• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

CHORD M-Scaler Review (Upsampler)

Rate this product:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 358 88.2%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 13 3.2%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther

    Votes: 7 1.7%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 28 6.9%

  • Total voters
    406

DavidEdwinAston

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 18, 2021
Messages
754
Likes
566
I watched the Rob Watts and down under reviewer who can hear differences between USB cables and the "benefits" of the M scaler.

First a few declarations: I have a PhD in electrical engineering, researched into the application of digital filters utilising their "transient" impulse response characteristics as well as their "steady state" responses (in a non-audio application). I own and I am very pleased with a Chord Qutest DAC. I am also a very big supported of the "ASR approach".

I was very disappointed with Rob Watt's "explanations". I don't understand from a fundamental basis how he differentiates the "transient" response of a filter from its steady state performance. Both are wedded together through the filters impulse response, therefore frequency response does tell the whole story UNLESS Rob Watts has incorporated certain non-linear responses into his design. Normally such non-linear effects, such as limiting, are detrimental to sound quality.

I find the credibility of "unknown brain effects at sub 120 dB levels" very difficult to be convinced about.

The pricing of the M Scaler is just so difficult to swallow - can our down under friend really hear a difference in USB and M Scaler applications or is he just a Rob fan boy?
Forgive me axbarker, have you ever attempted to start your Qutest in the 2 or 3 volt setting? Also, if you have, is there some indication on the dac, as to which voltage is selected?
I have studied the online manual. On startup, the voltages appear to cycle through so quickly that the relevant "double press", cannot be pinned down on a particular voltage. I have "officially" asked Chord about an indicator on the Qutest, but have had no reply.
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
Rob W never claimed he could hear differences down to -300dB.
What he once said was that when he experimented with filters, he compared 2 filters and they only differed a bit at around -300dB (in the digital domain) yet said he could hear differences between those filters.
Mind you, his testing was sighted and did not elaborate about those filters in the development stage.

He never claimed he could hear sounds -300dB and knows limits of noise floors very well.
 

axbarker

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2020
Messages
34
Likes
133
Rob W never claimed he could hear differences down to -300dB.
What he once said was that when he experimented with filters he had 2 filters he was comparing and they only differed a bit at around -300dB (in the digital domain).
Mind you, his testing was sighted.

He never claimed he could hear sounds -300dB and knows limits of noise floors very well.
Yes he was remarking about the hairs on the cochlea(?? spell check) being more sensitive in the bass region. Rather than hearing I think it was ESP.
 

Lukino

Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2022
Messages
64
Likes
175
Location
Slovakia
what measures are you talking about ? Watts said himself that the benefits can't be measured , you have to trust his non-blind tests .... if there is a device capable of measuring -301dB i'm not aware of its existence ...
In order to arrive at 301db measurements, first the basic 120db must be in order and they are not.
 

DavidEdwinAston

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 18, 2021
Messages
754
Likes
566
Yes I have, there is no indication as to what its set at - you have to back through and reset it so you have no doubt what its operating at.
Thank you for the rapid response. I don't understand what you mean by "back through and reset it".
On startup there is that very short time for a double press, and then a further double press to select a voltage.
I am saying that on my machine at least, the "colours" voltages, rotate through too rapidly to be sure of what is selected.
 

DavidEdwinAston

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 18, 2021
Messages
754
Likes
566
Thank you for the rapid response. I don't understand what you mean by "back through and reset it".
On startup there is that very short time for a double press, and then a further double press to select a voltage.
I am saying that on my machine at least, the "colours" voltages, rotate through too rapidly to be sure of what is selected.
At a practical level, last Sunday, the Quad preamp volume setting of 20, sounded "louder" than normal. Possibly I had selected 2 or 3 volts on startup. Very arbitrary!
 

Chester

Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
434
Likes
1,023
Rob W never claimed he could hear differences down to -300dB.
What he once said was that when he experimented with filters, he compared 2 filters and they only differed a bit at around -300dB (in the digital domain) yet said he could hear differences between those filters.
Mind you, his testing was sighted and did not elaborate about those filters in the development stage.

He never claimed he could hear sounds -300dB and knows limits of noise floors very well.

Thank you! I’m glad some people are willing to call out some of the inaccurate information in this thread, rather than just letting it run as it suits them personally.

Another I’ve seen is about the M Scaler adding back information. Rob Watts has always stated the same as is stated here, it doesn’t add back information, it can’t. His claim is that it more accurately reconstructs the available information.

