DAC architecture reimagined - the Cascade DAC

[Mike Lavigne]

The video tell little about the new DAC. Pretty high level. But it does show that they case work and layout appear excellent. The basic foundation looks superb. What we don't really know is what the internal software is all about. My perceptions are that the software can make a great product superb. If the software is not the best, a great product can rest at great, or maybe not.

I was reading about Pink Fauns USB cards. What is MSB doing to make their inputs superior? Do they have anything cutting edge? I am only asking. What sets MSB apart from any of the other well laid out DAC. Mostly what I see is a remote power supply, remote processors and remote DAC chip. Is that all it takes to make a great DAC. I don't think it is. But I really don't know what makes a DAC work well.

i'm no dac expert. but when i was on the hunt for the MSB Select II as my dream dac in 2015-2017 one big attraction to me was it's "bit perfect" approach described as taking advantage of the progress of lower noise dac technology by avoiding oversampling/upsampling to lower noise. and having a hybrid dac technology where both pcm and dsd were native. the second tech attraction was eliminating the output stage by using enough dac power that it could output a sufficient analog output. no analog output stage can be more pure than having one. those tech advantages, plus the solid "from a billet" chassis, and the modular approach to interfaces seemed future proofed. i met Vince Galbo and he seemed like a very knowledgeable guy and i felt i could have confidence in the company.

when i purchased my MSB Select II, there had been zero reviews on it, and not much feedback on line. a few blurbs here and there.

as a non techie, i claim no depth of understanding on the technology, but it did make sense and aligned with what i heard. (i can just see micro rolling his eyes).

and after auditioning it at three hifi shows and hearing what i needed to hear i was all in and pulled the trigger.

now 6-7 years later i view those attributes somewhat differently, but still respect them. and no doubt Select II owners really enjoy their dacs. not sure how much of those attributes are still part of the Cascade.

 

[matthias]

The video tell little about the new DAC. Pretty high level. But it does show that they case work and layout appear excellent. The basic foundation looks superb. What we don't really know is what the internal software is all about. My perceptions are that the software can make a great product superb. If the software is not the best, a great product can rest at great, or maybe not.

I was reading about Pink Fauns USB cards. What is MSB doing to make their inputs superior? Do they have anything cutting edge? I am only asking. What sets MSB apart from any of the other well laid out DAC. Mostly what I see is a remote power supply, remote processors and remote DAC chip. Is that all it takes to make a great DAC. I don't think it is. But I really don't know what makes a DAC work well.

Yes, my understanding is that they did separate the DD and the DAC in such a way that the DAC needs the DD to exist, the DAC does the conversion only nothing more. All other tasks are "directed" to the DD. Why the existing DACs can not be upgraded is beyond my understanding. I don't see any technical reasons for this approach.

 

[Alpinist]

Yes, my understanding is that they did separate the DD and the DAC in such a way that the DAC needs the DD to exist, the DAC does the conversion only nothing more. All other tasks are "directed" to the DD. Why the existing DACs can not be upgraded is beyond my understanding. I don't see any technical reasons for this approach.

I suspect it was easier for MSB to build the Cascade from the ground up than to upgrade the Select and Reference to the same level. Not to say that they couldn’t have or shouldn’t have. Companies usually take the path that is most economically efficient.

 

[LL21]

i'm no dac expert. but when i was on the hunt : "bit perfect" approach...lower noise dac technology...avoiding oversampling/upsampling...hybrid dac technology where both pcm and dsd were native...eliminating the output stage by using enough dac power...plus the solid "from a billet" chassis... modular approach... seemed future proofed....

...now 6-7 years later i view those attributes somewhat differently, but still respect them...

Fascinating, Mike. I have cut down your original quote to list just the key targets you found appealing in the MSG Select II...and I am most curious as to why now you view those original [target] attributes differently today than you did then. Presumably, this has some large part to do with your experience with Wadax.

What are are the key technical/design attributes you look for in digital today vs those original ones above from 6-7 years ago?

 

[bryans]

As a Reference owner of course we all want our products to be able to be upgraded until the end of time. I have seen different upgrades to MSB gear which was accomplished because of their modular design. At some point a new design was going to come out.

My issue with the latest announcement of the Cascade isn't that my Reference can't be upgraded, it is with the trade-in policy. One of the biggest advantages to MSB (IMO) was I could trade in my unit towards a new model and get 100% of the value I paid towards a new unit. The current policy states Select and Reference owners only get 50% value at trade in.

