[coopdog]

Here are my bloody two cents worth!
We’ve been letting this run but these above statements are the limit!
If there are any more unsubstantiated lies put about by those wishing to sell there cables and much more utter foolish nonsense spouted about the MScaler or Blu2 being susceptible to RF. We are shutting down this thread.
We spent over fifteen thousand pounds on equipment and a damn sight more on RF suseptability and emissions testing on these two products to have them lied about and denigrated by those with their own particular agendas. Please cease this forth with!

Thank you!

 

[ZappaMan]

I find optical (lifatec glass) sounds best from my ProJect CD box RS into Dave. I’m glad optical was added to HMS

It’s cool that it had two optical inputs too.

Romaz had said this is his preferred optical cable. I only have used stock todate.

https://shop.mapleshadestore.com/mo...able-Standard-Toslink/productinfo/OPTICAL-ST/

It has a 30 day guarantee which is nice.

 

[Sil3nce]

@AxelCloris has politely asked you guys to stay on-topic.
This was only a few hours ago.
If some of you cannot learn to respect others, corrective action will be meted out.

 

[marcmccalmont]

I feel sad about this thread for the following

1. I don't mind hearing people saying ferrites work. I've followed the Blu 2 and DAVE thread long enough and know that ferrites works in the case of Blu2-DAVE combo. Whether it works with HMS-DAVE remains to see.

2. This is an impression thread so people say that ferrites work with HMS-DAVE or not work with HMS-DAVE are both perfectly acceptable.

3. Given that seller of a particular cable is willing to give an enough long time for the potential buyer for a free trial (probably with deposit), I see that a fair deal. I have no skin in any BNC cable and is just a user like most of the headfiers here.

4. There are lots of post here that stated close-minded opinions or illogical conclusions.

For example, some say that Rob is a good enough engineer so that he would be able to take care the RF business. SO THAT the RF business of the HMS should be handled completely. The conclusion "SO THAT ..." is flawed. Rob is one of the best engineer that I can think of in his field and he know the impact of RF long before the birth of the Blu2. However, Blu2 is susceptible to RF, a well known fact and hands down. If the SO THAT conclusion was true, then Blu2 should not be susceptible to RF. This shows why the conclusion was illogical.

Another example was something like the HMS was so expensive that if it's susceptible to RF, then it's a crap. Please look at the real situation, the stock cable was pretty good and people wants the best. To get the last 5% or 1% would be very expensive. Just look at the pricing of the Intel CPUs vs their clock speeds.

5. Listening is always subjective but if many trusted people honestly report the same thing many times, the experience become objective. Please check how Faraday discover the Faraday's law. Many thought that the theories were already complete and took the observation just random errors. There are many things that we don't know in audio science. So explore if possible is the way to go, waiting the "consensus" of the listening impression is another.

6. Be humble and curious so that we may learn more and falsify more. Rob always show this attitude.

7. The golden phrase that I've learnt from HeadFi "If it sounds good an measures good, great. If it sounds good and measures bad, you've measured the wrong thing" It still holds in most of the cases.

I came here to see if people find optical equal to or better than USB as the input for the HMS. The reason is then I may save money. YMMV

I would rather like to read more real impressions/experiences here.

My 2 cents.

I don’t have an mscaler yet and Blu2 does not have an optical input but I find the optical input to Dave to sound best in my system

 

[GreenLeo]

I find optical from my pc / roon server sounds cleaner than my laptop as network renderer using usb on batteries into mscaler.

I need to do more long term listening tests tho.
It would be nice to have what mini would bring although I don’t need a CD player.

Thank you. I look forward to trying the HMS with optical. Hopefully, the $ spent on the cables may be reduced very much as I find the pricing of USB cables are rocketing.

 

[marcmccalmont]

Thank you. I look forward to trying the HMS with optical. Hopefully, the $ spent on the cables may be reduced very much as I find the pricing of USB cables are rocketing.

