CHORD M-Scaler Review (Upsampler)

[Dogcoop]

I don’t understand one thing (actually I don’t understand a lot of things). If the DAVE/M-Scaler are the absolute finest reproducers of music, why are so many for sale? What are they being replaced with? Are they all downsizing? You would think that there would be very few for sale. I mean where do you go after the ultimate? Just wondering.

 

[srkbear]

I thought this site was all about “hooking up“ your system.
Listening to Radio City. That album was my introduction to Alex, Chris, & Co.
Peace to you!

“Radio City” I have to admit is my favorite in terms of the perfect power pop album—although I have a lot of affection for Chris Bell’s contributions to “#1 Record”. Todd Rundgren’s “Couldn’t I Just Tell You” from Something/Anything? is another classic in that genre.

I guess I just have a thing for bands with dual songwriters who just drive each other to greatness. XTC, Squeeze, the Beatles, The Clash, The New Pornographers, Big Star, and Hüsker Dü are all favorites of mine. But Big Star really stand out to me as something extraordinary, given that their records blow your mind that they were written and recorded in the early seventies, making music that sounds like they presaged eighties alternative or later—they were so ahead of their time. How many bands created a brief canon of records that were completely ignored at the time but influenced so many bands that succeeded them? The Stooges maybe? There aren’t many…

 

[AudioSceptic]

“Radio City” I have to admit is my favorite in terms of the perfect power pop album—although I have a lot of affection for Chris Bell’s contributions to “#1 Record”. Todd Rundgren’s “Couldn’t I Just Tell You” from Something/Anything? is another classic in that genre.

I guess I just have a thing for bands with dual songwriters who just drive each other to greatness. XTC, Squeeze, the Beatles, The Clash, The New Pornographers, Big Star, and Hüsker Dü are all favorites of mine. But Big Star really stand out to me as something extraordinary, given that their records blow your mind that they were written and recorded in the early seventies, making music that sounds like they presaged eighties alternative or later—they were so ahead of their time. How many bands created a brief canon of records that were completely ignored at the time but influenced so many bands that succeeded them? The Stooges maybe? There aren’t many…

We're well off-topic now but I just have to mention The Go-Betweens with dual songwriters Forster and McLennan.

 

[JohnM-73]

Thanks. I think I will sell the DAVE since there's demand for it and it is a good DAC. Not sure about the M Scaler, because I don't think it does anything useful. I thought about donating it, but that doesn't make any sense either if it doesn't do anything.

I’d still like to ‘hear’ one, just to see for myself whether I could subjectively tell any difference at all. My TT2 was returned recently though due to QC issues I got sick of, and I guess it would be a moot point trying it out on my Benchmark DAC3 HGC?

 

[srkbear]

I don’t understand one thing (actually I don’t understand a lot of things). If the DAVE/M-Scaler are the absolute finest reproducers of music, why are so many for sale? What are they being replaced with? Are they all downsizing? You would think that there would be very few for sale. I mean where do you go after the ultimate? Just wondering.

I think they’re still selling. Obviously they aren’t the “ultimate”—they’ve just got a lock on the perception that there’s magic happening inside that shiny object. I just think the product is unique as a masterpiece in almost every way—aesthetic design, marketing, positioning, strategy, messaging—everything except for the engineering under the hood. In that capacity it’s serviceable, which is all it has to be to get a lock on the ways price and prestige trick our ears.

Chord has released new products since the DAVE in 2014, but they haven’t brought us any innovation—they just seem to be able to release anything, put it in that playful little package, make sure it weighs enough to feel substantial, write an inscrutable pitch, price it out of reach, and have a bevy of people coveting the thing and stricken with FOMO.

Audio has got to be one of the most corrupt and precarious of industries, in terms of predatory pricing—because although we can tell almost immediately if a smartphone responds briskly to touch or if a TV looks sharp, we can never quite trust our ears.

 

[srkbear]

I’d still like to ‘hear’ one, just to see for myself whether I could subjectively tell any difference at all. My TT2 was returned recently though due to QC issues I got sick of, and I guess it would be a moot point trying it out on my Benchmark DAC3 HGC?

I’m sincerely curious about this. Amir has demonstrated that its performance is average—arguably well below average for its price point. Chord themselves have yet to provide their own measurements backing up their claims. Yet you still feel tempted to hear one just to prove it to yourself, and I’m curious about what’s driving that interest.

If we were talking about any other product you read about in another market perhaps, such as a large screen OLED TV—and you read a review that included a deep dive into the objective technical performance that found it lacking, despite costing a fortune—would you still be curious to check it out for yourself? What is the mystery about the DAVE that still intrigues you?

(Absolutely no criticism or sarcasm behind my question here at all—just genuine curiosity, thank you)!

 

[Lukino]

I’m sincerely curious about this. Amir has demonstrated that its performance is average—arguably well below average for its price point. Chord themselves have yet to provide their own measurements backing up their claims. Yet you still feel tempted to hear one just to prove it to yourself, and I’m curious about what’s driving that interest.

