[csglinux]

On your way

you might like to listen to the original music and 12 variants using different upsampling filters:

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/49630-16x-filter-test-results/

There was a comment in that link I didn't understand. Is the Blu2 not the same as the new M-scaler (aside from the CD tray)? Are they supposed to sound different? If so, why and how?

BTW, @castleofargh, I'm all for healthy skepticism. I know from a great deal of personal experience it can be tricky conveying that without offending I do think it would be useful to see published data with a statistically-meaningful study showing a general ability to hear the same claimed improvements in the sound. I was given some technical papers a while ago by Bob Stuart, which (in defense of MQA) talked about how people could hear the improvements from hi-res audio. One was a meta-analysis (from Queen Mary College : https://www.dropbox.com/s/fkh23eoyvxyd4ik/Hi-res-meta-analysis.pdf?dl=0) which looks from the acknowledgements as though it was at least partly funded by those who had a vested interested in proving the hypothesis - and even then, trained ears were only able to identify the hi-res tracks slightly over 50% of the time. Based on similar probabilities, I'm fairly sure I could put together a meta-analysis to show that a coin is more likely to land on heads.

That being said, I've spent quite a bit of time comparing a Dave to my Hugo 2, and it does seem to have a more precisely-focussed sound-stage image. (Hard to put a percentage on that experience.) I've not heard Blu2, but have heard others claim it's another step up. I'm not sure how valid the above listening tests would be for me though, coming out of my inferior DACs/amps(?).

 

[Arpiben]

On your way

you might like to listen to the original music and 12 variants using different upsampling filters:

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/49630-16x-filter-test-results/

as you might hear some differences. You might even be motivated to explain why you do or don't hear differences.

Now playing: Låpsley - Falling Short

For those really interested in reconstruction filters I do suggest the use of free simulation software such as python,sox, etc.

In other words, create your own filter, control the parameters, learn from your mistakes,sweat and make up your own opinion.

Whatever the quality of the 12 filters used in the C.A. link, there is no mention about passband / stopband ripple,transition width,attenuation value,phase etc...

Just for illustrating:

 

[Jawed]

There was a comment in that link I didn't understand. Is the Blu2 not the same as the new M-scaler (aside from the CD tray)? Are they supposed to sound different? If so, why and how?

Hugo M Scaler and Blu 2 will produce the same digital data stream, when they are both configured for the same upsampling and fed with the same source stream.

If there's a difference in sound quality between the two, that will be a side effect of RF noise getting into the DAC (e.g. DAVE). The RF noise causing the problem in the DAC may have originated within HMS or Blu 2 or it may be coming from some other equipment. Some RF noise may get into the DAC and cause an audible problem via the power connection, rather than via the digital data connection.

A commonly-cited technique to minimise the RF noise getting into a DAC is to play a CD in Blu 2. But that, on its own, will not eliminate RF noise getting into the DAC. HMS has enhanced RF filtering on its outputs, compared with Blu 2's outputs. This should give HMS an advantage in sound quality, when dropped into a system as a replacement for Blu 2. But obviously CD replay will be lost, unless Blu 2 is connected to HMS solely to provide HMS with CD playback, leaving upsampling to HMS instead of Blu 2.

@Triode User have you tried playing a CD in Blu 2 and feeding the raw stream (not upsampled) from Blu 2 into HMS?

 

[bhobba]

I do think it would be useful to see published data with a statistically-meaningful study showing a general ability to hear the same claimed improvements in the sound.

You and a zillion others.

Here is the issue. I have participated in, and helped organize, at least 3 blind studies of equipment with a number of listeners - probably more, just 3 I recall well. They all had the following issues.:

1. Manufacturers, and it is usually the small guys who are the most wary, are on a hiding to nothing supplying equipment to such. If they win - wow great - but if they loose, and statistically that is the more likely happening, their bottom line is well and truly impacted. Often it must be supplied by the people organizing it - the manufacturer/distributor will not cooperate. And even if they do, and loose, well lets say I have seen friendships nearly destroyed and I, personally, have had to spend hours acting as peacemaker because I know the two people concerned, being friends with them. One DAC, I well remember, I will not name, had a number of people, one I recall well, who would sprout its virtues all the time. Ok lets have it in a blind test. No way - I had to buy it. Sometimes I do just that if I am interested in the DAC but this was just so pricey no way. Yet it was sprouted about all the time. Others I did buy out of my own money and boy did the distributor savage me - they want to control such things, calling me a lair, saying I told things differently privately etc. Not nice at all.

