1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

Hugo M Scaler by Chord Electronics - The Official Thread

Discussion in 'High-end Audio Forum' started by ChordElectronics, Jul 25, 2018.
First
 
Back
386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395
397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406
Next
 
Last
  1. jscmd2000
    20k USD?
    Got me all excited just thinking about it...
    Maybe a used Nagra HD DAC if you can find one, but that's just me. :ksc75smile:
     
  2. audio_1
    They inadvertently get a worse DAC!
     
    maxh22, Triode User and jscmd2000 like this.
  3. austinpop
    Cry into their beers?
     
    Triode User likes this.
  4. Whazzzup
    I can't part with my TT, ***
     
    Amberlamps likes this.
  5. ZappaMan
    a nice album, her voice sounds great, not sure if its the mscaler magic, but its lovely, the first song isn't the best, maybe more of a crowd pleasure back in the day.

    RoonShareImage-636875114550700565.png

    https://open.qobuz.com/album/0081227634162
     
  6. E976
    Long time lurker chiming in with my two cents.

    I have had the TT2 for a few months running it from a PC to a Cavalli Liquid Gold and 800S using all balanced connections. I really enjoy the TT2 but decided to add the M-Scaler based on comments from this thread and elsewhere.

    Describing the difference is frustrating. Not in a bad way, but because it is really hard describing the definite improvement I am hearing using high resolution (PCM and DSD) files upsampled through the MS. “Holographic” is the best I can come up with right now.

    I recently moved so my speaker system is not even set up but I am looking forward to dropping this combo into my main system to see what it does with a non-headphone set up.
     
  7. jarnopp
    Maybe look at mScaler + Chord TT2 instead, since you have the Abyss and they would benefit from TT2’s 18w (into 8 ohms) output and you could sell your amps! It really does wonders for the HE-6, which is even less sensitive
     
  8. matthewhypolite
    I won't be selling my WE33 EE + NOS Tubes.

    Just looking for the best source components at my price range I can get to add to my tube setup.
     
  9. Deftone
    If you really want to keep the tubes then id go for the DAVE + mScaler otherwise @jarnopp suggestion for TT2 + mScaler is good choice, TT2 is very powerful, you wouldn't have to worry about under powering headphones ever again as long as manufacturers stay sensible with the sensitivity of course lol.
     
  10. Christer
    According to what I have just read about the RAAL Ribbon SRA1 or whatever it is called, not even TT2 is anywhere near enough to drive it.
    A recent review on that thread suggested amplification of at least 100 watts per channel to drive that headphone to its full potential.
    I would personally be well on the safe side with my main speaker system amp back home and would even have 800 watts more to add if ever needed.
    But with my electrostatic speakers I know from measurements that some of my large scale symphonic masterfiles peak at around 250 -300 watts per channel at big climaxes.
    That is what it takes to play non compressed hi res masterfiles of large scale symphonic music in my system at reasonably realistic levels without congestion.

    DAVE on its own definitely needs a high quality and powerful separate headphone amp with lots of my music and HEKV2, and even more so with Susvara.
    Maybe that is one reason some are selling off their DAVEs?
    It is one of several resons I have not bought a DAVE although I am fully aware of its other potentials.
    Price of course being another big reason.
    Next time I audition TT2 I will make sure I use HEKV2 and Susvara on high gain setting. I am not sure that was the case last time around.
    Maybe my initial impressions of TT2 need to be reassessed?
    Cheers Controversial Christer
     
  11. matthewhypolite
    Which dac are you using now?
     
  12. x RELIC x Contributor
    The RAAL SR1a is <0.02 Ohms?! Lower than the cable impedance!! Good grief that's low impedance!!! I guess there's always going to be an outlier that comes along.

    Edit: I see the RAAL rep pointing out that to get to 111dB the RAAL needs 450mW with 5A RMS. I do wonder if the TT2 with the 6A RMS might do it. Remember, he's speaking about typical implementations and is using powerful speaker amps as a very safe way to guarantee 5A RMS. I'd be curious to know the results if someone tried it with the TT2. Here is the info:

     
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2019
  13. Christer
    That sounds interesting . And I am just as curious as you are about the result.

    My tech knowledge is very limited and maybe I misinterpreted the specs needed to drive the RAAL?
    I'd love to try it with a TT2 and my most demanding symphonic tracks.
    If what I have read about the RAAL holds true at actual auditions it could be one of the most transparent headphones ever built, Maybe even putting the very best electrostatic headphones in its shade as I interpret its strengths from those who have tried the RAAL.

    And if it can be driven by a TT2 directly to its full potential it could be a SOTA territory headphone combo.

    What if Sennheiser's most expensive SUPER LUXURY TOY which can only be auditioned by special invitation with a three months waiting list last time I inquired, at the only place I know about which keeps one ,might be beaten by a TT2 /RAAL combo?



    I'll have to find out where I can audition that combo.
    Maybe Canjam Singapore later this month will be a good starting point?
    Anybody here who knows who sells and demoes both the RAAL and the TT2 in KL or Singapore?
    I would of course add my M Scaler too.
    Good as it is on its own,TT2 definitely needs an M Scaler to truly shine, IMO.
    Cheers Controversial Christer
     
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2019
  14. x RELIC x Contributor
    Reading further I'm not sure it would be a good idea to plug a 0.018 Ohm load directly in to the TT2. That would tend to fry amps, and the Amp Interface box (resistor) that is recommended to get to 6 Ohms would help to alleviate this but it does look like they need insane power for a headphone. Anyway, this is going off topic in the M scaler thread.
     
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2019
  15. TheAttorney
    I've had my HMS for a couple of months now (connected to DAVE) and will post some impressions in due course, but first a couple of questions/comments on practicalities:

    1. In dual-BNC mode (DAVE's input set to BNC3), when I switch between 44k > 88k > 196k > 352k > 705k, the 352k setting results in mono for about 3 seconds and then switches automatically to 705k. And if I switch to DAVE BNC4 input, then I permanently get 352k in mono, which means that I can't compare the 0.5M tap option in practice. So far, this is as expected based on previous posts.

    But even when I have just a single cable connected (either BNC 1 to BNC3, or BNC1 to BNC1) I can still only get 352k in mono. So under no circumstance can I ever hear 0.5M taps in stereo.
    This seems wrong. Any ideas anyone what's happening here? The 2nd BNC cable is full disconnected for this test.

    2. An observation: When I first connected up the HMS with stock BNC cables, I would occasionally get drop outs. Oh NOOOOOO! Which was a worrying repeat of what happened when I tried a BLU2 a couple of years back. No amount of swapping cables around, or wiggling them about, would get rid of this. One cable seemed more susceptible to wiggling effects, but both cables looked fine, with solid looking connectors..

    Then at one point when wiggling cables I accidently touched the top surface of the HMS and got what felt like a very tiny static discharge. And from then on, I have never had any drop-out issue with those (or any other) BNC cables. Coincidence? Maybe, but whatever, this just reinforces my suspicion that DAVE (or at least my DAVE) is very sensitive to such things when in the most demanding dual-BNC situation.
     
First
 
Back
386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395
397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406
Next
 
Last

Share This Page