If we were talking about any other product you read about in another market perhaps, such as a large screen OLED TV—and you read a review that included a deep dive into the objective technical performance that found it lacking, despite costing a fortune—would you still be curious to check it out for yourself? What is the mystery about the DAVE that still intrigues you?

(Absolutely no criticism or sarcasm behind my question here at all—just genuine curiosity, thank you)!

I fully agree.... That's what happens when something is so covered in dirt that it can no longer be cleaned. The dirt is as deep as on our planet and has passed into a phase where it cannot be reversed and cleaned. This does not mean that everyone has dirt at home... They use a vacuum cleaner... This forum is a proper cleaner...

 

[Axo1989]

I’m sincerely curious about this. Amir has demonstrated that its performance is average—arguably well below average for its price point. Chord themselves have yet to provide their own measurements backing up their claims. Yet you still feel tempted to hear one just to prove it to yourself, and I’m curious about what’s driving that interest. ...

Has ASR tested TT2?

If you mean recent tests of DAVE and Hugo 2, then they aren't average. Depending what you think of the variable channel/noise results not seen by others, they are either very good or excellent. If we discard audiophile subjective reports about sonic character, every DAC in the blue group (and probably the green group as well) will sound the same. The shortcoming is cost-effectiveness, not performance. People will assess that based on their disposable income and value preferences (which may or may not include aesthetics, haptics, UI/UX, brand cachet among other things).

 

[srkbear]

Has ASR tested TT2?

If you mean recent tests of DAVE and Hugo 2, then they aren't average. Depending what you think of the variable channel/noise results not seen by others, they are either very good or excellent. If we discard audiophile subjective reports about sonic character, every DAC in the blue group (and probably the green group as well) will sound the same. The shortcoming is cost-effectiveness, not performance. People will assess that based on their disposable income and value preferences (which may or may not include aesthetics, haptics, UI/UX, brand cachet among other things).

The person who said he would like to try one had already tried out that TT2 and had gotten a defective unit—he was referencing the DAVE I’m pretty sure. Anyway, all three are definitely average for their price points, as I said. Perhaps I should have said “just fine”. They certainly aren’t at the top of the scale as they should be for their “reputation” and cost. Why are you championing them despite this? And how was your response germane to the question I asked?

 

[Axo1989]

The person who said he would like to try one had already tried out that TT2 and had gotten a defective unit—he was referencing the DAVE I’m pretty sure.

Yes, that makes sense.

Anyway, all three are definitely average for their price points, as I said. Perhaps I should have said “just fine”. They certainly aren’t at the top of the scale as they should be for their “reputation” and cost. Why are you championing them despite this? And how was your response germane to the question I asked?

Why is questioning the value of a metric once any audible performance threshold is exceeded 'championing'? How would 'top of the scale' be meaningful beyond symbolism?

I understand the appeal of a nice graph (or even a nice number) but that's just one of many possible values people consider when buying this stuff. There may be reasons to choose one esoteric value over another. There are unlikely to be objective reasons to choose one symbolic value over another.

 

[srkbear]

Yes, that makes sense.



Why is questioning the value of a metric once any audible performance threshold is exceeded 'championing'? How would 'top of the scale' be meaningful beyond symbolism?

I understand the appeal of a nice graph (or even a nice number) but that's just one of many possible values people consider when buying this stuff. There may be reasons to choose one esoteric value over another. There are unlikely to be objective reasons to choose one symbolic value over another.

I dunno, you’ve stumped me—I don’t feel strongly enough about this to argue about it I just think it’s curious why folks are so intrigued by the particular device other than the mystery of its rarified price, especially in this era 8 years later where you can find equally stellar options for a mere fraction of that. I don’t get why it’s still selling for $14,000–why any DAC/amp is selling for $14,000 to tell ya the truth!

 

[Thomas_A]

I rather have the below. It is more fun.

 

[Ornette]

The person who said he would like to try one had already tried out that TT2 and had gotten a defective unit—he was referencing the DAVE I’m pretty sure. Anyway, all three are definitely average for their price points, as I said. Perhaps I should have said “just fine”. They certainly aren’t at the top of the scale as they should be for their “reputation” and cost. Why are you championing them despite this? And how was your response germane to the question I asked?

He was almost certainly referencing the M Scaler, the subject of this thread. His final comment below makes no sense otherwise:

I guess it would be a moot point trying it out on my Benchmark DAC3 HGC?

I don't know his motivation, but presumably it would be to convince himself that upsampling isn't audible to him. Of course, he could simply download a trial version of HQPlayer and do the same for free!

 

[Jimster480]

I think they’re still selling. Obviously they aren’t the “ultimate”—they’ve just got a lock on the perception that there’s magic happening inside that shiny object. I just think the product is unique as a masterpiece in almost every way—aesthetic design, marketing, positioning, strategy, messaging—everything except for the engineering under the hood. In that capacity it’s serviceable, which is all it has to be to get a lock on the ways price and prestige trick our ears.

