[iDesign]

Question - if you have the M Scaler and own the 16/44.1 album from the CD, is that going to be better with the M Scaler than the same album streamed FLAC, but higher resolution like 96kHz? Or will the 44.1 be better?

In theory it should yield better results. However, there are a myriad of issues, grey areas, and variables such as the provenance of the streaming file, number of errors in the CD copy, how the file is modified by the streaming service with headers etc etc. In my experience a CD played via the Blu Mk II generally provides better sound quality than the same album in Qobuz or TIDAL while using Roon or Audirvana+. I have some serious suspicions about some streaming music files, and thus, the CD is the single source of truth.

 

[Mediahound]

In theory it should yield better results. However, there are a myriad of issues, grey areas, and variables such as the provenance of the streaming file, number of errors in the CD copy, how the file is modified by the streaming service with headers etc etc. In my experience a CD played via the Blu Mk II generally provides better sound quality than the same album in Qobuz or TIDAL while using Roon or Audirvana+. I have some serious suspicions about some streaming music files, and thus, the CD is the single source of truth.

Thanks. Probably b/c streamed files are compressed FLAC versus CD files are uncompressed. Both are supposed to be lossless but I've noticed uncompressed sounds better, which is why when I rip my CDs I do so in AIFF versus Apple Lossless (ALAC).

 

[Triode User]

Thanks. Probably b/c streamed files are compressed FLAC versus CD files are uncompressed. Both are supposed to be lossless but I've noticed uncompressed sounds better, which is why when I rip my CDs I do so in AIFF versus Apple Lossless (ALAC).

The alternative theory about why the Blu2 CD sounds better is that the internal Blu2 CD player is a particularly low RF noise source . . . . .

 

[ray-dude]

The alternative theory about why the Blu2 CD sounds better is that the internal Blu2 CD player is a particularly low RF noise source . . . . .

To add to this, in my big Blu2 study, I did try wav files ripped from a CD vs lossless version of same file vs CD direct. The former two were the same, and the CD direct was the gold reference.

That gap reduced as I added ferrites to the USB cable, but I never got all the way to the gold reference of CD direct.

I no longer have my Blu2 (I have a HMS now), but my recent experiments with large buffer streaming end points point to a huge SQ lift via USB. I would be very curious to repeat my experiments from a year and half ago, but use a large buffer end point to compare with CD direct. I suspect the gap would be materially reduced.

Also on my list is to compare large buffers+USB vs optical, on the theory that an optical CD transport connected to HMS should be identical to Blu (operative word is "should"...I have not done this experiment yet) The optical input on the HMS is a wonderful feature and experimental lever, so I hope to get to this soon.

For me, all this is hinting at a combination of RF factors (as Nick suggests), and some other (perhaps) timing or IRQ related factors on the end point.

My working hypothesis right now is to eliminate and isolate as much RF and electrical noise as possible (benefits are very clear here), and (more speculatively) isolate and optimize and get as close to real time (more precisely, zero variability latency) the digital input to HMS.

Every tweak I'm making that falls into these areas is rewarding me with a noticeable SQ lift.

Lots to explore and learn.

 

[Amberlamps]

To add to this, in my big Blu2 study, I did try wav files ripped from a CD vs lossless version of same file vs CD direct. The former two were the same, and the CD direct was the gold reference.

That gap reduced as I added ferrites to the USB cable, but I never got all the way to the gold reference of CD direct.

I no longer have my Blu2 (I have a HMS now), but my recent experiments with large buffer streaming end points point to a huge SQ lift via USB. I would be very curious to repeat my experiments from a year and half ago, but use a large buffer end point to compare with CD direct. I suspect the gap would be materially reduced.

Also on my list is to compare large buffers+USB vs optical, on the theory that an optical CD transport connected to HMS should be identical to Blu (operative word is "should"...I have not done this experiment yet) The optical input on the HMS is a wonderful feature and experimental lever, so I hope to get to this soon.

For me, all this is hinting at a combination of RF factors (as Nick suggests), and some other (perhaps) timing or IRQ related factors on the end point.

My working hypothesis right now is to eliminate and isolate as much RF and electrical noise as possible (benefits are very clear here), and (more speculatively) isolate and optimize and get as close to real time (more precisely, zero variability latency) the digital input to HMS.

Every tweak I'm making that falls into these areas is rewarding me with a noticeable SQ lift.

