• Welcome to ASR. 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: 369 88.5%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 13 3.1%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther

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

    Votes: 28 6.7%

  • Total voters
    417
Fraud is the wrong word. Someone produces something that customers want to buy. Whether or not it makes a difference is a problem for the person who requested it. Upscalers are a legit thing, and while it may not perform well that doesn't make it fraud. Additionally cost is related to economies of scale so if you produce something so niche it comes at a cost.

Waste of money? Yes. Fraud? No.

I know. It's also difficult to prove in court because you have to prove subjective intent in the accused. The easier case is when you intentionally deceive someone. But it can also be fraud when you knowingly mislead a customer by failing to inform them of something you know about the product that, if they knew, would cause them not to purchase it.

There is something arguably fraudulent about the design of the M Scaler. Consider this: I got the M Scaler as a small part of a larger system package, but I do remember being it demo-ed. The way it was demo-ed to me is set up a system for you with the M Scaler in the chain and a Chord DAC. They let you cycle through the four modes (bypass, 2x, 4x, 16x) to see the difference. I imagine this is typical.

I remember thinking there was a subtle improvement between bypass and 16x modes (I realize these are anecdotal experiences). And I did a number of comparisons. But they didn't tell me that the bypass isn't a true bypass, but rather an already processed signal that is not the original! I only found that out in this review. I don't recall it in the manual either, and I don't think the dealer himself knew. The true test would be to take the M Scaler completely out of the chain, and then put it back in for a 16x comparison. I don't think I actually did this until I sent the unit to Amir and am now listening to the DAVE without the M Scaler in front of it.

Why couldn't they make this clear? I realize they were probably concerned about the volume difference, but still, they should make this clear.
 
Last edited:
I know. It's also difficult to prove in court because you have to prove subjective intent in the accused. The easier case is when you intentionally deceive someone. But it can also be fraud when you knowingly mislead a customer by failing to inform them of something you know about the product that, if they knew, would cause them not to purchase it.

There is something arguably fraudulent about the design of the M Scaler. Consider this: I got the M Scaler as a small part of a larger system package, but I do remember being it demo-ed. The way it was demo-ed to me is set up a system for you with the M Scaler in the chain and a Chord DAC. They let you cycle through the four modes (bypass, 2x, 4x, 16x) to see the difference. I imagine this is typical.

I remember thinking there was a subtle improvement between bypass and 16x modes (I realize these are anecdotal experiences). And I did a number of comparisons. But they didn't tell me that the bypass isn't a true bypass, but rather an already processed signal that is not the original! I only found that out in this review. I don't recall it in the manual either, and I don't think the dealer himself knew. The true test would be to take the M Scaler completely out of the chain, and then put it back in for a 16x comparison. I don't think I actually did this until I sent the unit to Amir and am now listening to the DAVE without the M Scaler in front of it.

Why couldn't they make this clear? I realize they were probably concerned about the volume difference, but still, they should make this clear.
I remember people saying pass through is not as loud as without M and without M scaler the sound being better or preferable to passthrough, so don't think this pass through being worse is news.
 
All I know is I like the M Scaler. It upscales all my 44.1 CDs to high res. Plus all my streaming. The DAC is getting 768k out of the M Scaler and the audio improvement is there, albeit it may be subtle depending on the recording but I dig it....

Curious that you've now decided to sell off your M Scaler despite liking it :D

 
What a both amusing and sad thread to read

People who write multiple long posts to rationalize their bad purchasing decisions.

People who make "assumptions" on how things work that are as far from how things actually work as possible.

People who make absolutely invalid claims about workings of digital signal.

People with extreme audibility claims but not even a silver of evidence like here:

At 16x there is definite improvement in depth and imaging perception. Vocals are locked more solidly at centre and everything else become wider.
This is so extreme that a blind test would easily show that even for a audio noob right?

Truly we live in a post truth society.
 
Curious that you've now decided to sell off your M Scaler despite liking it :D

LOL
 
I don't know if you've heard the dCS Vivaldi system with their upsampler. In my experience it is so extraordinary that the idea of having to do blind tests becomes mute.
On contrary its as mundane as any device can be, it's a DAC, we know how this things work for 60+ years now, and today the same job is done by chips not even 1 square centimeter in size.
It is a 4-box system and I have little idea what each box contributes to the overall sonic purity
Yes it's quite obvious that you have no idea, and that's not a good thing.
 
