MSB Diamond DAC IV Reviewed By Stereophile

[CKKeung]

Priaptor,

It's my point exactly. Those that care to listen, are rewarded with excellent SQ both in PCM and DSD. Which sort of renders this argument about "smoke" pointless... Besides, where there's smoke, there's fire

I don't really think it's reasonable to expect the manufacturer to explain how he accomplished things. Since I'm not a hardware guy, I'm happy with the information I got from MSB so far, though I understand if the tweakheads are annoyed that they can't figure out how MSB did it...


alexandre

Hi Alexandre & Priaptor,

I agree with both of you.
I am an audiophile and music lover but a layman in hardware/eletronics/computering.

It's most important to enjoy music with good gears.
And I am very satisfied with my new MSB IV Plus playing both 16/44/high resolution PCM/DSD files and as a redbook CD dac.

 

[Orb]

I should add it seems MSB IV uses DoP open standard, hence why I mentioned it earlier.

Cheers
Orb

 

[microstrip]

Although legal aspects are many times different in Europe and the USA, is it legal in the USA to rip a SACD for use in a music server in either DSD or a PCM file format?

 

[tailspn]

Although legal aspects are many times different in Europe and the USA, is it legal in the USA to rip a SACD for use in a music server in either DSD or a PCM file format?

For the DSD content, there's no case law, for or against it. It however flies in the face of Sony's intent to produce a uncopy-able distribution media for DSD content that they then sold to labels as secure, but now leaks like a sieve. But as long as the content is not re-sold outside of the original purchaser, it's unlikely that any action would ever be taken.

What's more problematical to labels is ripped DSD file sharing.

 

[Elberoth]

BTW - if anyone is interested, a friend of mine is upgrading towards the Diamond, and selling his DAC IV Signature with all options. I posted the ad in a classifieds section:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...-Signature-as-new-115V-230V-universal-voltage

 

[ML Audio]

Native DSD signal can be sent out via an Asus Xonar soundcard's coaxial digital output and accepted by coaxial digital iutput of my MSB IV Plus.
I tried both HQPlayer (Linux) and JPlay & Foobar (Win7) successfully.
Here is the photo:
View attachment 9022

Hi
Interesting.
And have you try to connect a digital output of your UMT player to a computer, to rip SACD disks as DSD files ? ('if you have an UMT of course)
indeed, it seems the UMD can now output native DSD when SACD are played ...
Regards :b

 

[CKKeung]

Hi
Interesting.
And have you try to connect a digital output of your UMT player to a computer, to rip SACD disks as DSD files ? ('if you have an UMT of course)
indeed, it seems the UMD can now output native DSD when SACD are played ...
Regards :b

I am using my IV Plus with only CAS and a backup small Cyrus CD transport currently.
I am waiting for the coming UMT Plus.

 

[hvbias]

I guess I must be confused on another point, the MSB DAC modules are 24 bit, where is the 32 coming from?

Also this is straight from the MSB Platinum page

"The Platinum DACs draw from the older ladder technology but with incredible improvements that allow them to operate up to 3 MHz. "

I know most of the discussion has been around the Diamond, but the Platinum also accepts DSD with the latest firmware, I'm not sure how it can do native DSD with a 3 MHz limit?

 

[opus111]

A 3MHz symbol rate would allow DSD64, not DSD128.

 

[CKKeung]

I guess I must be confused on another point, the MSB DAC modules are 24 bit, where is the 32 coming from?

Also this is straight from the MSB Platinum page

"The Platinum DACs draw from the older ladder technology but with incredible improvements that allow them to operate up to 3 MHz. "

I know most of the discussion has been around the Diamond, but the Platinum also accepts DSD with the latest firmware, I'm not sure how it can do native DSD with a 3 MHz limit?

Dear All,

IMHO these technical questions can be answered more convincingly by Larry or Vince of MSB rather than us endusers.

My IV plus can play the 2L 64 and 128 dsd sample files and the screen shows the formats correctly.

If Larry and Vince do answer the questions, pls post them here. Many thanks!

CK

 

[asiufy]

It does multibit at 3Mhz. Single bit would be much higher, no?

 

[willshaw001]

Is there a way to put the DAC into standby mode? Or I have to switch the power off and on each time? Thanks

 

[edorr]

I am about to pull the trigger on an upgrade of my server (currently CAPS 2.0). I will get a CAPS 3.0 (or derivative) and already ordered the Red Wine Audio powersupply. However, I got bit by the HTPC virus at the same time and am set on enabling my server for Multi Channel and use it for Blu Ray and MCH SACD (converted to LPCM) as well. My options are to get two servers, get a CAPS 3.0 on a chassis that can house a SotM and Lynx AES16e card (which turns out to be very hard to find).

