CHORD M-Scaler Review (Upsampler)

[AudioSceptic]

Mark-ups are better than they used to be 'back in my day' but if they approach 100% on the electronics (except Linn if you do as you're told in the contract), I'd be surprised.

Back in my naive late 70's, I became fond of the first issue Naim amps (bolt up and different internal layouts with back plate output devices to the post 1980 models). DC on the mains caused transformer snarling in most samples and I have to say after ten thirty to eleven at night, after the News finished, on my pal's active Isobarik system (three NAP250's), you could hear the soundstage opening up quite palpably. I admit that there may have been other factors involved (I have never smoked anything and even if alcohol was involved, it would have been consumed far earlier in the evening..), but what was once regarded as sign of a better amp because it 'showed up' bad mains, I now regard it as a weakness in the amp's design, which was cobbled together by a non EE engineer.

So, don't be too hard on your dealer pal. I'm suggesting the gear he sells is suspect in certain ways, as the better designed amps do seem pretty much immune to the mains these days, unless you and they live in a really suspect mains area with massive voltage swings (I think the EU directives have minimised that over these parts, but can't be sure) and even current Naims don't appear to be quite as silly-sensitive as they were back then.

I had the company presented dem of the M-Scaler and definitely 'heard a difference for the better' with it doing its thing (Dave dac but can't remember the source other than the iPod used for music choice - Tidal?). Apparently the plastic mains block in between the racks makes an improvement too... Dreadful phone photo but I'm too fumbly to take good pics these days. Speakers were Dynaudio Confidence 60's which sounded a lot 'calmer' than they did via a Naim Statement amp (Naim digital source) in the same room a few weeks earlier. Bottom left a two box Melco source/library?

View attachment 217264

First time I've seen the term "transformer snarling". Is that the faint mechanical (it's never in the audio) buzz I sometimes hear?

 

[AudioSceptic]

I don't see anything wrong. Yes a bit over 2 samples and a waveform is properly reconstructed as perfectly as other factors allow. As perfectly reconstructed as with 10 samples.

Watch Monty Montgomery's Digital Show and Tell video. GEERT beat me to it.

Yes, as long as the sampling is 2x the *highest* frequency contained in the waveform (sorry if that's stating the obvious).

 

[AudioSceptic]

My job is to be a reviewer. Company needs to investigate, not me.

Quite so. This appears to be a staggering oversight, and utterly inexcusable in a product costing even a fraction of what this does.

 

[DSJR]

First time I've seen the term "transformer snarling". Is that the faint mechanical (it's never in the audio) buzz I sometimes hear?

Older ones really did 'snarl' and it varied from sample to sample. My first CB NAP160 was unusable at home (fine in the store), but the other sample from the delivery was very much quieter and very tolerable, although still not silent - on a quiet Sunday afternoon, you could hear the buzz going up and down in level at random depending on the mains coming in. Latest models are rather better, but my dealer pal tells me they're still a bit variable depending on where you live. I replaced the CB 160 with an earlier 'known since new' bolt-up 250 and, looking back, should have kept it as it lacked the hardness of tone of its replacement. Mind you, when I sold it in 1985, it was several years old and almost certainly starting to drift off spec as these older ones do...

 

[rkt31]

Any well engineered and SOTA DAC.wfuch dacwdac

Which sota dac has upsampler with better filtering? Or filtering is not a matter ?

 

[Veri]

Any well engineered and SOTA DAC.wfuch dacwdac

What the hell happened to that quote lol

 

[Trell]

Which sota dac has upsampler with better filtering? Or filtering is not a matter ?

For starters read some of the reviews of DACs and DAC/amp combos on this site.

 

[HarmonicTHD]

What the hell happened to that quote lol

I think a lot of unfounded THDplusN was added.

 

[Jimi Floyd]

Isn't it digital? Digital results are much higher than analog !

much higher in which sense? why talking about analog in a digital upscaler thread? what's the connection with the @mansr post you are replying to?

 

[Trell]

I think a lot of unfounded THDplusN was added.

Obviously you used a bad filter.

I’ll show myself out the door, thank you.

 

[Jomungur]

I guess we are wasting money on large telescopes. We can just use a postage stamped frame and create massive images from it! All we have to do is filter them! Oh wait, filter takes things away, not add them! Only in going after layman can you get away with such nonsense.

Ouch. When you put it that way, yeah, it doesn't make sense. If someone figured out how to systematically restore the lost information in a lossy signal, that would be a Nobel Prize worthy acheivement.

Now I think I understand why the M Scaler requires a minimum 44.1khz/16 bit input signal. I was wondering that; that if it worked as claimed, it should provide audible benefits to a low quality 22khz or 11khz audio file through upscaling. Actually, that should be where it would provide the most dramatic audible benefit.