2. They are very hard to organize. Even the littlest thing can go wrong. For example after many months work organizing a blind DAC shootout between a number of highly touted DAC's at the time, whose names I will not mention, but was won buy a DAC manufacturer up the road from where it was conducted, was ruined because one DAC was plugged into a socket with a lifted earth - some products perform best that way, others not. It all has to be checked and double checked, levels matched, all sorts of things done - I know because I was one of the bunnies that had to do it. Then one mistake - ruined. Huge egos are involved here - the looser will latch onto anything to invalidate it.

3. Gear needs time to settle - when you change gear over things need to settle a bit. You may think use a switch but believe it or not when dealing with really high end gear even switches can make a difference. So you pull out cables - but they need settling time and audio memory can play tricks. Even isolation platforms make a big difference. One maker complained his gear did not get the best isolation platform so was at a disadvantage,

I could go on. But here is the bottom line to those that want to do blind tests - organize one, do it, publish the results and put up with the inevitable blow-back before bemoaning you would like to see more. Only then will you appreciate why they are not common.

Thanks
Bill

 

[STR-1]

HMS has enhanced RF filtering on its outputs, compared with Blu 2's outputs. This should give HMS an advantage in sound quality, when dropped into a system as a replacement for Blu 2.

I admit to having no deep understanding of these things but I did expect the M Scaler to sound different compared to the Blu 2, and not just because of the internal RF filtering. My simple reasoning was that with so many things different - e.g external power supply (possibly different voltages), absence of CD transport and associated circuitry, more inputs and associated circuitry, smaller case with different patterns and intensities of RF/EMI bouncing around inside, possibly upgraded/next generation components, much lower internal temperature (possibly meaning less impact on inputs/outputs) - it must surely sound different, possibly better, possibly worse.

 

[Triode User]

@Triode User have you tried playing a CD in Blu 2 and feeding the raw stream (not upsampled) from Blu 2 into HMS?

I hadn't but because you asked I have done it this morning ie taking a CD on Blu2 outputted at 44.1 into HMS for MScaling compared with the same CD played and MScaled all on Blu2. On a pictures or it didn't happen basis early morning shots are attached for the two setups (luckily our nearest neighbours are almost 1/2 mile away).

My thoughts are that it is such a fine call between the two arrangements that either the sound is the same or maybe I thought a couple of times that the Blu2 by itself had slightly more depth of bass and bass resolution. It would take extended listening for me to be clearer on that. It really sounded very close or possibly / probably the same.

WAVE STREAM Premium 20 ferrite cables used for both to ensure a level playing field.

I admit to having no deep understanding of these things but I did expect the M Scaler to sound different compared to the Blu 2, and not just because of the internal RF filtering. My simple reasoning was that with so many things different - e.g external power supply (possibly different voltages), absence of CD transport and associated circuitry, more inputs and associated circuitry, smaller case with different patterns and intensities of RF/EMI bouncing around inside, possibly upgraded/next generation components - it must surely sound different, possibly better, possibly worse.

In a previous listening session with them side by side for comparison and using a Zenith SE as a source I found that a bare HMS sounds better (darker, less harsh, better defined bass, less fatiguing) than a bare Blu2. I take this to be because of the HMS's better dual bnc isolation and internal ferrites. I also found that a Blu2 with my WAVE dual BNC cables sounds better (same parameters as above) than a bare HMS and that to my ears the HMS and Blu2 sound identical when they both have my WAVE dual BNC cables.