 

[luca.pelliccioli]

I think it’s a question of value. A new Reference purchased 10 days ago at a price of 70K (here) had a value of 70K following the MSB trade-in policy. That pushed customers to do a choice, going for that product vs others. Like a new house or a new car. Even on the used market that Reference had a specific value, due to the trade-in policy.
Today, all at once, the same DAC has a value of 35K (again, here in Italy) following the announced new trade-in policy. This makes also a huge difference considering its value on the used market in general.

On the contrary my previous Premier still has the same trade-in value, no matter the date of purchasing, keeping a better value on the used market.

I’m wondering, what will be the value of my Reference when (soon) it will go out of production?

I agree with you, the new policy might discourage the customers that were trusting in MSB brand until now. This hobby, we all know, can’t be considered a financial investment (unlike watches or jewelry). But I was confident about a different value-protection strategy applied to MSB products that drove my choices in the past. Currently I’m not so sure, I can’t say I’m feeling like a “protected customer” as before, to be honest.

I highly respect Daniel and Jonathan view, so I prefer waiting some clarification about their strategy during the next few weeks. Probably the coming Munich event will bring on the table some better elements to be considered.

 

[Dustin Symanski]

All other tasks are "directed" to the DD. Why the existing DACs can not be upgraded is beyond my understanding.

We have recently upgraded the Select and Reference to the absolute maximum performance of their physical design via software, output modules, input modules (culminating with the Pro ISL), clocks and the Digital Director. Further performance required a change in physical form, the complete removal of all processing, displays microprocessors, control circuitry and upstream digital noise from the conversion box, hence the change to the Cascade DAC…. We promised upgradeability for the Reference and Select and we delivered, and will continue to deliver on that promise. 4 generations of input modules, 6 generations of major software upgrades ( many many more minor fixes and compatibility upgrades), 3 generations of clocks, and two generations of power bases as well as many tailored output and input modules for analog and digital and the absolute best processing and isolation available for their architecture in the form of the Digital Director are all of the upgrades thus far. And every last Reference and Select will benefit from future improved input modules and software (if you have the Digital Director) developed for the Cascade DAC meaning they will be fantastic usable DACs long into the future. They were amazing DACs last week and this week they still are. And they are much better than just last year because of the Digital Director.

 

[MarkusBarkus]

@DMSB thank you for your post. I recognize more info will emerge in the near future, but your summary is helpful, IMO.

It wasn't obvious to me that the DD I have would reap the sonic benefits of new modules/software should I decide to keep my Reference and Digital Director for now. Frankly, that was my hope and why I purchased the DD some months back: with an eye toward what you could add to it as development evolves. Good Luck in Munich.

 

[Brucemck2]

We have recently upgraded the Select and Reference to the absolute maximum performance of their physical design via software, output modules, input modules (culminating with the Pro ISL), clocks and the Digital Director. Further performance required a change in physical form, the complete removal of all processing, displays microprocessors, control circuitry and upstream digital noise from the conversion box, hence the change to the Cascade DAC…. We promised upgradeability for the Reference and Select and we delivered, and will continue to deliver on that promise. 4 generations of input modules, 6 generations of major software upgrades ( many many more minor fixes and compatibility upgrades), 3 generations of clocks, and two generations of power bases as well as many tailored output and input modules for analog and digital and the absolute best processing and isolation available for their architecture in the form of the Digital Director are all of the upgrades thus far. And every last Reference and Select will benefit from future improved input modules and software (if you have the Digital Director) developed for the Cascade DAC meaning they will be fantastic usable DACs long into the future. They were amazing DACs last week and this week they still are. And they are much better than just last year because of the Digital Director.

I “get” your rationale, but, as someone who very recently paid full boat with no trade in for a new Reference and Director on the premise, which you have marketed for years, that I would get most or even all of the original purchase price in trade for a new higher in your line MSB unit, I feel deceived and even cheated. I paid for the higher performance of the Director and offering the Director wasn’t part of any upgrade path for me. Many loyal customers will go elsewhere even if your new units are outstanding. I likely will.

 

[KeithR]

The thing is most of the people who would upgrade to Cascade own Refs and Selects. Guess I’ll upgrade my TT instead lol

 

[Kingrex]

The thing is most of the people who would upgrade to Cascade own Refs and Selects. Guess I’ll upgrade my TT instead lol

Whats the trade in on your table,

 

[Kingrex]

How many manufacturer really have trade in. And what do you get. Usually about 50%???.

It seems to me most people sell something old and buy new. Maybe that is because they are changing brands. I don't know too many people that stick with what they have. There always seems to be the itch to try something new. Maybe the jaded Ref and Select owners will try something else and find themselves very pleased.

