[icebear]

OK, you are a Chord fan, just enjoy.

 

[a1uc]

.

 

[EVOLVIST]

There's a brief Japanese assessment of Blu2 M Scaler over on the Blu 2 thread posted by maxh22. I think the writer was rather taken by what CD could produce too

".....The writer also experienced that sound, but also the depth of carving of three-dimensional sounds and the sense of air in the place where the sound source was recorded are conveyed vividly. This is a incredibly incredible performance of CDs."

I can't wait to hear this product.

 
Yeah, but see, I'm in no way being disparaging of Asians, as they are really cool and Hi-Fi is their game, but I don't trust any reviews that come out of native Asian lands, simply because nothing seems to satisfy them with Hi-Fi. I have literally seen some Japanese tourists at a Hi-Fi shop, with cans on, listening and smiling, bowing and genuflecting in front of the salesman, only to walk away with grimaces on their faces as soon as they turned their backs. It was the damndest thing!
 
I mean, it seems like a nice review - very polite - I just wonder if he popped a blood vessel in an eye as he was writing it, ya know?

 

[Christer]

   
Yes, the microRendu is galvanically isolated at its ethernet input and so is the sMS-200 but this also applies to my Mac Mini, Intel NUC, Mac Pro, my laptops and all things that have a hardwired network connection.  As far as I know, John Swenson didn't go to any extraordinary lengths to incorporate an special galvanic isolation in the microRendu beyond what the ethernet protocol calls for which is why he also added "ethernet filtering" but this is nothing unique as even my Mac Mini offers this.
 
I am not a networking expert but it has been my understanding that the ethernet protocol has called for transformer coupling dating back to 10base-T and so by definition, all modern ethernet connections are galvanically isolated (usually to several hundred volts) and so this is a key advantage that audio over ethernet has over other transmission protocols.  This transformer-coupling spec was introduced not for the benefit of audio but because ethernet can support fairly long runs such that equipment on different ends can be powered by different power distribution networks within a building or even different buildings which could then lead to a significant ground offset between ethernet nodes.  As we know, however, this transformer coupling does nothing for RF created by the device itself which can be significant and why DAVE's galvanic isolation at the USB input is still very important.
 
As we also both know, a microRendu is superior to a basic PC even though both have galvanic isolation at the ethernet input and despite DAVE's galvanic isolation at USB and so this is what I meant about the differences being due to more than just galvanic isolation.  There are many on other threads and other forums who talk of even more robust network galvanic isolation devices (to the degree of many kV of isolation) leading to even more SQ improvements.  These devices would include the GISO by Acousense, the Acoustic Revive RL-1 or the SOtM iSO-CAT6 and I happen to own the SOtM iSO-CAT6.  When used with my other DACs including a Oppo BDP-105, there is a small but noticeable improvement, worthwhile enough that I bought it last year.  When used with my DAVE, it offers no perceptible improvement and I have documented this several times in the past.
 
I guess what you are trying to say is that it doesn't hurt to have multiple points of galvanic isolation but does it make a difference?  Rob suggests that it won't with his design and my experience tends to support his claim but I suppose we will be able to answer that question for ourselves with the Blu Mk2 soon enough.

Hello again romaz, I see that you mention  the GISO by Acousense, it is one of the units I have been considering using with HUGO to make it work properly  and long term listenable in my home system.
Do you have any personal experience with that unit /isolator?
Or do  you have  links to more  information  about it apart from their own homesite?
I know they are using it at all their classical recording sessions and imho their 24/192 masterfiles are some of the most realistic hi res pcm recordings I know of.
Their Shostakovich 15th symphony coupled with Mozart's Haffner symphony is very good indeed.
And so are most other recordings I have from Acousense.
It seems they might  know a thing or two both about proper isolation and recording.
But they are if I understand it correctly, firmly in the camp of NON bandwidth limiting.
Their philosophy apart from sensible miking seems to be to capture and include hf enegry well into  the"inaudible" territory in their 24/192 recordings.
There is some interesting reading and  spectral screenshots at the  Acousense site that argues that rbcd is NOT enough for realism with dynamic large scale symphonic music. And I for one think that their recordings are  "proof of the pudding" in some respects.
Very spacious ,very airy  and tonally and timbrally  believable SQ .And with no sense of  the sound  having  been  closed in, or  squeezed in , in a too small box with a too low ceiling, which is a feeling I almost always get listening to rbcd more than a short while. 
As you know I have little interest in what can be squeezed out of the rbcd standard, which was not even state of the art when it was introduced. Several classical companies where recording at higher rates than 16/44.1 even before rbcd discs were introduced.
To me rbcd was an unfortunate compromise made for practial reasons NOT "perfect sound forever".
But as you said in an earlier post one needs demanding material  and a trained ear to hear the subtle differences I am striving for, but which could almost  be taken for granted with the best examples with  the medium the mass market abandoned for many years.
What I want from the best  digital is at least the level of direct cut LPs but without their limitations. 