Chord has released new products since the DAVE in 2014, but they haven’t brought us any innovation—they just seem to be able to release anything, put it in that playful little package, make sure it weighs enough to feel substantial, write an inscrutable pitch, price it out of reach, and have a bevy of people coveting the thing and stricken with FOMO.

Audio has got to be one of the most corrupt and precarious of industries, in terms of predatory pricing—because although we can tell almost immediately if a smartphone responds briskly to touch or if a TV looks sharp, we can never quite trust our ears.

The other thing is the lack of testing. The TV industry is also corrupt and "4k" is just a resolution.
Since you can pause a picture and see the difference and play back side by side without an issue, it's still easier to test VS sound.
The other thing is the overall performance, it's like with higher end OLED TVs. The differences between each one are not big, so the mfg can make all types of claims.
Products like this would be shot down in the video would immediately, because people would test and see it does nothing or makes it worse.

 

[mansr]

The other thing is the lack of testing. The TV industry is also corrupt and "4k" is just a resolution.
Since you can pause a picture and see the difference and play back side by side without an issue, it's still easier to test VS sound.
The other thing is the overall performance, it's like with higher end OLED TVs. The differences between each one are not big, so the mfg can make all types of claims.
Products like this would be shot down in the video would immediately, because people would test and see it does nothing or makes it worse.

The video enthusiasts do in general seem to be considerably more reasonable. However, audiophools apparently extend their disbelief in facts to display technology as well. This is what someone responded when I posted a link to an rtings.com report for an OLED TV, citing the measured brightness figures, on another audio forum (in a thread about 4K TVs):

In my view you are merely repeating information you found on the web and not from direct experience. With a tv being purely visible in direct sunlight as with my E7 which is an old OLED technically quite ‘dim’ in comparison (if i remember around 450nits) the whole nits blah blah is only relevant to the people building the product, as in real life it has much less relevance. Similar to using measurements to State if a hifi product is good or not when all you have to do is listen.

I am sure if ASR did a graph for it you would link it and give Amir Topping a little bum slap lol

There are reasons why LED and QLED are seen as inferior to OLED..but as with anything to OP just needs to go in a shop and see for himself. Once done, it is very unlikely that a person walks away with an LED tv if they can afford an OLED and dont mind spending the money. Thats why looking and watching is the best method of choosing a tv and listening is the best way to choose a hifi product. The specs merely give you a loose idea of what it does but in the real world of usage don’t matter a huge deal.

 

[DonR]

The video enthusiasts do in general seem to be considerably more reasonable. However, audiophools apparently extend their disbelief in facts to display technology as well. This is what someone responded when I posted a link to an rtings.com report for an OLED TV, citing the measured brightness figures, on another audio forum (in a thread about 4K TVs):

Visual presentation is more powerful than audio to the brain, thus the McGurk effect. It's much easier to be fooled by what we think we hear than what we think we see.

 

[Jimster480]

The video enthusiasts do in general seem to be considerably more reasonable. However, audiophools apparently extend their disbelief in facts to display technology as well. This is what someone responded when I posted a link to an rtings.com report for an OLED TV, citing the measured brightness figures, on another audio forum (in a thread about 4K TVs):

Absolutely unreal, Nits don't matter? People are really delusional.

Visual presentation is more powerful than audio to the brain, thus the McGurk effect. It's much easier to be fooled by what we think we hear than what we think we see.

That is true too, but I think it is attributed to peoples generally poor "audio memory".

 

[Guermantes]

I appreciate the way your comments conflict with your signature of "The highest activity a human being can attain is learning for understanding, because to understand is to be free. -- Spinoza" (copied here for context in case your signature changes)

Yes, I noticed that, too, but I don't think there is a conflict, really. Many people don't find science comforting since it tends to kill their gods. And to be "free" means to face up to taking your own responsibility for your life and your worldview. Scary stuff.

 

[Axo1989]

He was almost certainly referencing the M Scaler, the subject of this thread. His final comment below makes no sense otherwise:

I guess it would be a moot point trying it out on my Benchmark DAC3 HGC?

Ahh yes. Totally missed that. Clearly my brain had turned to mush last night.

I don't know his motivation, but presumably it would be to convince himself that upsampling isn't audible to him. Of course, he could simply download a trial version of HQPlayer and do the same for free!

M Scaler was connected (with TT 2, they look nice together) when I listened to my last speakers before buying. Sounded fine. Pretty sure we bypassed before listening to the speakers intently, still sounded fine. So I've heard M Scaler, but not really heard it.

 

[Jimster480]

Ahh yes. Totally missed that. Clearly my brain had turned to mush last night.



M Scaler was connected (with TT 2, they look nice together) when I listened to my last speakers before buying. Sounded fine. Pretty sure we bypassed before listening to the speakers intently, still sounded fine. So I've heard M Scaler, but not really heard it.

So you heard it and it did nothing. Pretty simple conclusion there. I mean for such a price it should be a night and day difference. I mean the mscaler alone is more than a new Sony Master 9 A95k QD-OLED TV in 65" and that is basically the best TV on the market today. Even if you prefer LG it is way below the price of a LG G2 65"+.