That's been pending for quite some time.
-
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 Hugo M Scaler - Stereophile Review (measurements also)
- Thread starter Tks
- Start date
Until you actually conduct an unsighted comparison for yourself, you won’t understand.
We have all been fed what forty years of FUD, by everyone, manufacturers, magazines and dealers, it is extremely difficult to come to terms with the fact that you have been lied to until you prove it for yourself, nothing else will convince you.
Keith
We have all been fed what forty years of FUD, by everyone, manufacturers, magazines and dealers, it is extremely difficult to come to terms with the fact that you have been lied to until you prove it for yourself, nothing else will convince you.
Keith
That assumes it does nothing though Keith and you wouldn't know as you have not tried the comparison that you are recommending.
I have very little doubt that if I were to do this and reliably detect the difference you would still have no doubt that it does nothing.
Until you try for yourself, you are simply removing the sighted component, and while you are at it compare the expensive ‘ferrite’ loaded interconnect to a standard fit for purpose design.
Keith
Keith
You mean the one that Rob Watts also believes makes a difference even though he would prefer that not to be the case? Ok then.
How about we don't turn this thread into a cable thread - it's bad enough already.
blackmetalboon
Active Member
Yes, it has. If, or when, it will see the light of day remains to be seen. Until then, I remain unconvinced by the M Scaler.
You mean the one that Rob Watts also believes makes a difference even though he would prefer that not to be the case? Ok then.
How about we don't turn this thread into a cable thread - it's bad enough already.
It is bad that a product like this exists... Just like oversold/overpriced cables.
Until someone actually demonstrates these claimed differences under controlled conditions, we truly are wasting time going over this again and again.
Evidence... Not claims.
Moving onward please.
Last edited:
blackmetalboon
Active Member
I was interested in buying the DAVE DAC so did plenty of research. The story behind all the RFI talk is highly amusing and, if I am honest, slightly confusing. If you believe it, it truly is a story of contradictions, bad design, bad engineering, terrible salesmanship, audiophile nonsense and self serving commercial enterprises.
You misunderstood the post. The comment was about a cable and RW does not profit from them.
Ahh...you are right, post edited, but let's still move on please.
I don't think it's fair to say it's bad this product exists. Say what you will about the claims of Rob Watts and others here, but this box seems to be at least an attempt at an ideal implementation of an interpolation filter. Yes it's pointless, the length of the filter is absurd, and it doesn't perform as well as it should for all those taps, but it's something. I don't see how this is any different from other products that perform well but don't provide a real audible improvement over a cheap product. That would encompass a lot of what ASR reviews. If people want to pay for audio jewelry, at least Chord gives you good measured performance on the whole. The marketing is dishonest, but there are far worse actors out there.
It's pretty simple. Some of us understand the theory and have actually implemented and tested filters like this. Between that knowledge, and the published measurements, there is no need to try it.
He obviously can't trust that knowledge works, having never tried it.
D
Deleted member 4708
Guest
I have a Chord Mojo. Super!
I like Chord as a company and someone has to fund their research and products. Personally I will not spend more than 1k$ for a DAC. And IF I am to go at that price point it better have DSP like EQ and such.
DACs around that price (1k$) are well into diminishing returns and money is better spent somewhere else. A good speaker or headphone has (at best) -60db (maybe -70db) THD+N. A decent DAC is waaay under. Even a decent amp.
I (still) have good hearing yet can't hear one difference between my Mojo or Motu A8 or SMSL SU-9. None. Why? the main distortion is from speaker / headphone or amp.
Personally I am having a hard time believing people who can hear DAC A vs DAC B differences when measurements are let's say better than -110db THD+N. I wonder if there were any blind A/B tests to prove any of these so called differences. I can't find any published results.
I like Chord as a company and someone has to fund their research and products. Personally I will not spend more than 1k$ for a DAC. And IF I am to go at that price point it better have DSP like EQ and such.
DACs around that price (1k$) are well into diminishing returns and money is better spent somewhere else. A good speaker or headphone has (at best) -60db (maybe -70db) THD+N. A decent DAC is waaay under. Even a decent amp.
I (still) have good hearing yet can't hear one difference between my Mojo or Motu A8 or SMSL SU-9. None. Why? the main distortion is from speaker / headphone or amp.
Personally I am having a hard time believing people who can hear DAC A vs DAC B differences when measurements are let's say better than -110db THD+N. I wonder if there were any blind A/B tests to prove any of these so called differences. I can't find any published results.
