[bikutoru]

Well..we can have a normal discussion over the measurements from Amir, can't we?

You can try to have it on the ASR site itself and see how it goes..

​

 

[Rebel Chris]

I'm a member on this forum. Little surprised with the comments...but it is what it is.

 

[ra990]

While I have no doubt Amir takes pleasure in revealing bad measuring gear that is expensive, I highly doubt he purposefully produces bad results. If the MScaler had better measurements, he would have reported them, while likely coming to the same conclusion (that he hears no difference). At the very least, he has produced data about the MScaler that never existed before. Owners and fans may not like what the results were, but let's face it, they showed that the MScaler has some issues. Rob Watts has already stated he's working on the next version of the product, so I hope that addresses some of the issues we now know exist with the current product.

I don't like posting there because everyone thinks they have a doctorate in audio science and almost none of them have any actual experience with the products they criticize. They worship objective measurements there, we value subjective and real experience here.

 

[The Jester]

Seems his measurement results are at odds with others who have done similar testing, maybe the owner/member who submitted the unit for testing should consider returning the unit to Chord for testing assuming a faulty unit ?
If faulty it should be well within Chords 3 year warranty conditions,
Interesting too the number of devices supplied for testing and review by “members” vs a select few supplied by “The Company” and the brands involved ?

 

[griff500]

If the MScaler had better measurements, he would have reported them, while likely coming to the same conclusion (that he hears no difference). At the very least, he has produced data about the MScaler that never existed before. .

I believe Stereophile got quite different measurements and it was done quite some time ago?

 

[griff500]

I'm a member on this forum. Little surprised with the comments...but it is what it is.

Are you really surprised?

 

[ra990]

I believe Stereophile got quite different measurements and it was done quite some time ago?

OK, I wasn't aware of those...interesting.

 

[Rob Watts]

While I have no doubt Amir takes pleasure in revealing bad measuring gear that is expensive, I highly doubt he purposefully produces bad results. If the MScaler had better measurements, he would have reported them, while likely coming to the same conclusion (that he hears no difference). At the very least, he has produced data about the MScaler that never existed before. Owners and fans may not like what the results were, but let's face it, they showed that the MScaler has some issues. Rob Watts has already stated he's working on the next version of the product, so I hope that addresses some of the issues we now know exist with the current product.

I don't like posting there because everyone thinks they have a doctorate in audio science and almost none of them have any actual experience with the products they criticize. They worship objective measurements there, we value subjective and real experience here.

The Hugo M scaler does not have technical issues that IMO need fixing. The added quantisation noise is there simply because with 2x and 4x upsampling I use Gaussian dither set to a high level - and this is done simply because it sounds much better, closer to the noise shaped outputs at 16x. Of course using it in the intended mode, 16x, the noise and distortion level is identical to the input noise due to the aggressive noise shaping. So noise is higher, but so what? You still won't hear it, but you will hear the benefits of Gaussian against the usual triangular dither. That is, you will hear better depth and detail resolution, unless you are deaf, or not blessed with good hearing, or not interested in the SQ and musical performance, in which case why on earth would you be interested in an expensive up-sampler?

As to the jitter being higher, well so what? It's not sold as a jitter reduction device, but sold to go with Chord DACs, where jitter on the dual coax inputs is eliminated by the Chord DAC.

 

[The Jester]

And why would anyone undergo testing of an upscaler capable of 16x only test at 2x and 4x given a suitable DAC was also supplied with the unit ?
My own main system uses a Qutest/MScaler feeding a quality preamp and headphone amp, plus a CD transport feeding both the MScaler and my previous “reference” DAC/preamp/ headphone amp unit, via optical to the MScaler and BNC to the other unit, and also optical out from the MScaler to the other unit which limits the output to 4x which is the limit of the original unit anyway, no prizes for guessing which sounds better to me via headphones plugged into the DAC/Pre/ headamp ?

 

[coopdog]

That is, you will hear better depth and detail resolution, unless you are deaf, or not blessed with good hearing, or not interested in the SQ and musical performance

I’m not deaf. I don’t know what ‘good’ hearing is, but I hear adequately and appreciate live performances. I am very interested in SQ. I owned the DAVE and M-Scaler, but now receive the same musical pleasure that you do from recorded music, with my Topping DAC. Am I wrong in thinking that the Topping DAC is the equal of the Chord combo?

 

[Rob Watts]

I’m not deaf. I don’t know what ‘good’ hearing is, but I hear adequately and appreciate live performances. I am very interested in SQ. I owned the DAVE and M-Scaler, but now receive the same musical pleasure that you do from recorded music, with my Topping DAC. Am I wrong in thinking that the Topping DAC is the equal of the Chord combo?

I am delighted that you have found something that musically works for you, and that you have saved some cash too.

But that absolutely would not be the case for me.

 

[coopdog]

I am delighted that you have found something that musically works for you, and that you have saved some cash too.

But that absolutely would not be the case for me.

Are you saying that the DAVE and M-Scaler are to only be appreciated by those with hearing ability equal to yours?

 

[anyoldears]

Are you saying that the DAVE and M-Scaler are to only be appreciated by those with hearing ability equal to yours?

I think he is saying his preference is for something other than the Topping. Is that controversial?

 

[coopdog]

I think he is saying his preference is for something other than the Topping. Is that controversial?

It’s controversial when Mr. Watts states that one has to be deaf, blessed with inadequate hearing, or not interested in SQ if one cannot “hear better depth and detail resolution.” I don’t hear any less depth or detail resolution with the Topping DAC I now use.

 

[anyoldears]

It’s controversial when Mr. Watts states that one has to be deaf, blessed with inadequate hearing, or not interested in SQ if one cannot “hear better depth and detail resolution.” I don’t hear any less depth or detail resolution with the Topping DAC I now use.

Thats slightly out of context, he is refering to his design choices (qv Gausian v triangular dither) of his upscaler. Not as a comparison to other DACs. If you enjoy the Topping, good for you, you have saved a lot of money. No one is critising you for your choice. Why take offense if others choose differently?