I’m not disputing the measurements (I don’t know enough to do that). I’m disputing some of the inaccurate comments here attempting to discredit.
 

mansr

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
4,685
Likes
10,700
Location
Hampshire
Rob W never claimed he could hear differences down to -300dB.
What he once said was that when he experimented with filters, he compared 2 filters and they only differed a bit at around -300dB (in the digital domain) yet said he could hear differences between those filters.
Is that any less ridiculous?
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
His claim is that it more accurately reconstructs the available information.

And that it does.
Also there is no aliasing.
Chord DACs are the only one's I have seen that have such steep (near ideal) reconstruction filters.
Of course, in software one can do a similar thing and use any other DAC that can do at least 192/24 which is the cheaper solution.
That said...
The $1M question is whether or not such is audible which is where Rob W's claims mostly are about.
Rob has been known to make some outragious claims though... understandable given his target audience/buyers.

Is that any less ridiculous?

Nope, it certainly isn't.
 

Jimi Floyd

Active Member
Joined
May 5, 2022
Messages
143
Likes
584
Location
Pisa, Italy
Thank you! I’m glad some people are willing to call out some of the inaccurate information in this thread, rather than just letting it run as it suits them personally.

Another I’ve seen is about the M Scaler adding back information. Rob Watts has always stated the same as is stated here, it doesn’t add back information, it can’t. His claim is that it more accurately reconstructs the available information.

I’m not disputing the measurements (I don’t know enough to do that). I’m disputing some of the inaccurate comments here attempting to discredit.
From the M scaler Stereophile Review by John Atkinson, Feb 25, 2020 in the Digital filters and upsampling section:

"In the promotional literature for the M Scaler, Chord writes, "The Hugo M Scaler . . . takes the digital file and repairs it, adding back the information lost between the samples, then it sends the repaired file to the DAC. . . . With 705,600 samples per second, a huge amount of important information that was lost when creating the 44.1 digital file is now recovered. The more samples, the closer you get to the original analog signal. . . . The Hugo M Scaler in essence places 15 additional new musical samples in between each original musical sample, resulting in an astounding improvement in the recreation of the original music signal."

It should be noted that this sentence has now been removed from the Chord promotional literature page, but it was there in 2020, John Atkinson stated this clearly. We find however the same sentence elsewhere: Bluebird Music Ltd, distributor of Chord in North American in its 2019 Promotional leaflet of the M-Scaler:

"The Hugo M Scaler acts like a “pre-DAC”. It takes the digital file and repairs it, adding back the information lost between the samples, then it sends the repaired file to the DAC."

Online sites selling the M Scaler are still using today the same "brings back information" nonsense. Read this in the AcousticSounds online store page about the Chord M Scaler:

"the M Scaler takes digital files from any source and transforms them into audio that’s virtually indistinguishable from the original analog performance." and then "Chord’s 16 times upscaling is a break-through technology that essentially recaptures the data lost when creating a digital file of an analog musical performance. One can think of the M Scaler acting like a “pre-DAC”. It takes the digital file and repairs it, adding back the information lost between the samples, then it sends the repaired file to your DAC."

SO: You say that Rob Watts has always stated that it doesn't add back information, BUT Chord, its distributor(s) and online sellers have maintained, and in some cases still maintain, that the M scaler repairs digital files adding back lost information. Having erased NOW this sentence from the Chord site does NOT repair anything at all.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 19, 2022
Messages
17
Likes
45
From the M scaler Stereophile Review by John Atkinson, Feb 25, 2020 in the Digital filters and upsampling section:

"In the promotional literature for the M Scaler, Chord writes, "The Hugo M Scaler . . . takes the digital file and repairs it, adding back the information lost between the samples, then it sends the repaired file to the DAC. . . . With 705,600 samples per second, a huge amount of important information that was lost when creating the 44.1 digital file is now recovered. The more samples, the closer you get to the original analog signal. . . . The Hugo M Scaler in essence places 15 additional new musical samples in between each original musical sample, resulting in an astounding improvement in the recreation of the original music signal."

It should be noted that this sentence has now been removed from the Chord promotional literature page, but it was there in 2020. We find however the same sentence elsewhere: Bluebird Music Ltd, distributor of Chord in North American in 2019. Promotional leaflet of the M-Scaler:

"The Hugo M Scaler acts like a “pre-DAC”. It takes the digital file and repairs it, adding back the information lost between the samples, then it sends the repaired file to the DAC."

