt that sensitive. For sure the components go through changes but the overal design fidelity has a ceiling that just isnāt revealing enough.
I certainly remember a lot of painfully long running in periods to get new demo stock ready for actual demo.
I think if your criteria has no room for run in or doesnāt accept that pre run in can be a pretty awful experience you can look at my current and past profiles and avoid everything I ever bought.
I guess we only have a different view on what āunbearableā means.
For me, āunbearableā is something close to noise
The ND555 was a marvel out of the box, especially comparing to the nDAC. Of course, after a couple of months, it was even better.
Same experience with my Magico S3 MkII.
The poor JMR Abscisse, my previous speakers, sounded so bad, and so boxy, comparing to the Magicos, even cold, out of the box.
I wouldnāt qualify the sound produced by both items as āunbearableā. I would rather say it was not perfect, or not as intended by the manufacturer.
But, yes high end gear takes time to run in.