Its all about selling fairytales to suckers.Interesting. Watts seems to have gone to some truly obsessive lengths to solve a problem that isn't real.
Its all about selling fairytales to suckers.Interesting. Watts seems to have gone to some truly obsessive lengths to solve a problem that isn't real.
I think they start with the appearance of the cabinet during production.
The product is not intended for measurements, nor does the company wish it to be.
Certainly you are right. Therefore, you have my like ... but this product should be a model of technology mainly and thus design. In so many spectachers from the DAVE, DAC for 150 dolar.And you want to be deceived technologically there is a journey of the company chord.Many product development starts with specifying functionality, basic specs, appearance and cabinet. To design the PCB one has to know what the cabinet looks like (controls, LEDs, connectors) anyway. Often an iterative process.
When you mean it is not designed as measuring equipment... yes.
Chord designs usually measure really well so I don't think they fear measurements. In this case M-scaler measures fine on Chord gear but seems to have compatibility issues with a specific Topping DAC. We have no idea how other DACs go with it.
The M-scaler, however, is a nonsense product but obviously it sells and people like it so there is a market.
Chord is in the business to make a (good) living for themselves and need to provide for their co-workers as well.
They are expensive because:
A: Not produced in large quantities so to make a living one has to up the price.
B: expensive casings (for the expensive line)
C: Exclusivity (think different looks, just like Quad looked very different from other gear) you pay for that.
D: Production not in low wages countries and not able to buy parts in huge numbers makes it more expensive than a mass produced product made in ME.
Talking about Quad. It looked old-fashioned but it was very well engineered. You could complete take one apart using just 1 flathead screw-driver instead of needing multiple tools, look for hidden screws and secret 'clips'.
Chord is not 'better' than other brands though, just different and higher priced. It's a choice not made for the mass market.
I do understand and love measurements, but if that is the case as you say I wonder why in this forum (and headfi which is allowed to have emotins) the seas of emotions and loathing runs so high.....You seem not to understand that measurements and blind listening tests are meant to exclude emotion from the issue altogether.
I wonder why in this forum (and headfi which is allowed to have emotins) the seas of emotions and loathing runs so high.....
Many people report positive differences with the M-scaler, just like you do. Here at ASR many people know this quite well.WOW, fantastic to read all the above Love & Hate and same over at HeadFi...what can I say....I love my Mscaler and Yes I can hear a positive difference and that's what counts IMHO.
I am glad to see there is so much emotions involved on both sides of the fence, engaging to say the least.
No, my point was not to provoke, quite the opposite, found it rather interesting reactions from the 2 camps, I rather felt that you and a few other were and are trying to provoke and shows very high negative emotions regarding the measurements which I agree are not top notch but there is also the aspect of listening and make up your on mind whether you like it or not on a subjective level, don't see the point on to keep loathing it just because of the measurements without having listen to it in its right element. Do understand this forum is measurement's only.....Maybe because of comments like yours that are meant to provoke emotions? Or is there any technical content hidden in your message?
I agree, my subjective listening is ofc not proof of anything, it would be like the purist vinyl fanatics always argue that vinyl sounds better than streaming HD from Qobuz or similar, dont take my word for it, listen to it at full upscaling if you have the opportunity, but I can hear a diff, same as I can hear a diff in Roon when upsampling or on the Auralic Aries G1, if it is worth the $$ spent I cannot say, some people buy Rolex for 20K $$ and swear by it wile a 3 $$ Casio probably keeps time better.Many people report positive differences with the M-scaler, just like you do. Here at ASR many people know this quite well.
What many people here at ASR wonder however is whether the M-scaler actually sounds any different: real vs. imagined differences. You personally have no obligation to care about this at all. To you that is what counts and that's perfectly acceptable - to you. Just do not expect that ASR members accept this as evidence - just because you say so.
Sure, we already know you think you hear a difference. However, the whole discussion has already moved to the next phase: are these perceived differences real or imagined? Btw, this is not about measurements per se. The true test is whether those differences can be heard in a properly controlled level matched blind test. Another 'I can hear a difference' testimonial - while no doubt genuine and sincere - does not add to the discussion at this phase.I agree, my subjective listening is ofc not proof of anything, it would be like the purist vinyl fanatics always argue that vinyl sounds better than streaming HD from Qobuz or similar, dont take my word for it, listen to it at full upscaling if you have the opportunity, but I can hear a diff, same as I can hear a diff in Roon when upsampling or on the Auralic Aries G1, if it is worth the $$ spent I cannot say, some people buy Rolex for 20K $$ and swear by it wile a 3 $$ Casio probably keeps time better.