Online sites selling the M Scaler are still using today the same "brings back information" nonsense. Read this in the AcousticSounds online store page about the Chord M Scaler:

"the M Scaler takes digital files from any source and transforms them into audio that’s virtually indistinguishable from the original analog performance." and then "Chord’s 16 times upscaling is a break-through technology that essentially recaptures the data lost when creating a digital file of an analog musical performance. One can think of the M Scaler acting like a “pre-DAC”. It takes the digital file and repairs it, adding back the information lost between the samples, then it sends the repaired file to your DAC."

SO: You say that Rob Watts has always stated that it doesn't add back information, BUT Chord, its distributor(s) and online sellers have maintained, and in some cases still maintain, that the M scaler repairs digital files adding back lost information. Having erased NOW this sentence from the Chord site does NOT repair anything at all.
:oops:
"The Hugo M Scaler acts like a “pre-DAC” this one is pure BS ...
"adding back the information lost between the samples"
:rolleyes:
 

Chester

Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
434
Likes
1,023
From the M scaler Stereophile Review by John Atkinson, Feb 25, 2020 in the Digital filters and upsampling section:

"In the promotional literature for the M Scaler, Chord writes, "The Hugo M Scaler . . . takes the digital file and repairs it, adding back the information lost between the samples, then it sends the repaired file to the DAC. . . . With 705,600 samples per second, a huge amount of important information that was lost when creating the 44.1 digital file is now recovered. The more samples, the closer you get to the original analog signal. . . . The Hugo M Scaler in essence places 15 additional new musical samples in between each original musical sample, resulting in an astounding improvement in the recreation of the original music signal."

It should be noted that this sentence has now been removed from the Chord promotional literature page, but it was there in 2020, John Atkinson stated this clearly. We find however the same sentence elsewhere: Bluebird Music Ltd, distributor of Chord in North American in its 2019 Promotional leaflet of the M-Scaler:

"The Hugo M Scaler acts like a “pre-DAC”. It takes the digital file and repairs it, adding back the information lost between the samples, then it sends the repaired file to the DAC."

Online sites selling the M Scaler are still using today the same "brings back information" nonsense. Read this in the AcousticSounds online store page about the Chord M Scaler:

"the M Scaler takes digital files from any source and transforms them into audio that’s virtually indistinguishable from the original analog performance." and then "Chord’s 16 times upscaling is a break-through technology that essentially recaptures the data lost when creating a digital file of an analog musical performance. One can think of the M Scaler acting like a “pre-DAC”. It takes the digital file and repairs it, adding back the information lost between the samples, then it sends the repaired file to your DAC."

SO: You say that Rob Watts has always stated that it doesn't add back information, BUT Chord, its distributor(s) and online sellers have maintained, and in some cases still maintain, that the M scaler repairs digital files adding back lost information. Having erased NOW this sentence from the Chord site does NOT repair anything at all.

I don’t disagree, total marketing rubbish, I just think a little more care should be taken when we attribute statements to individuals who have actually said the complete opposite.

We can’t be all about the facts only some of the time. Not if we want this place to continue the good work it’s doing.
 

Chester

Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
434
Likes
1,023
@amirm

If we can suspend reality for a second and go back to the moments before you began testing the M Scaler:

What would good have looked like for this particular type of product?

What test results would have meant this product received an excellent rating?
 

voodooless

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
10,226
Likes
17,803
Location
Netherlands
Rob should really read up on Shannon information theory :facepalm:
 

voodooless

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
10,226
Likes
17,803
Location
Netherlands
What would good have looked like for this particular type of product?
The non-existence of it.
What test results would have meant this product received an excellent rating?
The test results are not the problem.. well apart from the high jitter and non standard spdif voltage. Even if they were fine, you still have a multi-thousand dollar box that essentially does nothing audible.

Basically this thing was doomed from the get go. Is that fair? Maybe not? Neither is shilling for this shiit.. ah wait, that’s a different brand :facepalm:;)
 

bidn

Active Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2019
Messages
195
Likes
821
Location
Kingdom of the Netherlands
Rob W never claimed he could hear differences down to -300dB.
What he once said was that when he experimented with filters, he compared 2 filters and they only differed a bit at around -300dB (in the digital domain) yet said he could hear differences between those filters.
Mind you, his testing was sighted and did not elaborate about those filters in the development stage.

He never claimed he could hear sounds -300dB and knows limits of noise floors very well.

Thank you,
I am not the one who made the corresponding SPL calculation.

Do you think that a difference of one bit at -300 dB would give something which could be heard by a human with headphones (I understood he uses headphones)?
 
Top Bottom