Last edited by a moderator:
@spooky been reading your posts and just want to chime in with support for your cause. I have a TT2 with an mScaler and I can appreciate it and what it does. The idea that 4 different audio tests tells everything there is to the sound is doubtful, like claiming the nutritional facts of a food tells everything there is to know about the taste.
Blind listening tests are the only way to prove anything and how that would be set up, I'm not sure. It probably won't ever happen unless we all get together, set it up, and agree to be subjects. I don't think that's going to happen, so this will just remain a debate.
I'd be interested in Amir's tests with and without it using the TT2, but again, I don't think the tests that are done here tell the whole story. One thing to note is Rob Watts knows how to make a great DAC. His DACs do consistently measure really well, so he doesn't ignore that aspect of the product, like some high priced R2R or multibit DACs do.
Blind listening tests are the only way to prove anything and how that would be set up, I'm not sure. It probably won't ever happen unless we all get together, set it up, and agree to be subjects. I don't think that's going to happen, so this will just remain a debate.
I'd be interested in Amir's tests with and without it using the TT2, but again, I don't think the tests that are done here tell the whole story. One thing to note is Rob Watts knows how to make a great DAC. His DACs do consistently measure really well, so he doesn't ignore that aspect of the product, like some high priced R2R or multibit DACs do.
D
Deleted member 4708
Guest
The argument is not as open ended as you make it sound. To prove the merits of the said DAC (plus M) one should come up with measurements and the meaning of those measurements. -140db THD + N is better than -139.9db THD + N yet nobody can tell the difference.
So, please provide a break through measurement and what it means, how that is audible for some at least.
Otherwise we are in the diminishing gains territory.
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
Last edited by a moderator:
Veri
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2018
- Messages
- 9,598
- Likes
- 12,040
Erm, taste is something that could be distilled/examined/proven. "Sound Signature", not so much. Also, ever heard of "blind" wine tastings?
often a cheaper brand comes out surprisingly high or even on top. So your analogy is in fact, quite apt but not in the way you'd have thought. haha.
I’m sorry to have given offense or misunderstood you, but I think there may have been some of that on both sides
The quote above is an example of where we run into this disagreement. We clearly have a different idea of the null hypothesis/burden of proof on this question:
My view of the null hypothesis is that without measurement science or proper listening tests behind them, electronics aren’t going to make an audible difference (although I concede the possibility of a very rare breakthrough exception). A good null hypothesis helps prioritize your tests and time (as any Dr. will tell you). Therefore the burden of proof is on others to *demonstrate* an audible difference with proper listening trials in order for me to behave/shop as if I have rejected the null hypothesis.
AFAICT, your position is “you can’t *prove* that it does nothing audible, therefore we should accept your assertion that it does something audible. So, on the basis of not proving something that *can never be proved*, we should abandon a very defensible null hypothesis.
I appreciate your comment but don't worry, I really haven't been offended by anything in this thread other than being banned from posting and accused of trolling by a moderator. I thought that was all a bit unnecessary and it left a bit of a bad taste.
With regard to the second paragraph I have quoted above, that isn't my position. I don't expect anyone to simply take my word for it (and particularly on a forum such as this).
My position has been that the absence of evidence (measurements) is not a basis for categorically stating as fact that it does nothing. I have yet to see anyone who has heard it say that they did not hear a difference, including JA's review and some who have commented on this thread, and one would hope that they cannot all be wrong (although it remains a possibility, as is me winning the lottery - life is full of possibilities).
I fully accept that sighted subjective listening is not evidence. I have said on a number of occasions that I'd love to see measurements showing what it does, but it might be that such measurements are either not possible or not being used and people consistently saying that they hear a difference might at least be cause for further investigation. A correctly conducted listening test would be interesting but it is unlikely to happen and especially in the current circumstances.
I'm honestly not as bothered as some might think - I only initially posted because it seemed rather odd to me that people would state that as an absolute fact that it does nothing without evidence or experience of the product. The person I initially responded to was asking how it might be making the difference he had heard and I commented that he wasn't going to get a sensible answer here, which was proven to be correct as people for the most part are somehow certain that it doesn't do anything and some are even stating that the product should not even exist.
I'll probably get banned again for repetition, but I thought your post warranted a response.
You were given a brief break from this thread, after which you picked right back up where you left off.
So far, all of your 105 posts have been in this thread... Do you really not think we understand your position?
It really is time to either move on to other threads, or just move on.
Similar threads