Question (and sorry if I offend), but I see a common theme whenever Amir posts measurements like these, from other forums and people stating that he a) isn't using the measuring equipment properly and b) isn't interpreting the results properly. These people usually name other reviewers who they say are more credible or trustworthy. People like GoldenSound or Erin's Audio. SBAF and /r/Audiophile say this too.

I'm curious, why does this keep coming up? What is Amir doing that these others aren't and why do people think he's less experienced or credible than these others?
Because Goldenears is probably in Chords pocket judging by how he lives and dwells in chord threads and always pushes and defends their products like no other without good reason. So my impression. Would love him to stop hiding in headfi and throwing his explainations out on a crowd who are mostly gullible and have little to no technical knowledge and log into his ASR account and come here and explain why. Since I’m quite sure he’s already following every chord thread like a hawk including this one.
 
Last edited:
Because Goldenears is probably in Chords pocket judging by how he lives and dwells in chord threads and always pushes and defends their products like no other without good reason. So my impression. Would love him to stop hiding in headfi and throwing his explainations out on a crowd who are mostly gullible and have little to no technical knowledge and log into his ASR account and come here and explain why. Since I’m quite sure he’s following every chord thread like a hawk including this one.
He is banned from ASR and so is unable to participate. Otherwise he would do so.
 
I’ve got to be honest, I was intrigued when the first M Scaler was announced (the Blu MK II), but more and more Chords recent digital products look like Rob Watts vanity projects.

Apart from the ham fisted DSP on the Mojo 2 their digital products are lacking in any real innovation.
 
It doesn't do that at all. It is like you saying if you change $1 into four quarters, you get more money! You do not. What has been discarded at production of music at 44.1 KHz, is gone forever. Remember, there is no intelligence in M-scaler. It is a simple math machine. Don't be confused with bigger numbers having more information. They simply cannot.

Maybe it's like vinyl. I wonder if you realize that a lot of people prefer the sound of vinyl, even though it measures worse.
 
Maybe it's like vinyl. I wonder if you realize that a lot of people prefer the sound of vinyl, even though it measures worse.

Of course he knows a lot of people like vinyl. The problem with your analogy, though, is that the M-scaler doesn’t change the sound: the digital audio upscaling produces no audible change, and the unit’s SINAD measurement, while mediocre for a digital source/processor component, does not degrade the signal enough to be audible either.

Your first comment earlier in the thread suggested that the M-scaler improved the sound by making it high-res. In this comment here you suggest the opposite, that it makes it sound better by reducing the fidelity. But in actuality it doesn’t change the sound at all.
 
Because Goldenears is probably in Chords pocket judging by how he lives and dwells in chord threads and always pushes and defends their products like no other without good reason. So my impression. Would love him to stop hiding in headfi and throwing his explainations out on a crowd who are mostly gullible and have little to no technical knowledge and log into his ASR account and come here and explain why. Since I’m quite sure he’s already following every chord thread like a hawk including this one.

He was banned from this forum for just questioning the test methodology. That should tell you something.
 
He was banned from this forum for just questioning the test methodology.
Nope... there was a lot more to it than that, however this is certainly not the thread to revisit same.
That should tell you something.
What tells me something though is you joined on the 31st of May backing up Goldfinger in the ol' MQA thread... then, no post until the recent three in this thread. The first going on about how fantastic the M-Scaler is, the second a rather silly post directed at the forum owner and the third raising Goldfinger again like he's some kind of saint. Yeah... that surely tells me something, but it's about you really.


JSmith
 
It seems like Amir's review has rattled some owners of this unit. New "for sale" ads from different owners have popped up on Audiogon and USAudiomart in the few days since it came out. Perhaps coincidence, of course, but I'd attribute this to Amir's impact in the marketplace. Thanks @amirm for sharing your skill and insight to shift toward science and reason... I'm glad to be a fellow heretic against the blind following the blind.
 
This is a review, listening tests and measurements of the CHORD Hugo M-scaler upsampling digital transport. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $5,295 (some show it as $5,650).