 

[Geert]

If someone figured out how to systematically restore the lost information in a lossy signal, that would be a Nobel Prize worthy acheivement.

Now imagine someone could let people observe the lost information without restoring anything. What a feat that would be.

 

[JohnA]

Everything Rob Watts says is at best a misrepresentation and often outright lies.

So why on earth did he fit a level-matched bypass button on the remote?
If he was knowingly misleading/misrepresenting, that would be the last thing he would fit on the MScaler.

I've spent *many* hours investigating the 'tap' business and now I've got useless spare BNC cables and ferrites lying around, let alone battery packs etc, all remains of the unsuccessful attempts to make the "MScaler effect" audible (to me).

Could it be that he actually believes what he's saying? He is an intelligent man and top-tier designer after all..
I am genuinely perplexed

 

[Purité Audio]

Company sees opportunity to create and sell a product, even though it makes no audible difference, that’s capitalism.
Re the designer’s complicity that is an interesting point, I would think less of him as a designer if he didn’t know and less of him as a person if he did.
Keith

 

[Jimbob54]

Could it be that he actually believes what he's saying? He is an intelligent man and top-tier designer after all..
I am genuinely perplexed

There isnt much middle ground on this one. Either he absolutely believes the product does what he claims, or he is an outright BS artist. He has publicly stated he takes the MScaler (along with one of the Chord DAC/amps- dont recall which) on longhaul flights. If this is true, he must believe in it. Or it is an outright lie.

There is always the outside possibility he has never shut his eyes and had someone cycle through modes and see if he can determine which setting its on.

 

[mansr]

So why on earth did he fit a level-matched bypass button on the remote?
If he was knowingly misleading/misrepresenting, that would be the last thing he would fit on the MScaler.

I've spent *many* hours investigating the 'tap' business and now I've got useless spare BNC cables and ferrites lying around, let alone battery packs etc, all remains of the unsuccessful attempts to make the "MScaler effect" audible (to me).

Could it be that he actually believes what he's saying? He is an intelligent man and top-tier designer after all..
I am genuinely perplexed

There are really only two possible explanations for his (public) behaviour: incompetence or dishonesty. Either way, trusting him is a mistake.

 

[bennetng]

Now I think I understand why the M Scaler requires a minimum 44.1khz/16 bit input signal. I was wondering that; that if it worked as claimed, it should provide audible benefits to a low quality 22khz or 11khz audio file through upscaling. Actually, that should be where it would provide the most dramatic audible benefit.

That's why I proposed a test like this long time ago:

CHORD M-Scaler Review (Upsampler)

Or you can do it with SoX (mod) and SoX (mod2) so you can have both families of 44.1 and 48Khz upsampled individually and automatically. Not that I think more taps are better but the SoX foobar plugin does not support so many taps unless someone change the source code to extend it...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I have some Playstation game rips with audio stored in 4-bit, 18.9 / 37.8kHz XA ADPCM and many old games use low sample rate audio too.

 

[amirm]

So why on earth did he fit a level-matched bypass button on the remote?

Because if he didn't, bypass would sound louder and win over upsampled many times. So he disadvantaged bypass that way to help himself out.

 

[DSJR]

Because if he didn't, bypass would sound louder and win over upsampled many times. So he disadvantaged bypass that way to help himself out.

Then I'm effed if the dem I was given using a full Chord source-amp system really was level matched in and out, 'cos there was a certain difference heard with it in... Damn not working with this stuff every day as I could have done the comparison alone to my satisfaction. Doesn't bloody matter now as 'everything' now sounds grand compared to what I was hearing before the 'aids...

 

[AudioSceptic]

So for a dude with a basic level of understanding of why we upsample, we do so for three reasons (correct me please!!!):

1- esp for 44.1, we do so to move the brick wall filtering well away from the 22k "zone" and also to ensure aliasing isnt audible

AND/OR

2- to allow us to bugger around with different filters (change pre/post ringing etc) and then upsample these to the native resolution of the DAC so the DAC wont impart its own filtering

AND/OR

3- we believe that upsampling in itself increases resolution and hence provides for better sound reproduction


Can someone please explain how a million taps is better than some lessor number (yes I can google that but I will see marketing gobbledygook that might not provide for an honest appraisal).

Thanks,

Peter

Can someone answer a more basic question? Don't all competent modern DACs oversample in order to reduce problems with the brick wall filtering? If so, what further advantage does upsampling give; if not, what is the purpose of oversampling? (I thought I understood the basics, but I now realise that I probably don't!)