Well, I have no "golden Ears" for sure and using headphones using Hugo 2 and a TT2 I can clearly hear a difference (Real or Imagined) and I think I could seperate the 2 in a blind test(leaving the Mscaler aside), but I am sure that you would hear a difference especially on a pair of good headphones such the DCA Stealth and Susvara and even the old and trusty HD800, maybe more difficult on Speakers as the room acustics will be very much dependent on how it sounds.Sure, we already know you think you hear a difference. However, the whole discussion has already moved to the next phase: are these perceived differences real or imagined? Btw, this is not about measurements per se. The true test is whether those differences can be heard in a properly controlled level matched blind test. Another 'I can hear a difference' testimonial - while no doubt genuine and sincere - does not add to the discussion at this phase.
Quite a few people are genuinely and sincerely convinced they could hear these perceived differences also in a blind test. But this does not really advance the discussion, since you have to do that blind test before appealing to its results.Well, I have no "golden Ears" for sure and using headphones using Hugo 2 and a TT2 I can clearly hear a difference (Real or Imagined) and I think I could seperate the 2 in a blind test(leaving the Mscaler aside), but I am sure that you would hear a difference especially on a pair of good headphones such the DCA Stealth and Susvara and even the old and trusty HD800, maybe more difficult on Speakers as the room acustics will be very much dependent on how it sounds.
What benefits would you expect to see from an upsampler with a 1kHz test tone?
True, And I would love to do a blind test.Quite a few people are genuinely and sincerely convinced they could hear these perceived differences also in a blind test. But this does not really advance the discussion, since you have to do that blind test before appealing to its results.
None, it is quite easy to reproduce a 1kHz tone whether it is 32kHz or 768kHz sampling frequency (as long as a decent, does not have to be perfect, reconstruction filter is applied). The result is no different. In any case it does not hurt to check if it does not get worse either. Without testing one does not know.
I would expect it to be good anyway (as good as the DAC can actually make it, which is the limiting factor. Not the calculations which will be fine.
Then the added dither might be seen or some unwanted spurious under certain circumstances. All that can be said is ... it does not make the response worse. Improve things (1kHz only) it can not.
What the measurements show is no improvement and no penalty in that area.
As has been mentioned in this thread, the impulse response of a digital generated pulse (1 sample width at 44kHz) is more interesting but was not tested.
The 22μs bit is total nonsense. A 20kHz tone can be reproduced perfectly and as that is not a multiple of the sampling frequency there you have the proof that resolution is far better than 22μs
A key part of my question is that Amir specifically called out 'no benefit' on this graph which implies a negative.
Those people may have good reasons to believe the M-scaler does nothing. They may be right. They could also be wrong, of course. They also may be quite correct in noting that the listening impressions so far have not been valid evidence since they have not been based on proper blind listening results.True, And I would love to do a blind test.
I have no argument against the measurements of the Mscaler, my only objection is the hate that this devise is getting by people who never listened to it and to say that it does noting.
That said to better explain the difference is to for those of you who use Roon, if you use the sample rate conversion in Roon and you can hear the difference there then you have an idea on what the Mscaler does but much improved (my subjective opinion), for lack of better word, so use Roon as a stage for your blind test and if you can hear a difference there I believe you would be able to hear same using the Mscaler.....is the Mscaler worth the price tag, that I cannot answer.
I don't see it that way. No benefit means no improvement in that area (1kHz), which it basically even can't. It can potentially mess things up only which it doesn't.
No, my point was not to provoke, quite the opposite, found it rather interesting reactions from the 2 camps, I rather felt that you and a few other were and are trying to provoke and shows very high negative emotions regarding the measurements
I don't understand. If, on one hand, you're saying that an upsampler can't improve a 1kHz tone, then why say 'no benefit'? From what you're saying, the test should be considering if damage is being done and calling out 'no reduction in signal quality' or a reduction in signal quality.