 

[luca.pelliccioli]

Maybe it’s not a matter of general trade-in policy, just the way that policy happens to suddenly change once you have bought a product that was differently marketed (changing the rules while still playing, so to speak). No doubts about quality, upgrades possibilities or general refreshments of MSB products.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Fascinating, Mike. I have cut down your original quote to list just the key targets you found appealing in the MSG Select II...and I am most curious as to why now you view those original [target] attributes differently today than you did then. Presumably, this has some large part to do with your experience with Wadax.

my views have evolved with dac (and server) evolution i suppose. which for me, yes; that now means the Wadax.

What are are the key technical/design attributes you look for in digital today vs those original ones above from 6-7 years ago?

my tech understanding is very limited. i would describe myself as familiar with the terms, but not the nuts and bolts, of dac design or how digital works. i connect the dots of what my ears tell me with the processes i see implemented.

my view of the significance of 'bit perfect' and elimination of any analog output circuits, has now evolved to appreciate (1) forward looking error correction circuits, (2) very very low noise processing, (3) synergistic (ideally same manufacturer for both) dac and server design along with the (4) dac<->server interface significance. also (5) power supplies are enormously significant as digital reaches new heights. chassis design and modularity are still central, but also (6) resident Roon implementation allows streaming optimization. even (7) DC cable construction for the power supplies appear to be significant.

yes; all these things are part of the Wadax, but we see much of it in the Taiko Olympus efforts especially the power supply, interface, Roon being resident, and the Olympus internal dac all being common directions with Wadax.

for whatever reason, digital music reproduction is very sensitive to power and noise. we clearly hear changes when we improve these things. and it seems like digital sampling rates and bit depth is less significant as we lower noise.

the 'bit perfect' verses 'up-sampling/over-sampling' seem to have tipped back in favor of the latter.....to my ears.

 

[bryans]

How many manufacturer really have trade in. And what do you get. Usually about 50%???.

MSB trade in/up policy was a major factor in me buying MSB products. Having the ability to use 100% of what I paid towards an upgrade model was huge.

 

[Brucemck2]

MSB trade in/up policy was a major factor in me buying MSB products. Having the ability to use 100% of what I paid towards an upgrade model was huge.

Ditto! Absent that clear marketing messaging I would almost certainly have gone with something else (likely a Lampizator). I would “get it” if they changed it for new products going forward, but the retrospective change isn’t in keeping with the sales pitch of just a few months ago. I’ve been eyeing a pair of their 200 or 500 mono amps,, but that’ll go by the wayside if the “retroactive 50%” policy stands.

 

[bryans]

Ditto! Absent that clear marketing messaging I would almost certainly have gone with something else (likely a Lampizator). I would “get it” if they changed it for new products going forward, but the retrospective change isn’t in keeping with the sales pitch of just a few months ago. I’ve been eyeing a pair of their 200 or 500 mono amps,, but that’ll go by the wayside if the “retroactive 50%” policy stands.

Have also been looking at their 200 series amps along with a DD. Probably need to rethink this.

 

[LL21]

my views have evolved with dac (and server) evolution i suppose. which for me, yes; that now means the Wadax.

my tech understanding is very limited. i would describe myself as familiar with the terms, but not the nuts and bolts, of dac design or how digital works. i connect the dots of what my ears tell me with the processes i see implemented.

my view of the significance of 'bit perfect' and elimination of any analog output circuits, has now evolved to appreciate (1) forward looking error correction circuits, (2) very very low noise processing, (3) synergistic (ideally same manufacturer for both) dac and server design along with the (4) dac<->server interface significance. also (5) power supplies are enormously significant as digital reaches new heights. chassis design and modularity are still central, but also (6) resident Roon implementation allows streaming optimization. even (7) DC cable construction for the power supplies appear to be significant.

yes; all these things are part of the Wadax, but we see much of it in the Taiko Olympus efforts especially the power supply, interface, Roon being resident, and the Olympus internal dac all being common directions with Wadax.

for whatever reason, digital music reproduction is very sensitive to power and noise. we clearly hear changes when we improve these things. and it seems like digital sampling rates and bit depth is less significant as we lower noise.

the 'bit perfect' verses 'up-sampling/over-sampling' seem to have tipped back in favor of the latter.....to my ears.

