In my system, yes, for the digital front end. Analog not so much (vinyl into separate minmailist SS preamp).
Viridian is correct with respect to impedence matching & quality / 'oomph' of source(s) driving your amps.
I run the MF X10v3 into Levinson monoblocks and find improvements with all of the following DAC front ends: Theta DS Pre GenII (passive pre may explain why the buffer helps); TacT 2.0 RCS; Acurus ACT-3 & Oppo 980 for HT.
In my system / room, the improvements are: Less hardness / glare, expecially strings & piano when played dynamically; less sibilance on female vocals; deeper soundstage / better imaging. Most important, though, is a better sense of cohesiveness, more natural, more thereness without being in your face, more liquid, less fatiguing (not that it was so bad before - just better). I use it in conjunction with a Camelot 5.1 jitter reduction / reclocking device that has similar happy effects.
Like everything audio, it will depnd on the sum of all the parts, I suppose.
Hope that helps.
Ken
Viridian is correct with respect to impedence matching & quality / 'oomph' of source(s) driving your amps.
I run the MF X10v3 into Levinson monoblocks and find improvements with all of the following DAC front ends: Theta DS Pre GenII (passive pre may explain why the buffer helps); TacT 2.0 RCS; Acurus ACT-3 & Oppo 980 for HT.
In my system / room, the improvements are: Less hardness / glare, expecially strings & piano when played dynamically; less sibilance on female vocals; deeper soundstage / better imaging. Most important, though, is a better sense of cohesiveness, more natural, more thereness without being in your face, more liquid, less fatiguing (not that it was so bad before - just better). I use it in conjunction with a Camelot 5.1 jitter reduction / reclocking device that has similar happy effects.
Like everything audio, it will depnd on the sum of all the parts, I suppose.
Hope that helps.
Ken