advertisement


Chord MScaler - not that impressed

Thanks for sharing your detailed thoughts on M Scaler. It's interesting because it's more or less the opposite of my experience of M Scaler with TT2. I'm usually pretty good at describing differences but in the case of M Scaler I found it particularly difficult to put my finger on exactly how the sound changed, but I felt it became purer, more lifelike and it increased my sense of immersion in the music. I found the TT 2 on its own to be a touch sterile and brittle sounding, and simply less 'convincing', without M Scaler in the chain. It's fascinating how we all hear things differently.
I heard it with a Dave at a dealer demonstration, so very controlled / room optimised conditions. Like you I found the effect on music was to make the singers ( in particular) sound more life like. The Dave was already excellent and I thought he couldn’t improve on it, so the m-scaler was one of those genuine wow moments. I didn’t feel I was having more detail thrown at me and it reminded me of hearing SACD for the first time- just how natural it sounded.
 
Last edited:
Another decent, genuine thread crapped on by Purite Audio. It could have been a useful conversation between people who had some experience of the o/p’s kit

Fwiw, even though I have a DAVE/MScaler I would definitely suggest you look at speakers first, preferably active. ATC SCM40As are within your budget, especially as you wouldn’t need an amp, and maybe other ATCs further up the range, depending on whether you go new or s/h. They have a magnificent, solid, coherent, convincing sound, with all sorts of music, and will give you a huge amount of pleasure and involvement. And they aren’t “hi-fi”.
Very true about speakers (and sadly true about the thread crapper). It’s a while since I listened to B&W speakers but the last ones I heard (£22k?) seemed to me to have a very prominent treble that I can well imagine might become a bit too much of a good thing with added detail. It’s always difficult to get to the right balance for our individual tastes.
 
There was some improvement in detail at the expense of a leaner, etched and bleached sound, but it was unnatural

Interesting. Those descriptive traits kept popping into my mind when I owned my TT2 (I’ve owned two), and this was without M-scaler. Sometimes it could sound truly superb and I could understand what the hype was about, but all too often I found it lean and sometimes a little ‘etched’, like you said. Artificial. Some have mentioned ridiculously over-priced RF combatting cables to improve matters. But my feelings were (and still are) when spending 4 grand on a DAC the rf issues (IF any, in actuality) should have been designed out at the pre-production stage. And needing a £3.5 M-scaling gizmo to make a £4k DAC work at its best seemed crazy to me too the more I thought/think about it, much like the Naim upgrading treadmill. Glad to be out of that, though intend to get a used Hugo TT again this year - For sheer musical involvement and an ‘analogue-like’ presentation it really hit the sweet spot for me, despite the ‘superiority’ of TT2.
 
Last edited:
Oh god, more babble from ‘Measurement Keith’. We have ears! Also most of us are true music enthusiasts - we play a lot of music - so our ears are very well tuned barometers of what appeals or not.
 
If some unit/item does not sound "right" or fit in with a person's system at home, then that said item is not going to purchased/kept. Does not matter what the measurements of said item may be, if it does not do the job the person wants from it, then back it goes. As said before, ears are used to listen/appreciate music being played, not some "fancy super-duper" measurements. Maybe get a list of items that ought to be good then listen to each one if possible in home system, then make decision which unit to buy/keep.
 
I cannot stretch to the TT2 maybe one perhaps but for me the MScaler / Qutest represents great value, the MScaler transforms the Qutest into another DAC especially with the 2x BNC digital inputs both being used on the Qutest.
Cables I use Mark Grant HDX1 digital leads and at £30 per cable I wont spend anymore (no need), BNC plugs are a nice tight fit unlike the supplied MScaler cables.
 
Any news on Chord dac products that will incorporate m-scaler technology on their boards? I imagine that’s the next step in their product sequencing.
 
OP here.

I hear what people are saying about speakers making a difference. I have B&W CM10 S2 speakers, which I am hoping to upgrade to B&W 804 D3, or some other brand at around that price point (£7k new). But my comments about not being convinced by the merits of the Mscaler apply equally to my experiences listening via my Focal Utopia headphones. I can hear a small difference between the Mscaler/Dave and the bare Dave - but am not convinced that I prefer the sound with the Mscaler in play. So maybe my findings are similar to RossB. The Mscaler does make the Dave sound a little bit smoother (more analogue?), but I feel the sound also loses something, compared to the bare Dave.