Thank you. Very interesting and good to know. Interestingly, despite it age, the Zanden digital was always designed with:
- Transport and DAC always being considered 'one;
- 6 separate power supplies, 1 for each part - 5 for Transport (transport, display, etc) and 1 for DAC itself.
- In fact, Zanden is 4 boxes (2 PSU and 1 DAC and 1 Transport) to separate PSUs out/away
- The cables and i2s umbilical were always something they designed and shielded themselves...and subsequent bespoke cabling has made improvements further along those lines (Z:Axis Audio did our umbilical cables)
- Zanden also focused more on NOS and lack of filtering and lower noise than on bit-perfect, resampling
- the transport chassis remains surprisingly unbothered by isolation...yes, the SRA designed for it is 'better' but not by anywhere near the level I was originally expecting...thankfully got it second hand! (DAC did benefit quite a lot, as did PSUs)

No doubt, Zanden is showing its age despite being 'extraordinarily well proportioned' in its overall delivery of music...but the principle observations made by Yamada San appear to stand.

 

[Daniel Gullman]

Hello! This is Daniel Gullman here, finally decided to make an account and jump in to share some thoughts. It pains me to see speculation for things that I have the answers behind all this… so here I am, to hopefully clear things up.

The 95,000 USD price of the Cascade DAC is a disruption to MSB and to industry trends. Here, we have a DAC outperforming the Select DAC and we made the radical decision to sell it for less. Why?

I will happily provide some full transparency on the reasoning behind the decisions made. This is a real example of how “greedy corporations” can and often work, not us. We could have arbitrarily decided to sell the Cascade DAC for 165,000. That reality would see our customers unknowingly purchase both the Cascade DAC and the value of the Reference DAC all over again. Easy for us to offer 100% trade value as long as we could still find a way to sleep at night. A cloak and daggers method to deceive people. This is genuinely what industry folks asked us to do when we first revealed the pricing… it’s a thing. I hate it.

Let’s chat about the previous trade in program, and how it was different. For the Reference to Select upgrade: we gut and re-use almost all the parts of the Reference DAC. Because this is the same platform, we can do that and make the trade in actually work. Also, the price gap between the Reference and Select (73,500) is much bigger than between the Reference and Cascade (16,000). But now, moving to the Cascade, we have fundamentally changed to next gen architecture and we cannot migrate materials over. If we limited the Cascade to the Select platform it would have killed our most innovative product evolution yet. The Cascade DAC will have 90% trade in because similarly, we can migrate the actual DAC materials over to the new Sentinel DAC.

Now, let’s address modular design… the DACs are still modular and will still benefit from this. When/if new updates or input modules come out, they will be made available to existing DACs that are already 10 years old… and that will continue moving forward. The Digital Director for the Reference and Select is an upgrade we were able to implement because of this. This is the upgrade path to the new platform! Y’all made it! This is how products are supported. We will continue to do this! We are nerds and we want everyone to get their hands on cool stuff. We can service and fix our DACs longer than anyone in our industry because of this design feature.

Alright, sorry for the long message, last thing to discuss. Why 50%? I hear you, and you are right. Do not trade in a one month old DAC! That would be wild. This trade in policy is a price protection policy. It means in 5 years, your Reference will not drop below 50% because it CAN be traded in for the Cascade. Maybe even in 8 or 10 years!? If anyone wants to sell their new Reference DAC, the buyer can know that DAC has an established value. It is worth a hell of a lot more than 50% its original value. Let’s not get carried away praising the new DAC at the cost the Reference and Select DACs. They are still. So. Damn. Good. Every owner thought it was worth the money when they bought them, and they still are.

So, in the end, why choose 95k vs 165k? This is where the buyer wins, not the “greedy corporation”. I am terribly concerned over industry behavior towards charging whatever will be paid. Systems based on retail dollar values instead of the product craftsmanship. They say the audio market is slowing down, but I feel we are simply pricing out the people we do it for. We are engineers who have created a leading class manufacturing facility with advanced robotics, lean manufacturing, and clever designs to be able to offer our best sound ever at this price point. I am not disillusioned on the price, this is still expensive, but we are going to make sure quality from start to finish is second to none.

This is as honest as I can be. I am just a guy trying to make cool audio systems because I really like building them. I am not trying to screw anyone over. We made a decision that was best for the most people possible… and I totally get how much that sucks for some of you. For that, I am sorry. We decided not to gauge you… if you tally it up, it’s a better future for you too.

Cheers all! Glad to be here.

 

[Daniel Gullman]

Ditto! Absent that clear marketing messaging I would almost certainly have gone with something else (likely a Lampizator). I would “get it” if they changed it for new products going forward, but the retrospective change isn’t in keeping with the sales pitch of just a few months ago. I’ve been eyeing a pair of their 200 or 500 mono amps,, but that’ll go by the wayside if the “retroactive 50%” policy stands.

To clarify on this, the trade-in policy stands from time of purchase. i.e we still offer 100% trade in on Reference to Select, but of course won't be able to publish blanket policies on products we haven't invented yet