View attachment 216660

We have the usual lightshow of buttons as other CHORD digital products but here, due to less overloading of the buttons, it is not hard to navigate. Still, it is annoying to have to keep looking up the color coding in the manual until you memorize them. Here is the back panel:
View attachment 216661

The unit accepts digital audio over either USB or S/PDIF inputs (coax and optical). Very oddly for a device in this class, a large PC laptop type power supply is provided, needlessly causing anxiety for most of their customers buying this tweak. An internal power supply should have been provided. Output is in the form of S/PDIF again or dual BNC outputs which is proprietary to CHORD. Fortunately the member kindly provided a Hugo 2 and all the necessary (high-end Nordost) cabling to make the system work.

If you are unfamiliar with the marketing of this product, it takes an input and upsamples it to higher rate using incredibly high number of taps. High taps allows sharper transition from pass-band to ultrasonic. Company claims that one needs huge number of taps for better fidelity, literally going to millions of them. This has a side-effect of creating fair amount of latency so there is a "video" mode where if it detects 48 kHz sampling, it will shut off the upsampling (or lowers its taps?). While 48 kHz is a common sampling rate for video, many other rates are used so this is not a full fix. Fortunately a "bypass" mode is also provided which basically disables the filter. However, it still lowers the levels to make it match the level when upsampling is used (needed for headroom as to avoid overflow). Company rightly realizes that if the volume is higher in bypass mode, customer may think that sounds better and reject the whole notion of the unit. If so, I wonder then why company doesn't believe in going the next step and providing level matched, controlled blind test to show the efficacy of the unit.

Back to upsampling, the rates provided are 2X, 4X and 16X with the latter needing dual BNC connection at 768 kHz.

CHORD M-Scaler Measurements
My first test was to examine the quality of the Coax output with respect to jitter. Results were disappointing and depended in how you output bits to the unit. Let's start with USB connection:

View attachment 216665

The green line is the Audio Precision analyzer measuring jitter spectrum of its own Coax signal. The red, green and orange lines are what we get when we send the same digital signal through M-Scaler, i.e. USB In/Coax out to the analyzer. We see a large increase (in relative terms) of the baseline noise indicating random jitter. The correlated spikes are elevated much higher as well.

Turns out the above was the "good case." Here is the bad case when we use Audio Precision's coax output to feed the M-scaler:

View attachment 216667

Good grief. What is going on here? Not only do we have the same baseline (higher) noise floor but now have distinct deterministic spikes coming out of the unit. I captured the AP and M-Scaler's computed jitter level and it is embarrassingly bad:
View attachment 216668

It is so bad that you can see the problem just looking at the waveform of jitter:

View attachment 216669

On the left we see AP analyzer's benign, very low level noise. On the right we see clearly, somewhat sinusoidal of M-scaler. I have tested $100 digital bridges that far outperform the M-Scalar on this front! As a way of reference, 500 picosecond/0.5 nanosecond is enough jitter to equal one bit of 16 bit digital audio sample. M-Scalar is outputting 8X that amount!

Fortunately any half-respecting DAC will filter this and not let it in the output but still, what is the claim to fame of M-scaler if it is not precision of its digital transformation? Let's save our frustration for other test results.

Next I connected a Topping D70S to the analyzer and captured its output by itself:
View attachment 216670

We see the great performance that we expect from this DAC. Now let's put the M-scaler in the loop:

View attachment 216671

What the heck happened here? Even in pass through mode performance of D70s is heavily degraded. We have spikes at oddball frequencies which I can't explain. I see reviewers with company blessing using M-scaler with third-party DACs. I would say be cautious, very cautious doing so.

Fortunately there was no problem using M-scaler with Hugo 2:
View attachment 216672

Then again there was no benefit to upscaling either:
View attachment 216673

And here is the response with dual Coax:
View attachment 216676

Still the same.

I should note that the Hugo 2 was running on battery for all of these tests per suggestion from the owner.

Let's go back to basics and see if the M-scaler is doing what it is supposed to be doing by running our filter test with the D70s:
View attachment 216674

It is indeed. Both 2X and 4X modes provide an ultra sharp response. However they do so at the cost of higher noise floor/lower attenuation.