I will use a lifatec glass cable from my ProJect cd box rs. The Aurender N10 is an unusual case it has AES, Spdif coax, tos and usb outputs but only the AES and coax are clicked with their fempto clock so it will be interesting to “hear” which is better the more accurately clicked coax or the rfi immune tos ......

 

[GreenLeo]

I find optical (lifatec glass) sounds best from my ProJect CD box RS into Dave. I’m glad optical was added to HMS

I'm glad too. As far as I know, Blu2 has no optical input.

According to some members that shared in other forums, the quality of the optical input and the USB input of the HMS are at least equally good. Unfortunately not much impressions could be found there. The limitation of optical input is only up to 192. So if you've lots of HD music with higher samplingsampling rate, optical is a no go.

 

[Mikey99]

Here are my bloody two cents worth!
We’ve been letting this run but these above statements are the limit!
If there are any more unsubstantiated lies put about by those wishing to sell there cables and much more utter foolish nonsense spouted about the MScaler or Blu2 being susceptible to RF. We are shutting down this thread.
We spent over fifteen thousand pounds on equipment and a damn sight more on RF suseptability and emissions testing on these two products to have them lied about and denigrated by those with their own particular agendas. Please cease this forth with!

Thanks for this, all this stuff has been driving me nuts! Let’s get back to discussing the M-Scaler and music

 

[Crgreen]

Here are my bloody two cents worth!
We’ve been letting this run but these above statements are the limit!
If there are any more unsubstantiated lies put about by those wishing to sell there cables and much more utter foolish nonsense spouted about the MScaler or Blu2 being susceptible to RF. We are shutting down this thread.
We spent over fifteen thousand pounds on equipment and a damn sight more on RF suseptability and emissions testing on these two products to have them lied about and denigrated by those with their own particular agendas. Please cease this forth with!

It was Rob who first raised the RFI issue with the MScaler in the Blu2, and how to deal with it by ferrited cables, and Rob who introduced internal ferrites to the HMS to address the issue.

A threat to throw your toys out of the pram is not really the response I would expect. Better to acknowledge that there was an issue but you consider that its been adequately resolved.

 

[Crgreen]

I'm glad too. As far as I know, Blu2 has no optical input.

According to some members that shared in other forums, the quality of the optical input and the USB input of the HMS are at least equally good. Unfortunately not much impressions could be found there. The limitation of optical input is only up to 192. So if you've lots of HD music with higher samplingsampling rate, optical is a no go.

In practice, I wonder how big a problem that’s likely to be. Predictions are difficult, but I think it unlikely that we’ll see much music > 192. The majority of hi-res files are at 96 which many engineers seem to think is as high as you need to go. For the relatively few DSD albums, you can always use DoP, and the MScaler converts DSD to PCM in any event.

 

[GreenLeo]

Here are my bloody two cents worth!
We’ve been letting this run but these above statements are the limit!
If there are any more unsubstantiated lies put about by those wishing to sell there cables and much more utter foolish nonsense spouted about the MScaler or Blu2 being susceptible to RF. We are shutting down this thread.
We spent over fifteen thousand pounds on equipment and a damn sight more on RF suseptability and emissions testing on these two products to have them lied about and denigrated by those with their own particular agendas. Please cease this forth with!

Hi John,

Since you quoted me, I'm obliged to response.
Why are you associating me with "wishing to sell there cables" in the 2nd line?

1st of all, you mean "wishing to sell their cables", right?

2nd I have no skin in selling any cable but you have skin in selling the HMS and any Chord products. You joined here after the success of HUGO and I joined much earlier. Your wordings are very misleading because you quoted me and your suggestion that I wish to sell cables is totally incorrect because I was, am and will not selling any audio related cables.

My another question: why are you associating me with utter foolish nonsense, again in the 2nd line.

3rd Regarding whether HMS is susceptible to RF, I did not say it is. Please read my post again.