If I sell the Mscaler now I can get most of my money back and will probably use the funds to upgrade my speakers. I would hope to hear a definte improvement going from B&W CM10 S2 to B&W 804 D3 (or something else at the £7k-£8k level). So I feel that would probably be a better use for my funds.

I have thought about adding an Innuos Phoenix to my Zen server - that may be a future purchase.

And of course I could always buy another Mscaler at a later date if I wanted to (as per RossB!!).

Incidentally, I had a TT2 before I bought the Dave. I do prefer the greater resolution of the Dave, but the TT2 was pretty good. Just not so sure about the Mscaler.....
I moved from B&W CM8 S1 to 804D2, even after getting a room correction device I was never happy with the low end, the top/mid was better but many evenings I found myself wishing the CM8 were back in place. I then had a few demos and found a speaker that I’m absolutely delighted with, they do divide opinion it seems but if you can, have a listen to some Panel type speakers, I’ve bought Martin Logan ESL11a - you’ll get them in budget second hand. Later this year I will be upgrading to the bigger 15a model. Out of around a dozen pairs we tried the Box type option was the Wilson Sabrina but we didn’t feel the extra £ gave enough of a difference. Magnepan + Subs will be the alternative I consider to the Logans.

I do wonder what the next generation of Chord DAC technologies will bring, a Premium Streamer would make sense as an addition. I have had Chord kit and did order a Scaler in 2019, for a couple reasons it didn’t arrive and after a few changes since a dCS Bartok arrives tomorrow. If you’ve not compared the Chord stuff to dCS it would be worth a demo after the old COVID malarkey has subsided.
 
Good to hear different impressions of what the m scaler does. It does seem, from those that have actually used it, that it does do something; contrary to the “opinions” of some who express their views based on limited knowledge of the technology behind the product and their belief system.
It is only to be expected that there are various subjective impressions of what the M Scaler does. Placebo works wonders. But ordinary digital conversion has been audibly transparent for decades. What more can M Scaler then do? If it indeed does something audible, it is an effects box which has nothing to do with proper sound reproduction.
 
I moved from B&W CM8 S1 to 804D2, even after getting a room correction device I was never happy with the low end, the top/mid was better but many evenings I found myself wishing the CM8 were back in place. I then had a few demos and found a speaker that I’m absolutely delighted with, they do divide opinion it seems but if you can, have a listen to some Panel type speakers, I’ve bought Martin Logan ESL11a - you’ll get them in budget second hand. Later this year I will be upgrading to the bigger 15a model. Out of around a dozen pairs we tried the Box type option was the Wilson Sabrina but we didn’t feel the extra £ gave enough of a difference. Magnepan + Subs will be the alternative I consider to the Logans.

I do wonder what the next generation of Chord DAC technologies will bring, a Premium Streamer would make sense as an addition. I have had Chord kit and did order a Scaler in 2019, for a couple reasons it didn’t arrive and after a few changes since a dCS Bartok arrives tomorrow. If you’ve not compared the Chord stuff to dCS it would be worth a demo after the old COVID malarkey has subsided.
Have you compared the Bartok with Chord? Would be keen to hear impressions.
 
Last edited:
Another member who’s been tired of Keith’s thread crapping over several years. I made my mind up some time back that I would never go anywhere near Purite Audio.

Anyway, with that out of the way, I’ve had a Hugo TT2 with M-Scaler since late 2019 in my study system. With the lockdowns of the past year I’ve spent a great deal of time listening to music at low volume through the setup while working on more important stuff. I use the M-Scaler as a digital front end for a CD transport and Internet Radio stations via a tablet. CDs sound more dynamic and detailed with the M-Scaler working. I’m not bothered about soundstage and imaging in my study.

Where the M-Scaler really comes into its own is improving the sound of low bandwidth radio stations – to the point where I’m very happy listening to them. For example, Progzilla radio produces very enjoyable sounds on much of its material whereas when listening straight I’ve found these stations sound compressed and boring.
 
Have you compared the Barton with Chord? Would be keen to hear impressions.
No, I sold the Chord kit a while ago.

I had Auralic Aries G2/Vega G2/Leo GX and it was that I pitched the Bartok against. All running the latest firmware. I had the Bartok from 27th Dec to 17th Jan so a decent period to try various combos, settings, filters etc.