 

[STR-1]

In a previous listening session with them side by side for comparison and using a Zenith SE as a source I found that a bare HMS sounds better (darker, less harsh, better defined bass, less fatiguing) than a bare Blu2. I take this to be because of the HMS's better dual bnc isolation and internal ferrites. I also found that a Blu2 with my WAVE dual BNC cables sounds better (same parameters as above) than a bare HMS and that to my ears the HMS and Blu2 sound identical when they both have my WAVE dual BNC cables.

Thanks. Yes, I saw that post. Unfortunately, I no longer have the Blu 2 to compare to.

On a separate point, what mains cables are you using in those photos?

 

[Triode User]

Belden 2.5mm screened. Off a reel and then I terminated.

 

[Peter Hyatt]

I work with a brilliant instructor and analyst. Professionally, he’s at the top of his game. He’s the most talented instructor I’ve ever met.

We meet w professionals from the US, Canada & W Europe once a month in criminal cases.

As deep as he is, he is like “a kid at Christmas” learning new things. He is remarkable for his ability to lift others.

He avoids technical language if he senses another not understanding. He doesn’t speak to impress.

I’m technologically ignorant. My mind grasps poetry more than engineering. (I work w engineer types trained in deception detection as the balance is needed.)

I often look up Rob’s posts to understand.

Yet when simplicity is needed. He employs it and does so patiently. No “talking down” or condescending for insult.

I’m grateful.

I love the you tube Chord videos. Like John, Rob believes his own words. He is “very low” in persuasive language; a marker of veracity. He has no “need to persuade.”

Because of the language, I trust Chord. They do this while needing to be profitable.

I’m grateful for the responses, education, guidance (what to listen for w different filters) and for the musical journey Chord has taken me on.

I’ll save my pennies for the M Scaler. Yet, if 2Go comes out in time for Christmas...?

Rob, thank you for the lessons & most of all for drive of innovation that pushes.

W headphones & Hugo 2, it’s an emotional experience.

I get it.


PS

UE Long, I could have predicted that you’d respond. You also get that some of us who struggle technically are worthy of a response. I’m grateful to you.

 

[STR-1]

Belden 2.5mm screened. Off a reel and then I terminated.

Thanks. I was wondering because they look like my 20-year old Music Works cables that I bought for my then Naim system. They also are screened, as I learned from a Music Works rep at the Festival of Sound show at the weekend. My cables do nothing for my current system, which is why I am focusing for the moment on adding to the one good cable I have, a Shunyata Alpha HC.

 

[DaveRedRef-III]

Rob
My ‘buying impulse’ is beginning to win a battle with my restraint whilst waiting for new Chord products. I am starting to look at speakers again. Help!

Any chance of some SotA amps that extend the digital chain beyond Dave or a Davina by spring?

 

[Alifatemi]

Hi Rob, regarding Qutest, what filter do you like most?

 

[Rob Watts]

Green... The red and orange options I put in because I could, so that people could hear the changes wrought by the WTA 2 filter (16FS > 256FS) against the 3 stage IIR filters. I have been surprised by the reaction - some like me, hear big changes in terms of the starting and stopping of notes; some can't perceive it at all.

And green because it's really useful for HD recordings, as the energy above 30 kHz is just distortion and noise from the ADC's and needs removing, as this noise adds to noise floor modulation.

Rob
My ‘buying impulse’ is beginning to win a battle with my restraint whilst waiting for new Chord products. I am starting to look at speakers again. Help!

Any chance of some SotA amps that extend the digital chain beyond Dave or a Davina by spring?

No I am afraid not. I need the proof of concept prototype finished first before I can start design work. But the good news is that my long awaited next prototype turned up yesterday... Testing starts next week.

 

[DaveRedRef-III]

Hope it goes well Rob. Your designs give joy. Unfortunately that makes us greedy for more.

 

[Mediahound]

Green... The red and orange options I put in because I could, so that people could hear the changes wrought by the WTA 2 filter (16FS > 256FS) against the 3 stage IIR filters. I have been surprised by the reaction - some like me, hear big changes in terms of the starting and stopping of notes; some can't perceive it at all.

And green because it's really useful for HD recordings, as the energy above 30 kHz is just distortion and noise from the ADC's and needs removing, as this noise adds to noise floor modulation.

Is it same for Hugo 2?