Chord Hugo M Scaler - Stereophile Review (measurements also)

[Deleted member 9286]

They are both ridiculous products despite doing exactly what they say they do. The reason is that the same thing can be done for a tiny fraction of the cost. The casework alone isn't enough to justify the price of either, even you think they're pretty.

I don’t disagree. It’s the same the world over though, cars, houses, jewellery etc.

I just think it’s a waste of energy to rant about high end products, purely on the basis of cost. Technical merit, absolutely but cost is just what people are willing to pay. If you can afford them and go in for all that, great. If you can’t and don’t, equally great.

 

[majingotan]

All I can say is that I had no *obvious* bias in favour - the silly-high price tags put paid to that - but realistically I suppose I was expecting to hear something... The difference at that moment in time was akin to comparing a cheaper Rega turntable to a 'better' deck like the countless Linn LP12-Rega dems I did in my past life. Without any means of actually checking mean-volume, let alone control the remote used, I'm left in a quandary really, as it was totally out of my control.


I also kind of take issue over a very early comment that 'we' can't afford such a device so will slag it off as a result. Many times in my audio-life I've heard audio gear that sets the pulse racing, where the sound and visuals come together beautifully and which I'll never now be able to contemplate affording. Doesn't mean I go all sour grapes (bah humbug) over it, Chord's top amps included, as it's obvious looking at them as to where a large chunk of your money has gone! Same with some awesome oil-rig types of lavish turntables which must cost an absolute fortune to manufacture and finish (I'm thinking Kronos in the first instance, with contra-rotating platters and which apparently 'work' very well sonically).

Sorry I can't offer anything objective here...

Understandable that you don't have control over the setup, but an opinion that you feel more intimate to the music by seeing that upsampler box do magic is what makes audiophiles splurge money to feel that sense of calmness and cure that "audio nervosa". The thing is that in ASR language, we cannot conclude that the m-scaler is actually "improving sound" without a peer reviewed DBT ABX testing, and objective measurements show that the filter response is very good while the actual FPGA inside the Chord DAC is actually performing quantization/noise shaping at even higher than that 705.6 KHz that this M-Scaler is touting. I read somewhere that it was around 104 MHz or so, and as such, I don't really see a reason for upsampling to 705.6 Khz when that stream is modulated at 104 megahertz or something like that

 

[hellboundlex]

I am in agreement with you here, the M Scaler seems to generate a very bitter reaction in some people.

There are numerous problems with this device that we haven't addressed in the comments so far. I believe the very existence of this product creates confusion in the market place. Much like the very existence of high end cables offends me. It is nothing more than fraud.

This device contains electronics that could be built for $100 (a raspberry pi and a spdif in and out). The electronics could be used for DSP to make a real difference in sound, but instead they do nothing.

Luxury products should serve a purpose for all consumers, namely to develop new technology and improvements that can be passed down to consumer products. This develops nothing. This solves no problems. It offers nothing to future consumer products. It is chasing a dead end for improvements in the wrong places.

So, yes, those of us who have a household income with only five digits per year get angry with products like this. There are no trickle down benefits. The only one who benefits is the con artists dealers and manufacturers that took your money.

 

[Deleted member 9286]

@hellboundlex

No point in getting angry or offended. Even at the cable manufacturer’s who outright lie.

I don’t think you understand the product to be honest if you think it’s the same as a raspberry pi and an spdif in and out. It’s not the hardware that’s important here (just like with the software equivalent scalers).

A real difference in sound doesn’t always mean better. Lots of people would argue that DSP alters the sound in a negative way (not me by the way) but you feel DSP is a worthy path. Rob Watt’s believes improving things in the timing domain is a worthy path. Yes, Chord then slap their usual coat of marketing on top, they are a company trying to do business in a market where everyone is exaggerating constantly. They are no different to other companies in that respect.

Amir (and others) have Salon 2’s that in reality probably sound marginally better than Revel 208’s. Yet they cost more than 20k. There is a huge range of personal wealth within this hobby which is one of the things I like about it. A guy can stretch himself and get a Topping D10 and a JDS Atom and can experience a lot of the benefits the guy with a 30k system has, meaning they can share their hobby and discuss. Try doing that in a Ferrari owners club

I don’t feel anyone took my money but if it makes you feel better, knock yourself out.

 

[SIY]

[QUOTE="BenniMac, post: 398479, member: 9286”]

A real difference in sound doesn’t always mean better. [/QUOTE]

Assumes facts not in evidence.

 

[Deleted member 9286]

[QUOTE="BenniMac, post: 398479, member: 9286”]

A real difference in sound doesn’t always mean better.

Assumes facts not in evidence.[/QUOTE]

I don’t know what that means.

 

[hellboundlex]

No point in getting angry or offended. Even at the cable manufacturer’s who outright lie.

I don’t think you understand the product to be honest if you think it’s the same as a raspberry pi and an spdif in and out. It’s not the hardware that’s important here (just like with the software equivalent scalers).

The point of getting angry is to effect change. Why do I want change? Because my humanist atheist scientific world view sees progress and improvement as good.

I don't think you understand what your product does. I will clarify: nothing. Not a god damn thing. And yes, a raspberry pi running SOX could emulate the nothing this nothing box does.

 

[Deleted member 9286]

The point of getting angry is to effect change. Why do I want change? Because my humanist atheist scientific world view sees progress and improvement as good.

I don't think you understand what your product does. I will clarify: nothing. Not a god damn thing. And yes, a raspberry pi running SOX could emulate the nothing this nothing box does.

I will take it outside and burn it immediately. Thanks for enlightening me.

