[Rob Watts]

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!

Yes it does - and Qutest, Hugo 2, TT2 and Dave all share the same process. The M scaler is the first stage of converting a sampled digital signal back into the continuous analogue signal before sampling; and it does this in a twofold process. First another WTA filter (WTA2) that takes you from 768k (16FS) to 12.288 MHz (256FS); then a third order filter that takes you to 104 MHz. Thus the DAC noise shaper, which also runs at 104 MHz, is fed with a digital signal that is very close to the continuous analogue signal that was in the ADC.

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.

Yes; the intent is that we are converting the redbook recording to as if it was a 705.6 kHz recording; indeed from an interpolation it will be accurate to better than 16 bits.

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

Obviously not identical, but identical to 16.6 bits to an ideal sinc filter. Of course, that leaves open the question of whether 16 bits is good enough, and how much more we get from longer tap lengths; but for sure there must be a point of diminishing returns. But the DX amps will offer a big step forward in transparency, judging from my listening tests so far; being able to effectively remove the sound of a pre-amp and power amp is no small change in transparency.

 

[Arniesb]

Hello, sir Rob
i was always wondering that it is lot of going with m scaler, like adding more taps and then upscaling it.
Does this process will create some slight delay listening something live? Or this all conversion is instant? Thanks.

 

[Rob Watts]

Yes it creates a lot of delay as its using 1.42 S of music (44.1) to do the interpolation, giving a 0.71 S of delay. The delay for 48k (video) is 0.65 seconds, hence the need for low latency (low delay) filter option.

 

[Arniesb]

Yes it creates a lot of delay as its using 1.42 S of music (44.1) to do the interpolation, giving a 0.71 S of delay. The delay for 48k (video) is 0.65 seconds, hence the need for low latency (low delay) filter option.

i see thank you. Congrats on such astonishing product sir!!!
Next time i upgrade dac it will be chords and maybe adding mscaler later.

 

[Staxton]

Yes it does - and Qutest, Hugo 2, TT2 and Dave all share the same process. The M scaler is the first stage of converting a sampled digital signal back into the continuous analogue signal before sampling; and it does this in a twofold process. First another WTA filter (WTA2) that takes you from 768k (16FS) to 12.288 MHz (256FS); then a third order filter that takes you to 104 MHz. Thus the DAC noise shaper, which also runs at 104 MHz, is fed with a digital signal that is very close to the continuous analogue signal that was in the ADC.



Yes; the intent is that we are converting the redbook recording to as if it was a 705.6 kHz recording; indeed from an interpolation it will be accurate to better than 16 bits.

Thanks very much, Rob!

 

[OG10]

Thanks for answering all my questions Rob

I think the best thing for me to do would be to hear it in person. My local AD here in Manchester stocks your items so will give it a good whirl.
The different from the Chord Mojo to the Qutest was substantial and immediate, I am hoping for a similar revelation with the M Scaler.

All the best with this product.

 

[seeteeyou]

Hi @Rob Watts , could we connect Hugo M Scaler directly to DX amps with a pair of BNC cables in the future without adding any DACs between them?

Besides, what does each BNC connection carry?

• Mono 768kHz

• Stereo 384kHz

 

[rgs9200m]

What does the M-scaler do with a dsd-encoded file?
Does the DSD mode of DAVE have any relevance or utility with the M-scaler in use?
Thank you.

 

[Alcophone]

It should be possible to surpass the M-Scaler's performance in software on a computer, as long as it doesn't have to be in realtime. Just write the computed bitstream to disk and play it back from there later in realtime as needed.
Imagine a streaming service doing that for its catalog in the cloud, then streaming 705.6 kHz / 768 kHz audio to a device with dual BNC out. Let's call this service Chordal

Would a NOS DAC benefit from the M-Scaler so long as it has a compatible dual BNC input and supports those sample rates?

 

[Hifi Boy]

@Rob Watts

Will this new DX amplifier be for speakers only, or will it have a headphone output too?

 

[musickid]

I'd imagine speakers only with hundreds of watts output rating.

 

[greenmountain]

Not only standard digital filters but also loudspeakers mostly have time domain issues. I am quite interested in using DSP for digital cross-overs (using it with my Devialet amp) and speaker correction (not so much for room correction). So would it be possible to use the M Scaler technology with these DSP functions or would it be too far from presently reasonable achievable computational requirements.

 

[musickid]

Would it be okay aesthetically to pair a silver h2 with a black mscaler. I want to order my h2 today and i like the silver but with the scaler i like black. I keep telling myself they should match and have reached a mental block. It might be to do with the fact i had a faulty h2 black last year.


more pics :https://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1133600.html

click on the pic for more pics.

 

[STR-1]

Would it be okay aesthetically to pair a silver h2 with a black mscaler. I want to order my h2 today and i like the silver but with the scaler i like black. I keep telling myself they should match and have reached a mental block. It might be to do with the fact i had a faulty h2 black last year.


more pics :https://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1133600.html

click on the pic for more pics.

If they are going to be stacked I think most would go for the same colour. But as I am learning how to paint I have come to value colour contrast more than I did previously - and then you’ve got all those button-ball colours to throw into the mix. I’ve still gone for all silver with my order.

 

[miketlse]

Would it be okay aesthetically to pair a silver h2 with a black mscaler. I want to order my h2 today and i like the silver but with the scaler i like black. I keep telling myself they should match and have reached a mental block. It might be to do with the fact i had a faulty h2 black last year.


more pics :https://av.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/1133600.html

click on the pic for more pics.

Aesthetics is a personal decision, which only you can make.
Any advice given in good faith by other posters, will be biased by their view of aesthetics, which may differ from yours.