Chord launches new M Scaler for Hugo TT

analogmusic posted:

What Steve sells actually stated in his Ndac white paper

“Even though, in a perfect world, FIR should be able to implement any IIR response to the resolution of the DACs, we found that processing loads, arithmetic noise, etc had greater influence on sound quality than the phase errors that IIR filters inherently introduce.”

 

Yes, but remember this choice from Naim was  specifically about the AD implementation of the DSP reconstruction filter and what sounds best when using them in the Naim designs, as Analog Devices  SHARC processors can support both recursive IIR algorithms as well as linear FIR ones. It is rather well documented in DSP engineering design and implementation  texts that although FIR implementations can be ultimatelymore accurate overall in an ideal world ... the increased processing and ground modulation noise from larger filter kernels and the processing of those filter steps or ‘taps’ undermines the increased reconstruction accuracy. Now Chord have produced new generation ultra low power FPGAs from Xilinx that have massively reduce processing power for filter kernel convolution and thereby reducing significantly associated noise... and this therefore has moved the goalposts. If Naim used a different ultra lower power DSP engine I would be very surprised if they wouldn’t prefer FIR instead for the above reasons. However I suspect changing things like that would be a huge upheaval and I suspect there was little appetite to do that economically ... I must admit when talking to some of the Naim design engineers on this matter i was met with looks that suggested that they really hadn’t revisited this with the new streamer products.it might change if there is a Statement streamer.

These areas are more about real world implementations and what sounds best rather than technical issues... and processing noise is the enemy of high quality digital audio electronics.

Stefan Vogt posted:

Simon, thanks for all your input on this thread, though I must admit I haven't quite understood as yet if the 'taps' in the M scaler are serving the same (filtering) purpose as those in a chord Dac? If so, then are there two filters in series?? Or are the taps in a chord Dac doing something completely different?

I doubt if it’s the same. Kernel sizes are relative to filters ... and there must a reconstruction filter associated the DAC for the DAC to create an accurate analog signal.. If there is filter kernel convolution ahead of the DAC that implies there is some sort of digital filtering ahead of the DAC which could be adding to the overall reconstruction effect. I for obvious reasons am not aware of the details of the M Scaler... I feel it is unlikely to be solely an oversampler but it might be some sort of noise shaper optimised to work with the Chord DACs.

analogmusic posted:

it Would be nice if Roon could do for 500 dollars what blu2 does for 8000 gbp

Well Roon, either by itself or adding HQPlayer, can upsample to 768k...

Roon may oversample

but the WTA filter does something else completely. The Mscaler has a 760 core CPU processing FPGA

your average laptop has a 2 core CPU even if it runs faster it just can’t compete with the FPGA for this kind of task 

over £3000 to improve the cd when the format is dieing  .new cdp for sale  are getting less .  it also needs to use two outputs to the dac  What will be its market

Same market as rich people who can pay 18000 gbp for a Klimax Linn Turntable

audio1946 posted:

over £3000 to improve the cd when the format is dieing  .new cdp for sale  are getting less .  it also needs to use two outputs to the dac  What will be its market

The M-scaler has multiple inputs....USB,optical,and dual BNCs,so can be used with many different products,not just CD players.The dual BNCs need to be used if you want the max output of 768 KHZ,but using a single BNC still upscales a 44.1 KHZ (CD quality) signal to 384 KHZ.You can use it with a laptop,or in my case, a Naim Core,so I think its market will be HUGE,and I look forward to trying one out.

audio1946 posted:

over £3000 to improve the cd when the format is dieing  .new cdp for sale  are getting less .  it also needs to use two outputs to the dac  What will be its market

As it is nothing to do with CD specifically, but digital replay, then CD for as long as people continue to play them with any transport with a digital output, and streaming, whether from own local music stores, or even online streaming servises.

analogmusic posted:

Same market as rich people who can pay 18000 gbp for a Klimax Linn Turntable

Except with Hugo TT only half the cost including a good renderer, and still significantly less costly even with Dave.

I talked to my local dealer today,he is getting an mscaler in as soon as they are available,which he said I can try . He currently has a Blu2/Dave at home,along with a Qutest,he plans on comparing Blu2/Dave to Blu2/Qutest in the near future.He agrees with me that the M scaler/Qutest should be a really good combo,at reasonable cost...without having to sell body parts.Oh yes,he also mentioned good isolation feet under the Dave and Blu2 made a huge difference for him,he does not have the Chord stands.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Stefan Vogt posted:

Simon, thanks for all your input on this thread, though I must admit I haven't quite understood as yet if the 'taps' in the M scaler are serving the same (filtering) purpose as those in a chord Dac? If so, then are there two filters in series?? Or are the taps in a chord Dac doing something completely different?

I doubt if it’s the same. Kernel sizes are relative to filters ... and there must a reconstruction filter associated the DAC for the DAC to create an accurate analog signal.. If there is filter kernel convolution ahead of the DAC that implies there is some sort of digital filtering ahead of the DAC which could be adding to the overall reconstruction effect. I for obvious reasons am not aware of the details of the M Scaler... I feel it is unlikely to be solely an oversampler but it might be some sort of noise shaper optimised to work with the Chord DACs.

 

The Mscaler does the first stage WTA filtering and takes this job over from this WTA processing in Dave

the FPGA in Dave is now only doing the DAC job (no longer the filter job) and is running at a much more easier load therefore less power supply noise....