I also have a Topping D90 MQA (replaced a SONCOZ) in the Office system so I did a head to head against it as well.

I tried both direct to Mono Power Amps as Pre/DAC and through normal Amps as a pure DAC.

Compared to the Auralic stack the Bartok has more air, space, timbre, texture and better bass, the improved bass was a bit surprising. In the context of price it's not night and day, veils lifting and all that but I enjoyed the music more via the Bartok and missed it when I removed it, so I bought one which is due to arrive tomorrow.

For the record I've been very happy with the Auralic gear which I found better than anything I'd had before (it replaced the top Gen1 Naim), well built, solid in operation with no serious bugs, regular updates and features added, sounded better than anything I'd had/demo'd previously and that is a fair few Streamer/DAC/Pre devices/combos. I had planned to add the Auralic Sirius to complete the stack of 4 and be done, however the dCS Bartok has changed my mind.
 
Last edited:
I too had various Chord DAC’s over the years and even trying the TOTL pieces, they just didn’t float my boat.
I have a dCS Bartok now and I was able to reduce box count at the same time as it is streamer and DAC.
 
Unfortunately not many consumers have a spare £11k lying around for a DAC.
True, obviously depends on circumstances and priorities, I know a number of friends, family and clients who spend a large sum most years on multiple foreign holidays, cruises, other interests, I choose to spend any disposable cash on my Hi Fi and always have, going on 45 years now.
 
It is only to be expected that there are various subjective impressions of what the M Scaler does. Placebo works wonders. But ordinary digital conversion has been audibly transparent for decades. What more can M Scaler then do? If it indeed does something audible, it is an effects box which has nothing to do with proper sound reproduction.
Bold statements you make there! I assume you’ve studied Watts ideas on tap length and implementation of Shannon Nyquist, and how they impact on human perception, and as such you should be able to explain why he is wrong without resorting to the simplistic purite lexicon of “placebo”, “transparency” and “effects box”. You might then be able to express yourself without insulting those members who have taken the trouble to report on their findings, good and bad.

By the way, you forgot to use “cognitive bias”! ;)
 
DCS products are not cheap but at least they develop their own DAC tech. The great thing about digital is that you can get a great system for not a lot of money but can still go ‘boutique’ should you choose to.

I have relatives who drive a modest car & think my 5 series is bit bourgeois but they go on 5 holidays a year & I don’t. I reckon they’ve spent more on holidays than I have on hifi.

I can fully understand why people spend big on audio equipment, I’ve done it myself.
 
John Atkinson’s measurements simply don’t suggest an audible difference you can see that for yourself.
Chord make really decent measuring equipment, but the ‘tap length ‘ assertion is simply that, there have been no unsighted trials performed by Chord or Watts that confirm that the more taps equals higher SQ.
Lastly it is of course simple to test, just borrow another dac, one with and one without and switch between them unsighted.
Keith
 
I've had a Hugo TT for almost 6 years and plan to purchase a TT2 in a couple of months after briefly hearing one in my system and enjoying it very much. After being initially intrigued by M-scaler, I have little desire to try one any more. I do trust Rob Watts as an engineer, and his DACs seem to get progressively more impressive with tap length so he must be on to something, but the whole idea of a separate unit in the chain with its cryptic balls of light and the additional requirement of expensive ugly cables, just doesn't seem like a very elegant solution to me. It's a lot of wedge for what most would agree is a relatively minor improvement. Money better spent elsewhere for all but the most complete of systems.

In answer to the OP: Just sell it.
 
I've owned an M Scaler no less than three times. Strictly speaking, I had a Blu 2, and then two M Scalers. Yes, the definition of insanity.

Short version

To cut a long story short, I think the M Scaler is a bit of a con. It does what it says it does, but it just doesn't sound very good. It makes a noticeable and quite significant difference, and most people seem to equate "difference" with "improvement". To my ears, with multiple Chord DACs, I found the M Scaler made the sound more detailed, but resulted in a sound that is lean and tonally bleached. The Chord DACs without the M Scaler sounded warmer, fuller and richer. The M Scaler produces the illusion of more detail and more dynamics but at a significant cost to musicality and natural sound.