I ran a very high resolution frequency response test focusing on the end of the spectrum and results are basically the same in all modes:
View attachment 216675

The bypass mode has the sharp filter and the others do not because the DAC is operating at higher sample rate. With respect to audible band up to nearly 22 kHz though, the frequency response is essentially the same. So anyone saying tonality has changed with upscaling modes needs to re-think that.

CHORD M-scaler and Hugo 2 Listening Tests
Conveniently, the switch between bypass and 2X upsampling was seamless. So I used that to perform listening tests. I say some because the button cycles to higher rates and there, it causes a glitch/pause which completely throws off your mind. Going by forward mode of bypass to 2X, I detected no difference at all. Nothing changes as far as tonality, soundstage, etc. I captured a couple of samples for you to listen as well:



You can listen right in the dropbox or download them. If you are sure there is a difference, go ahead and say which one is M-scaler bypass and which is 2X.

FYI I could not run a null test with DeltaWave as there is too much clock drift and clips are not lined up. The difference shown was the same as two consecutive captures without changing anything.

Conclusions
I was very disappointed to see high noise levels and jitter on Coax outputs of such an expensive digital products. And one where its designer claims you can hear problems at 300 dBFS. Well, if you can hear that well, then maybe you can hear this jitter too so I suggest not releasing a product that performs this bad. Second, there is a serious compatibility issue with third-part DAC that I tested. Maybe it is OK with other DACs, I don't know. But grabbing a sample DAC and having such serious degradation in its performance with M-scaler is very concerning.

Putting design issues aside, I found no audible difference in upsampling with company's own DAC. As it should be. The differences in the filter are above audible band so they should not be audible. Is it nice to have a sharper filter? Sure. But I sure as heck wouldn't pay nearly $6,000 to get that.

Bottom line, I don't see a reason to own M-Scaler. It can damage the audio signal in some cases and in others, provide no audible benefit. If people think otherwise, I highly suggest performing a blind test with enough repetition to provide statistically valid results. Otherwise, the M-scaler remains as a product with no purpose.

Needless to say, I can't recommend the CHORD M-Scaler.

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
Frist of all a big THANK YOU for these measurements Amir.
Definitely noise floor looks like a big issue here, since RB is usually claiming noise floor and noise flood modulation is key to our ears. I am dissapointed to see these measurements.
By the way, how do you expect us to hear a difference if both sample files have identical sample rate and bit depth? (unless you were upsampling from lower sampling frequencies, which I doubt) I was expecting at least one (or both) of the samples to be 88.2 or 96 KHz.
 
Could this be an impedance mismatch (50 ohm M Scaler output into 75 ohm D70)? Perhaps the Hugo inputs are actually 50 ohm, too?

I would have never expected this to cause measurable distortion, perhaps a glitchy connection. But I’m not a user of coax S/PDIF myself, so I don’t know…
No. This would cause some reflections, but at this length of cable it would not cause much harm to the results. Something else is going on.
 
I know. It's also difficult to prove in court because you have to prove subjective intent in the accused. The easier case is when you intentionally deceive someone. But it can also be fraud when you knowingly mislead a customer by failing to inform them of something you know about the product that, if they knew, would cause them not to purchase it.

There is something arguably fraudulent about the design of the M Scaler. Consider this: I got the M Scaler as a small part of a larger system package, but I do remember being it demo-ed. The way it was demo-ed to me is set up a system for you with the M Scaler in the chain and a Chord DAC. They let you cycle through the four modes (bypass, 2x, 4x, 16x) to see the difference. I imagine this is typical.

I remember thinking there was a subtle improvement between bypass and 16x modes (I realize these are anecdotal experiences). And I did a number of comparisons. But they didn't tell me that the bypass isn't a true bypass, but rather an already processed signal that is not the original! I only found that out in this review. I don't recall it in the manual either, and I don't think the dealer himself knew. The true test would be to take the M Scaler completely out of the chain, and then put it back in for a 16x comparison. I don't think I actually did this until I sent the unit to Amir and am now listening to the DAVE without the M Scaler in front of it.

Why couldn't they make this clear? I realize they were probably concerned about the volume difference, but still, they should make this clear.
It is not in their interest to make it clear.
 
Back
Top Bottom