 

[EVOLVIST]

  . 
As you know I have little interest in what can be squeezed out of the rbcd standard, which was not even state of the art when it was introduced. Several classical companies where recording at higher rates than 16/44.1 even beefore rbcd discs were introduced.
To me rbcd was an unfortunate compromise made for practial reasons NOT "perfect sound forever".
 
 
What I want from the best  digital is at least the level of direct cut LPs but without their limitations. 

Wow. You just said the total opposite of what I just posted earlier. I like it.

 
Have you gotten your DAVE yet?

 

[DaveRedRef-III]

Evolvist
In no way being disparaging of Asians?

 

[EVOLVIST]

Evolvist
In no way being disparaging of Asians?

 
Ha! Nah, I mean, okay, I made a blanket statement, but no, not disparaging.
 
I have this Vietnamese buddy - in fact, I'm going to listen to his new speakers this Saturday - and I'm always busting his chops, you know, that my DAVE is not good enough for him, or whatever, just being goofy. Then he'll put on some esoteric Vietnamese artist with all of this clicks-'n'-clacks going on, pings and plucks and whatnot, so I tell him, "Hey man, can we hear that one album." He asks me which one, so I tell him, "You know, the one with all of the cats with their tails tied together." It's all in good fun.
 
Actually, he's one amazing dude at ripping vinyl, while I'm only amazing at listening.

 

 

[EVOLVIST]

In fact, my Asian pal, he busts my balls that I spend half of my time tracking down and cherry picking the best performance of this classical piece or that one, only to spend the other half of my time listening to something like the Neil Young or Earth, Wind and Fire. Heh.

 

[Christer]

  Wow. You just said the total opposite of what I just posted earlier. I like it.

 
Have you gotten your DAVE yet?

Hello EVOLVIST,
 No offence intended if your post was the one that praised  the 16/44.1 standard. Maybe we listen to very different  musical genres you and I? To really hear the lacking resolution of 16/44.1 it takes demanding large scale classical or contempory acoustic music material imho.  I have to confess that I have yet to hear 16/44.1 via DAVE. I just don't have any music recorded in that in that format any longer and I don't miss those that I had very much. Until convinced by my own ears and standards and with  large scale classical reference material of the opposite  I still regard rbcd as simply NOT enough for me .Especially knowing that my direct cut LPs in some respects still give even the very best of digital like DAVE with hi res material a very good run for its money.I was very tempted  to buy a DAVE.But I found the price outrageous. Hence  I am biding my time  knowing well that the trickle down effect both will deliver what I need and  might already have provided a close enough competitor to DAVE that I can hopefully use both as a DAC in my highend  mainly LP based  stereo home system and as now on my travels  with HUGO. Its name is possibly and again hopefully  HUGO 2.
I also think that before long  and with the introduction of the Mscaler in combination with even HUGO 2 or similar any audible differences will be so small that the deficiences of most recordings will be much more important  limiting factors than my choice of DAC.
Cheers Cris

 

[erik701]

http://hifipig.com/chord-electronics-adds-usb-input-to-blu-mkii-cd/
 
I just read that Chord added USB type B input to Blu Mk. 2. Does it mean that Blu Mk. 2 will work as USB DAC as well? 

 

[onlychild]

http://hifipig.com/chord-electronics-adds-usb-input-to-blu-mkii-cd/

I just read that Chord added USB type B input Blu Mk. 2. Does it mean that Blu Mk. 2 will work as USB DAC as well? 

I have the same question after I saw the post on Chords FB page

 

[theveterans]

  http://hifipig.com/chord-electronics-adds-usb-input-to-blu-mkii-cd/
 
I just read that Chord added USB type B input to Blu Mk. 2. Does it mean that Blu Mk. 2 will work as USB DAC as well? 

 
It does not have a FPGA for conversion. It'll just function as a transport with the upsampling I believe.

 

[erik701]

   
It does not have a FPGA for conversion. It'll just function as a transport with the upsampling I believe.

This is from Blu Mk. 2 product page on http://www.chordelectronics.co.uk
 
Put simply, the Blu MkII upscaling CD transport sets new standards for CD sound quality by using the very latest FPGA technology to implement advanced proprietary filtering and upscaling techniques. Our next-generation CD transport incorporates a powerful new FPGA core with extraordinary capability.

 

[onlychild]

Since getting the Utopias, I've been eyeing the DAVE as my next purchase so I'm not that familiar with how the whole "taps" thing works.

If the Blu MK2 has 1M taps but then that signal is fed to the Dave with 164k taps, are you not downgrading the 1M taps of the blu by feeding it to the DAVE? Sorry for the newbi question

 

[theveterans]

 
This is from Blu Mk. 2 product page on http://www.chordelectronics.co.uk
 
Put simply, the Blu MkII upscaling CD transport sets new standards for CD sound quality by using the very latest FPGA technology to implement advanced proprietary filtering and upscaling techniques. Our next-generation CD transport incorporates a powerful new FPGA core with extraordinary capability.

 
Edit: Blu does not have a pulse array DAC. The quote refers to the advanced WTA filtering techniques (pulse array modulation) to upsample the digital input before feeding to the DAC in the DAVE, essentially bypassing DAVE's internal pulse array modulation.