Lots to explore and learn.

For your testing regarding buffering, not sure if you have Jriver but there is a setting where you can load all tracks decoded into memory before playback.

I think that would be a good test against CD.

Whilst I’m posting here, why is there barely any external reviews for the MScaler and TT2, I can find like 2.

What hifi liked it, anyone seen any others for mscaler and tt2 ?

 

[ray-dude]

For your testing regarding buffering, not sure if you have Jriver but there is a setting where you can load all tracks decoded into memory before playback.

I think that would be a good test against CD.

Yup, that's exactly the kind of thinking (and experimenting) I'm going through. I'm using a NUC (highly integrated SoC design, quad core), with AudioLinux and the entire file system running in RAM. It is configured to give real-time priority to the audio playback software and teh interrupts to the USB interface. Everything else is stripped away or disabled.

This by itself has a huge impact on SQ

The wild thing is that increasing the buffers to the ALSA driver (linux sound driver) with everything else staying exactly the same has a huge lift in SQ. Increasing the buffers to the end point software (so everything preloads from Roon Server, and ethernet is only active for ~1 second for each song) has a lift in SQ.

There is huge leverage in attacking the RF and EMI side of your digital chain, so hygiene pays big dividends. This other stuff is HIGHLY speculative right now, and may be a dead end, but exciting about how much we don't yet know, and how much SQ there is hidden in all those wonderful music recordings.

 

[iDesign]

To add to this, in my big Blu2 study, I did try wav files ripped from a CD vs lossless version of same file vs CD direct. The former two were the same, and the CD direct was the gold reference.

That gap reduced as I added ferrites to the USB cable, but I never got all the way to the gold reference of CD direct.

I no longer have my Blu2 (I have a HMS now), but my recent experiments with large buffer streaming end points point to a huge SQ lift via USB. I would be very curious to repeat my experiments from a year and half ago, but use a large buffer end point to compare with CD direct. I suspect the gap would be materially reduced.

Also on my list is to compare large buffers+USB vs optical, on the theory that an optical CD transport connected to HMS should be identical to Blu (operative word is "should"...I have not done this experiment yet) The optical input on the HMS is a wonderful feature and experimental lever, so I hope to get to this soon.

For me, all this is hinting at a combination of RF factors (as Nick suggests), and some other (perhaps) timing or IRQ related factors on the end point.

My working hypothesis right now is to eliminate and isolate as much RF and electrical noise as possible (benefits are very clear here), and (more speculatively) isolate and optimize and get as close to real time (more precisely, zero variability latency) the digital input to HMS.

Every tweak I'm making that falls into these areas is rewarding me with a noticeable SQ lift.

Lots to explore and learn.

I’m looking forward to your posts on the subject. The process streaming services like TIDAL, Qobuz, Spotify etc. use for labels and artists to submit albums and how they modify them leaves a lot of grey space in the quality of some of those albums and no amount of audiophile eqipment can resolve them. I very much like lossless streaming music for its convenience but starting with the CD is always best— you’re on an interesting path of testing/exploring with Hugo M Scaler’s optical inputs to see if you can parallel the gold standard.

 

[iDesign]

Whilst I’m posting here, why is there barely any external reviews for the MScaler and TT2, I can find like 2.

What hifi liked it, anyone seen any others for mscaler and tt2 ?

I believe Jay at Audio Bacon is going to post a review of the Hugo M Scaler soon and I hope he compares it to the Blu Mk II. He already posted unboxing videos of the Hugo TT2 and Hugo M Scaler.

 

[211276]

I have the M scaler on loan from my dealer and initial impressions are favourable. I would like to find out how it sounds with video, but am not able to connect the phono plugs which were previously connected to my pre amp. Is there an adaptor I could use? A link would be helpful. Thanks

 

[Amberlamps]

Yup, that's exactly the kind of thinking (and experimenting) I'm going through. I'm using a NUC (highly integrated SoC design, quad core), with AudioLinux and the entire file system running in RAM. It is configured to give real-time priority to the audio playback software and teh interrupts to the USB interface. Everything else is stripped away or disabled.

This by itself has a huge impact on SQ

The wild thing is that increasing the buffers to the ALSA driver (linux sound driver) with everything else staying exactly the same has a huge lift in SQ. Increasing the buffers to the end point software (so everything preloads from Roon Server, and ethernet is only active for ~1 second for each song) has a lift in SQ.