Apparently the magic and clever processing is in this WTA filtering stage hence the massive FPGA in Mscaler.

I have Dave on Stillpoint minis, works very well but then i find they help most kit. Saying that i never liked them under my NDX.

analogmusic posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Stefan Vogt posted:

Simon, thanks for all your input on this thread, though I must admit I haven't quite understood as yet if the 'taps' in the M scaler are serving the same (filtering) purpose as those in a chord Dac? If so, then are there two filters in series?? Or are the taps in a chord Dac doing something completely different?

I doubt if it’s the same. Kernel sizes are relative to filters ... and there must a reconstruction filter associated the DAC for the DAC to create an accurate analog signal.. If there is filter kernel convolution ahead of the DAC that implies there is some sort of digital filtering ahead of the DAC which could be adding to the overall reconstruction effect. I for obvious reasons am not aware of the details of the M Scaler... I feel it is unlikely to be solely an oversampler but it might be some sort of noise shaper optimised to work with the Chord DACs.

 

The Mscaler does the first stage WTA filtering and takes this job over from this WTA processing in Dave

the FPGA in Dave is now only doing the DAC job (no longer the filter job) and is running at a much more easier load therefore less power supply noise....

Apparently the magic and clever processing is in this WTA filtering stage hence the massive FPGA in Mscaler.

So how does it communicate to the downstream DAC like DAVE that this filtering is done and not to be re-applied over the top?

Is there a technical reason not to add the scaling thingy to the dacs vs. seperate units?

I think that's why mscalersends a 705khz signal to Dave which tells Dave to switch off the first stage WTA fikter. In any case it shows on Dave screen when the dual bnc is active

As for separate mscaler well Rob watts says the mscaler generates way too much PSU noise to be in the same box as his Dave DAC....

Well the nds also has the PSU in another box....

Well mine is ordered, and expected in “Autumn”. 

No quarter posted:

Oh yes,he <dealer> also mentioned good isolation feet under the Dave and Blu2 made a huge difference for him,he does not have the Chord stands.

I have a similar experience with upgrading the footers of the Hugo.  I have used pucks from Isoacoustics under my Hugo to dramatic effect.  The little nubs under the body are clearly inadequate.  

I seriously found placing my Hugo on the glass of a Fraim shelf provided a gain, and i ensure my Hiline connecting between my 552 and Hugo is not touching the glass shelf or anything else.

Hi audio1946 - I for one will be buying the M Scaler.  I already have a Dave.  I'm looking forward to an improvement in sound quality.

Ok so i have just read Andrew Everards NDX2 review in this months HFNRR, and if im honest i read it as though he is not 100% enamoured with it. Now this is Andrew who won’t say a bad word on a Naim product IMHO.

upshot is you need a 555dr to get it on song and then its a toss up between this and an NDS. Ok so nothing really bad here but when you consider a number of guys on here moved from NDS to Hugo, well where does that leave the ND555 in comparison to something like Dave + MScaler.

i know what my opinion would be, whats yours.

I will demo all the new streamers inc the new nd5 with Dave and the blue 2 upscaler. If I like the latter I will just buy the nd5 and a Dave and wait for the mscaler. Despite knowing all about the Chord products , people are trying, buying and loving the ND555. Perhaps they feel they get more of the Naim presentation of music and something different with Chord?

a comparison between dave/blue 2 / melco and nd555 would be specially interesting...

Gazza posted:

I will demo all the new streamers inc the new nd5 with Dave and the blue 2 upscaler. If I like the latter I will just buy the nd5 and a Dave and wait for the mscaler. Despite knowing all about the Chord products , people are trying, buying and loving the ND555. Perhaps they feel they get more of the Naim presentation of music and something different with Chord?

It sounds as if you have an open mind. I suspect in at least some cases  others simply haven’t heard Dave, whether from lack of opportunity, commitment to a particular size/ shape of black box, or blind belief that the ND555 will inevitably outshine anything else (which for all I know, it may)

Gazza posted:

People are trying, buying and loving the ND555. Perhaps they feel they get more of the Naim presentation of music and something different with Chord?

I wonder how many of those actually try home demos of other equipment 

Well I like perhaps some (or many?) have listened and enjoyed the NDAC, NDX, NDS, ND555 as well as various Chord DACs including Hugo, TT, Hugo2 and Dave. To me there is a characteristic similar sound to the Naim DACs, perhaps based on similar analogue filtering, i2S, as well as PCM1704Ks and the same AD DSP methods... although refinement and design clearly improves through the range and the ND555 has been rather resolving when I have listened with it, and moves things nicely on from the NDS, albeit I don’t find it has the weight of the NDAC/555PS which was quite something... albeit perhaps not top flight in resolution.

The Chord DACs tend to have a similar trait amongst themselves as well, and to my ears I have yet to hear a more enjoyable all round DAC than the original Hugo, although Dave takes the lead with hidef, and sample variation with the Hugo is greater than I would prefer.. I ended up buying my demo one as it sounded so much better than two other new Hugos I tried. To my ears I just find them potentially more natural sounding than PCM1704K based devices..but that is subjective, and all DACs have a choice of compromise.

So in the end I think it really falls down to sonic preference and ‘house’ style. To me some of the greatest ND555 advancements have been through design decoupling and electrical noise management from the streaming functions and display etc.