 

[hellboundlex]

I will take it outside and burn it immediately. Thanks for enlightening me.

Please don't improperly dispose of electronics.

Edit: A worthy goal is making music sound better. Full stop. DSP does that. This is why consumers don't hate cheap Bluetooth speakers. Improving resolution well above human hearing does nothing for me or the average consumer. The only people who can even hear it are children and possibly teenagers. It is not a worthy goal.

I don't care that you don't feel cheated. I honestly don't care what you feel, at all. What I care about is honest products succeeding and fraudsters and cranks failing because this is what is good for the hobby and the industry.

 

[Digital Mastering System]

There are numerous problems with this device that we haven't addressed in the comments so far. I believe the very existence of this product creates confusion in the market place. Much like the very existence of high end cables offends me. It is nothing more than fraud.

This device contains electronics that could be built for $100 (a raspberry pi and a spdif in and out). The electronics could be used for DSP to make a real difference in sound, but instead they do nothing.

Luxury products should serve a purpose for all consumers, namely to develop new technology and improvements that can be passed down to consumer products. This develops nothing. This solves no problems. It offers nothing to future consumer products. It is chasing a dead end for improvements in the wrong places.

So, yes, those of us who have a household income with only five digits per year get angry with products like this. There are no trickle down benefits. The only one who benefits is the con artists dealers and manufacturers that took your money.

What I don't understand is why people think a higher playback sample rate would work better in the first place. Beside the obvious fact you can't create information that is not there, there is the fact that a given DAC will work best if it is going a slowly as is acceptable. Amplifiers and DACs like to have as much time as possible to settle accurately to the precise desired voltage level. Making them go faster just increases the error at audible frequencies.

 

[Deleted member 9286]

It doesn’t create information that wasn’t there. I think someone explained it a page or two back.

 

[hellboundlex]

What I don't understand is why people think a higher playback sample rate would work better in the first place. Beside the obvious fact you can't create information that is not there, there is the fact that a given DAC will work best if it is going a slowly as is acceptable. Amplifiers and DACs like to have as much time as possible to settle accurately to the precise desired voltage level. Making them go faster just increases the error at audible frequencies.

It doesn’t create information that wasn’t there. I think someone explained it a page or two back.

True.

The purpose is to create a sharper roll off curve than the default in the DAC. It improves resolution from 20 to 22 khz significantly. In other words, it makes a single note that only your cat can hear resolve better.

Edit: the fact that their marketing material says it finds missing information tells you everything you need to know about this company.

 

[JRM_PT]

I use plain vanilla power cord cables since day 1. They don't get in the signal path anyway. Could I afford a 200, 500 even 1000€ power cord? Yes. But electrons feeding my cd player or amp wouldn't care about it as all they "want" is enough cable section. But look at the respected Nordost price table and you'll see that I was modest...
Power conditioners were here demonstrated to be as ineffective as fancy power cords.
This Chord device is in the same league...

 

[Digital Mastering System]

I seriously doubt it improves resolution from 20k to 22k of actual program material. Here we are discussing the DAC reconstruction filter. We are ignoring the A/D's anti-aliasing filter entirely - I would think this A/D filter dominates the FR of actual program material. The A/D anti-aliasing filter is more important to SQ anyway as it rejects HF signal that re-enters the passband as non-harmonic noise and/or distortion. Spending an infinite amount of money on a post recording playback filter is not going to change the recording conditions. Getting better playback FR from 20K to 22K probably makes SQ worse by letting more alias junk in.

 

[hellboundlex]

Spending an infinite amount of money on a post recording playback filter is not going to change the recording conditions.

Good point! On another thread, i was schooled on the feedback loop between recording technology and playback technology and studio innovations. I learned a great deal from that post, after ignorantly huffing at it.

 

[bennetng]

Hearing -300dB down as he claims, must help with confirming this process surely.

M-Scaler itself does not have 300dB performance anyway.

Here is foobar2000 using the bundled SSRC resampler, vs the SoX resampler plugin, and dithered by the Smart Dither plugin.

Lower FFT size to make it looks more similar to Stereophile's plot:

 

[mansr]

What I don't understand is why people think a higher playback sample rate would work better in the first place. Beside the obvious fact you can't create information that is not there, there is the fact that a given DAC will work best if it is going a slowly as is acceptable. Amplifiers and DACs like to have as much time as possible to settle accurately to the precise desired voltage level. Making them go faster just increases the error at audible frequencies.

That's an overly simplistic view. The reality is sigma-delta DACs operating at rates of many MHz. The idea with external oversampling is to replace the DACs internal oversampling filters with others of your choosing (whether this is beneficial is beside the point). For best performance, such DACs should be operated with the highest clock possible regardless of the PCM sample rate since this moves the modulator noise to higher frequencies. The settling time considerations you mention do not apply here.

In traditional DAC architectures like R-2R ladders settling time is an important factor. Nevertheless, there are benefits to oversampling. One is lower noise level of quantisation noise. Another is simpler anti-imaging filters. With too much oversampling, distortion starts increasing, so there is a sweet spot to be found. 4x CD rate has been a common choice.

 

[LTig]

Hearing -300dB down as he claims, must help with confirming this process surely.

I'm wondering what @solderdude's shout-o-meter has to say about -300 dB - maybe distance to the next star?

 

[solderdude]

That was Ray's shoutometer.

It was a doubling of distance every 6dB so you can extrapolate to -300 dB.

 

[mansr]

That was Ray's shoutometer.

It was a doubling of distance every 6dB so you can extrapolate to -300 dB.

How many dB from the edge of the visible universe?