4th Is this a sponsored thread? If so, I truly did not realize. I googled HMS and got this thread in the summit-fi section rather than in the rsponsors thread forum. You may do whatever you want if this thread is sponsored by you and I have no objection at all because this is according to rules of the forum.

5th I did say that the Blu2-DAVE is susceptible to RF after reading lots of post in the DAVE thread. If I have misinterpreted those posts as a whole, I stand corrected. Please me where you get this conclusion. To me HMS incorporates ferrites supports my interpretation rather than against it. Again, I stand corrected but not a blanket statement.

6th I think one of the major problems is many people are waiting for their HMS, and I'm one of them. Given more people have heard of it, more honest people will stand up and fight for or against the HMS. I have fight for DAVE quite a few times because I have one. Nevermind my gears listed here--I just don't bother to update them and they are totally outdated.

Lastly, I repeat again "I would rather like to read more real impressions/experiences here."

 

[Crgreen]

I think Joshua Tree fans should at least console themselves with this as a consolation prize:
http://www.elusivedisc.com/U2-The-Joshua-Tree-Super-Deluxe-4CD-Box-Set/productinfo/ISLCD48257/

I think there are a couple of U2 albums in hi-res but most of their albums have not been released in that format. I suspect that some of their albums could only be provided as 44.1/24 in any event, but their older albums, recorded in analogue, could be made available. I’m not sure why U2 and their management have not yet done this, but they appear to be the exception rather than the rule.

 

[GreenLeo]

In practice, I wonder how big a problem that’s likely to be. Predictions are difficult, but I think it unlikely that we’ll see much music > 192. The majority of hi-res files are at 96 which many engineers seem to think is as high as you need to go. For the relatively few DSD albums, you can always use DoP, and the MScaler converts DSD to PCM in any event.

Hi CG,

I have only 1 album in 352 so no problem for me. I state the 192 limitation because there may be new comers who may not know the technical details. Also it seems that it is cheaper and cheaper to buy such files.

 

[marcmccalmont]

Here are my bloody two cents worth!
We’ve been letting this run but these above statements are the limit!
If there are any more unsubstantiated lies put about by those wishing to sell there cables and much more utter foolish nonsense spouted about the MScaler or Blu2 being susceptible to RF. We are shutting down this thread.
We spent over fifteen thousand pounds on equipment and a damn sight more on RF suseptability and emissions testing on these two products to have them lied about and denigrated by those with their own particular agendas. Please cease this forth with!

A quote from your manual:
With a thick, solid aluminium chassis,
the Hugo M Scaler’s casework largely
protects the sensitive internal circuitry
from radio frequency interference.
However, for optimal performance, it is
recommended that the following points
are observed:
1. Consider placing the
Hugo M Scaler away from
wireless routers.
2. Separate the Hugo M Scaler
from amplifiers using
toroidal transformers.
3. Operate mobile phones
at a distance to avoid
interference.
Although the Hugo M Scaler
is largely shielded, it can
generate radio frequency
interference that may have an eff ect
on radio and television reception. If
this occurs, please reconsider your
placement

No one is denigrating your products as a matter of fact we are all of the opinion they are the best DAC's in the world. That's high praise not denigration. I'm looking forward to a refined Dave II with a single box, single FPGA Mscaler DAC. I believe the 2 box solution was a marketing decision not a technical one (maybe there is not a powerful enough FPGA yet I don't know). Perhaps your next generations of DAC's will include a 1m tap Watts Transient Filter. Best Marc

 

[marcmccalmont]

I'm glad too. As far as I know, Blu2 has no optical input.

According to some members that shared in other forums, the quality of the optical input and the USB input of the HMS are at least equally good. Unfortunately not much impressions could be found there. The limitation of optical input is only up to 192. So if you've lots of HD music with higher samplingsampling rate, optical is a no go.

The lack of tos optical input is one reason I sold my Blu2 in anticipation of a more versatile Mscaler