These days, any powerful PC can produce similar upscaling to the M Scaler at a fraction of the cost, and the results are very similar. Rob Watts has obviously tuned the M Scaler to sound a little different to other software like Roon or HQPlayer, but even this could probably be replicated by someone willing to spend a bit of time playing with filter settings and maybe a bit of DSP. Even so, in my view it would be a waste of time because the effects of massive upscaling are as I've described - an etched, bleached un-musical sound which bears no relationship to the original. There are no free lunches in audio, particularly digital, and you cannot apply massive processing to a signal without there being a cost somewhere else.

Long version

I bought a Chord Dave a few years ago at a store after hearing it at a dem at a shop, alongside the top Audio Research DAC. The DAVE was played with the Blu 2, but at the time I didn't really think too much about its effect. The Audio Research DAC sounded as I expected - rich midrange, full sound. Not quite my cup of tea, but very good in a conventional way. The DAVE however sounded like nothing I'd ever heard. The sound stretched to the outer walls and beyond. The detail presented was extraordinary. It was like watching an MRI image of an orchestra, the level of detail was forensic to the extreme. It was an unfamiliar system and I can never really judge anything properly in a system I am not familiar with. But what I heard was something so extreme and so different that I thought that Rob Watts must really be onto something with his approach, and I ordered a DAVE. What I didn't realise was that I was mostly hearing the effects of upscaling from the Blu 2, which was producing that unexpected sound.

When I got the DAVE, I liked it. It sounded very good. At home, it didn't sound quite as radically different as I had expected based on the dem, but I was happy with it. And, as happens with these things, after reading up on it, I liked it so much I ordered the Blu 2 to go with it. (The M Scaler had not yet been released.) The Blu 2 arrived, I connected it, never really compared it with the "bare" DAVE, and just carried in listening to it. After some months I became vaguely dissatisfied with the DAVE/Blu 2. It was sounding tonally thin, lean, a little brighter than I remembered, and not very engaging. I didn't associate the Blu 2 with this sound (I naturally assumed it was an improvement, having drunk the Chord Kool Aid). After a year I sold both the DAVE and the Blu 2.

I tried a few other different DACs, but wasn't quite satisfied, and still believed there was something to the Chord approach that was fundamentally correct. I had read that the Hugo TT2 was fuller and more dynamic than the DAVE, but not as detailed. That sounded like what I wanted, so I ordered one, along with an M Scaler, since I still believed that upscaling would be an improvement. I quite liked the TT2 and did think it was an improvement over the DAVE for my preferences - it was smoother, fuller, tonally richer, and more dynamic, without quite the level of forensic detail. This time I did compare the different levels of upscaling, including comparing full upscaling to bypass mode (ie no upscaling). This time I could clearly hear that upscaling sounded brighter, more detailed, but lacked harmonic richness. Bypass sounded warmer and more natural. But did I prefer it? I didn't know. I couldn't reconcile the idea of having the M Scaler and not using it. I can't recall the thought process at the time, but after a few months I sold both, and moved on to something else.

Later still (all of this occurred over a period of about 4 years), I decided I still was interested in hearing the Chord sound, so bought a Qutest. It was good, if a little grainy and obviously a lesser DAC than the TT2. And again, I couldn't resist, I had to hear what an M Scaler would do to it, so I bought yet another one. I repeated the experiment with the TT2 and over time, I came to feel that the changes which the M Scaler made - which are clearly noticeable and not to be doubted - were definitely for the worse. I loaned both units to a friend whose ears I trusted, he did the same comparison without bias (and with little knowledge of the Chord DACs or upsampler) and came to the same conclusion much more quickly.

So after some years of listening to all of the Chord DACs with multiple M Scalers, I had come to the conclusion that upscaling just didn't produce the benefits claimed. There was some improvement in detail at the expense of a leaner, etched and bleached sound, but it was unnatural, and lost some of the warmth and richness of the original.

I sold the Qutest and M Scaler and have finally regurgitated all of the Chord Kool Aid, and will never go back there. I have moved on to other DACs and am very happy with what I currently have. And those who think that all DACs sound the same or that upscaling is not audible must either have an agenda of their own or be deaf.

It took me years, multiple DACs, endless listening comparisons and a ridiculous amount of money to figure out what the OP has realised very quickly. So my recommendation is: trust your ears, don't believe the hype and sell the M Scaler while there is a market for it.

That was a very useful and thoughtful post and will save people a lot of cash experimenting - thanks! What DAC are you using now if you don’t mind me asking?
 


advertisement


Back
Top