There is huge leverage in attacking the RF and EMI side of your digital chain, so hygiene pays big dividends. This other stuff is HIGHLY speculative right now, and may be a dead end, but exciting about how much we don't yet know, and how much SQ there is hidden in all those wonderful music recordings.

Keep us updated on how it goes, as I’m looking for a server and I don’t want to spend thousands on something that should only be a couple of hundred quid at most.

If possible, intergrate a rechargable battery into it ?

 

[Amberlamps]

I believe Jay at Audio Bacon is going to post a review of the Hugo M Scaler soon and I hope he compares it to the Blu Mk II. He already posted unboxing videos of the Hugo TT2 and Blu Mk II.

It would be worth while to see what he makes of blu II and mscaler.

Something that I’ve never bothered about, does blue II only upscale cd’s or can it be setup to also upscale files from computers ?

I have the M scaler on loan from my dealer and initial impressions are favourable. I would like to find out how it sounds with video, but am not able to connect the phono plugs which were previously connected to my pre amp. Is there an adaptor I could use? A link would be helpful. Thanks

Can you not use an optical cable coming from your tv and plugging it in to the optical port on the mscaler ?

 

[iDesign]

Something that I’ve never bothered about, does blue II only upscale cd’s or can it be setup to also upscale files from computers?

Yes, the Blu Mk II also has a USB input and uses an identical filter and audio path as the Hugo M Scaler. It can upscale both a CD natively and a USB signal.

 

[Amberlamps]

Yes, the Blu Mk II also has a USB input and uses an identical filter and audio path as the Hugo M Scaler. It can upscale both a CD natively and a USB signal.

So it looks like Blu II is the better of the two since it has both cd upscaling and also usb inputs

I wonder if a standalone cd player hooked up to the mscaler would be able to compete with blu II’s cd upsampling.

Somebody need’s to be testing this, who owns both mscaler and blu ii ?

 

[Triode User]

So it looks like Blu II is the better of the two since it has both cd upscaling and also usb inputs

I wonder if a standalone cd player hooked up to the mscaler would be able to compete with blu II’s cd upsampling.

Somebody need’s to be testing this, who owns both mscaler and blu ii ?

Ahem, please Sir, I do.

However the test is not as simple as it might seem because Blu2 and Mscaler are different in that the Mscaler has more built in RF filtering / isolation than the Blu2. And filtering the RF on the Blu2 then to my ears makes it sound superior to the HMS. However when both Blu2 and HMS use the dual BNC cables that I make then to my ears they both sound identical. So I will use that set up and report back comparing cd into both.

 

[dmance]

@ray-dude

I know you are exploring ideas 'out-loud' on this forum - and your efforts and thorough analysis will ultimately provide us with an answer and a great learning.

For me, the great revelation came in 2016. I was dumbstruck by the following observations in my system:

• CD playback from a transport sounded better than same CD ripped playing through a laptop
• WAV rips sounding better than compressed lossless rips
• Playback from RAM buffers sounding better
• A different server OS or reduced footprint or more ram sounding better
• A lossless streamed version sounding worse than CD rips of the exact same original file
• etc, etc

When the sound changed I could have inferred the improbable "the bits must be changing" but I took the hint that something else must be going on. I then owned a PSAudio Directstream DAC and downloaded their bitperfect test files. These are basically legal music files with a defined pseudo-random pattern that the DirectStream DAC recognizes deep in its internals and reports "Check - BITPERFECT" on its front panel. This validation means that just before the DAC converts the digital bits to analog volts, the bits as received by the DAC are exactly as those sitting on the source media.

I repeated the full complement of tests described above using the bitperfect test files. My results:

• CD playback on a transport or same CD ripped playing through a laptop. Both playbacks reported [Check - BITPERFECT]
• WAV rips or compressed lossless rips. Both versions reported [Check - BITPERFECT]
• Playback from RAM buffers. Both ways [Check - BITPERFECT]
• A different server OS or reduced footprint or more ram. All changes, same result [Check - BITPERFECT]

An honest analysis spells out the jaw-dropping obvious - it sure did for me. The bits are the same but the sound is different. So a path to pursuing the best sound quality from your digital system lies in the understanding that analog perturbations during the final D/A conversion is all that matters. Making mechanical modifications to your digital chain is like whack-a-mole: the analog perturbations remain and you will never get to hear what your system is capable of.

Dan