A third alternative is to build the CAPS Zuma with just the AES16e card and run AES into my MSB DAC instead of USB. This is appealing, because it would be both the least complex and cheapest solution.

Has anyone compared the two signal paths, in particular AES from the Lynx card? Bruce B. I believe you use Lynx card and own the MSB DAC. Any indication how much (if anything), I would lose going from USB to AES?

 

[Bruce B]

Has anyone compared the two signal paths, in particular AES from the Lynx card? Bruce B. I believe you use Lynx card and own the MSB DAC. Any indication how much (if anything), I would lose going from USB to AES?

I have 2 of the Lynx cards and have always said AES connections were better than USB. USB was not designed for music reproduction whereas AES/EBU was designed for it.

Too bad AES/EBU has a limited bandwidth. The only reason I use USB is for convenience.... not sound!

 

[Andre Marc]

I have 2 of the Lynx cards and have always said AES connections were better than USB. USB was not designed for music reproduction whereas AES/EBU was designed for it.

Too bad AES/EBU has a limited bandwidth. The only reason I use USB is for convenience.... not sound!

Bruce....the Async USB Police are gonna come after you! The Rankin File!

 

[edorr]

I have 2 of the Lynx cards and have always said AES connections were better than USB. USB was not designed for music reproduction whereas AES/EBU was designed for it.

Too bad AES/EBU has a limited bandwidth. The only reason I use USB is for convenience.... not sound!

I totally forgot about bandwidth. I believe I can play DSD64 in DoP format into the AES/EBU input of the MSB, but for DSD128 I would need the 384 bandwith of USB - correct? Not a big deal for me because I have no DSD128 content, but just making sure I understand all the parameters before ordering new hardware.

 

[Priaptor]

I am about to pull the trigger on an upgrade of my server (currently CAPS 2.0). I will get a CAPS 3.0 (or derivative) and already ordered the Red Wine Audio powersupply. However, I got bit by the HTPC virus at the same time and am set on enabling my server for Multi Channel and use it for Blu Ray and MCH SACD (converted to LPCM) as well. My options are to get two servers, get a CAPS 3.0 on a chassis that can house a SotM and Lynx AES16e card (which turns out to be very hard to find).

A third alternative is to build the CAPS Zuma with just the AES16e card and run AES into my MSB DAC instead of USB. This is appealing, because it would be both the least complex and cheapest solution.

Has anyone compared the two signal paths, in particular AES from the Lynx card? Bruce B. I believe you use Lynx card and own the MSB DAC. Any indication how much (if anything), I would lose going from USB to AES?

Notwithstanding the above comments regarding the inferiority of USB, my unmitigated opinion of the best sound I have yet to hear from my Diamond is the use of a 2 computer JPlay 5.1 setup, with a ControlPC (still trying to determine the best computer, but it does require more horsepower than I originally thought) controlling your AudioPC (Zuma) via USB to the Diamond. This allows DL for all buffering and by far the best method to use hibernation on your AudioPC. There has been some experimenting as to the best method of feeding the Zuma to the DAC, including a FiberOptic USB solution as well as Pang's USB card (http://ppastudio.blogspot.com/) as well as his USB cable (which I have in my possession and is definitely a big improvement over the Audioquest Diamond).

From my perch, I have never heard he Diamond sound better including their transport, which is MSB's standard.

 

[edorr]

Bruce....the Async USB Police are gonna come after you! The Rankin File!

Since the MSB is asynchronous on all inputs I expect there to be little difference. The most important variable is probably difference in "noise" levels (whatever that may be...) of the source rather than jitter (eliminated through reclokcing). However, I strictly rely on empircal observations, rather than theory about what should sound best in theory.

 

[edorr]

Notwithstanding the above comments regarding the inferiority of USB, my unmitigated opinion of the best sound I have yet to hear from my Diamond is the use of a 2 computer JPlay 5.1 setup, with a ControlPC (still trying to determine the best computer, but it does require more horsepower than I originally thought) controlling your AudioPC (Zuma) via USB to the Diamond. This allows DL for all buffering and by far the best method to use hibernation on your AudioPC. There has been some experimenting as to the best method of feeding the Zuma to the DAC, including a FiberOptic USB solution as well as Pang's USB card (http://ppastudio.blogspot.com/) as well as his USB cable (which I have in my possession and is definitely a big improvement over the Audioquest Diamond).

From my perch, I have never heard he Diamond sound better including their transport, which is MSB's standard.

Just for once, can't we all just agree on something and make my life easier

 

[Andre Marc]

Since the MSB is asynchronous on all inputs I expect there to be little difference. The most important variable is probably difference in "noise" levels (whatever that may be...) of the source rather than jitter (eliminated through reclokcing). However, I strictly rely on empircal observations, rather than theory about what should sound best in theory.

You are spot on. Agree totally. The source will be the biggest variable.