[musickid]

Thanks Rob i wonder if the mscaler has real world uses outside of digital audio. Perhaps military or physics research etc.

 

[miketlse]

Many thanks Rob fascinating read. I did a little background reading regarding timbre too. In theory then does the mscaler perform equally to an infinite tap length filter if this could be modelled ? I ask because i assume 1M taps is perfectly reconstructing the original analogue waveform to at least 99.99% accuracy so any increase over 1m taps would have negligible effect or none at all. Thanks MK.

You need to listen to the version of the presentation, with the audio track as well.
Rob says that he will try 2M to test if any further improvement is audible, and even up to 16M (but that would take a large amount of coding, which he would rather avoid if possible).

 

[ZappaMan]

Thanks Rob i wonder if the mscaler has real world uses outside of digital audio. Perhaps military or physics research etc.

Hopefully rob would only license it’s use to make the world a better place.

 

[Whazzzup]

This is a silly question, but how does one know if what they are sending the M Scaler is bit perfect? For example, is Spotify premium bit perfect? Is 320kbps MP3 bit perfect? Is lossless FLAC bit perfect? Or does it depend on the file, rather than the file type?

It’s the software like roon that sends bit perfect data. Course the hardware that that software is in, like a server, also improves sq.

 

[miketlse]

Thanks Rob i wonder if the mscaler has real world uses outside of digital audio. Perhaps military or physics research etc.

The principle of upsampling must already be used in applications such as Hawkeye, used for tennis and cricket matches.
With audio, you have the initial sampling rate (and a number x that corresponds to the music 'voltage' at those sample points), then you upsample, to try and accurately predict the value of x for intermediate points.
With hawkeye, cameras give the input values for the 3D geometry (x, y and z) of the ball at several sampling intervals, then presumably upsampling is used to predict the values of x, y and z at intermediate times (that correspond to screen refresh rates for TVs), thereby enabling a continuous reconstructed view of the balls trajectory, to be shown on TV.

 

[musickid]

Voice recognition systems might benefit somehow. Off topic.

 

[RJson]

This is a silly question, but how does one know if what they are sending the M Scaler is bit perfect? For example, is Spotify premium bit perfect? Is 320kbps MP3 bit perfect? Is lossless FLAC bit perfect? Or does it depend on the file, rather than the file type?

+1

I was thinking the same thing.

What would be some examples of sources you could connect to the m-scaler that are guarenteed to be bit perfect?

A full definitive list of all possible sources would be very useful for this thread.

 

[dontfeedphils]

+1

I was thinking the same thing.

What would be some examples of sources you could connect to the m-scaler that are guarenteed to be bit perfect?

A full definitive list of all possible sources would be very useful for this thread.

Bit-perfect just means that you're using ASIO, KS, WASAPI or some other means of direct communication to the DAC, ensuring you're bypassing the source hardware's internal mixer/resampler. Anything from a Windows PC running FB2K in WASAPI to a smartphone running UAPP can output bit-perfect. Assuming the settings are correct.

 

[Rob Watts]

Rob, is there anything fundamentally different about how mscaler receives and processes it’s usb I put (apart from galvanic isolation) compared to the blu2?

If users perceived good synergy between a server/usb reclocker and blu2, is it very likely, that that same synergy will be with the mscaler?

No difference at all. And I didn't get the problems I had with Hugo M scaler with the Blu 2. As to your last question - it's whether the galvanic isolation helps or not - but the Blu 2 never did need USB isolation as the noise we are trying to isolate is from the FPGA, the source should be very small in comparison.

 

[Staxton]

Rob,

Thanks very much for your detailed explanation as to why and how the M Scaler is superior to PC upsampling. You have certainly convinced me!

Just one more question, and forgive me if it has already been answered or if I am misunderstanding the way your DACS work.

Presumably (and I'm sure I'm oversimplifying), your other DACs (the Hugo2, HugoTT2, the DAVE, and the Qutest) use a similar method to process audio, but with lesser FPGA processing power and far fewer taps. My question is, after the audio signal goes through the M Scaler and it does its magic, and the signal then goes to the connected Chord DAC, does the Chord DAC attempt to upsample or otherwise process that signal using its lesser power and taps, or is that somehow bypassed?

Thanks very much!

 

[Mediahound]

after the audio signal goes through the M Scaler and it does its magic, and the signal then goes to the connected Chord DAC, does the Chord DAC attempt to upsample or otherwise process that signal using its lesser power and taps, or is that somehow bypassed?

I believe after the M Scaler, it's like new source data going in to your DAC so you still benefit from the all the taps, etc. the DAC itself provides.

Maybe a bit like the difference between playing a poorly mastered album and then the same album remastered amazingly.

 

[rgs9200m]

Jriver has an icon that turns blue if you are sending bit perfect. (I don't know about Spotify.)

 

[Staxton]

I believe after the M Scaler, it's like new source data going in to your DAC so you still benefit from the all the taps, etc. the DAC itself provides.

Maybe a bit like the difference between playing a poorly mastered album and then the same album remastered amazingly.

So if I understand what you're saying, a 16bit 44khz source file sent to the M Scaler gets upsampled to 705khz and the Hugo2 treats it the same as if a 705khz source file was sent directly to the Hugo2. And any taps, etc. the Hugo2 applies is cumulative to what the M Scaler has done.

 

[SuperBurrito]

Rob,

Since the WTA filter is now identical to the sinc function filter, how much room is there for future improvements to CD sound quality? Have we approached a maximum, and so future sound quality improvements will have to come from other areas, e.g. the DX amplifiers?

Thanks

 

[GreenBow]

I am seriously excited to read the reviews for the M-Scaler.

Congratulations of 35 year mission-impossible.

(The picture of the TT 2, M-Scaler, and Ttoby, is bliss.)