MSB Diamond IV Select dac
- Thread starter CKKeung
- Start date
just read the new Select DAC cost on their site. Insane and a complete U turn from there philosophy. You do not get their best DAC for 90k. Now you have to pay 4k if you want more than 2 inputs. Why would one buy a 90k DAC with only 2 inputs. And not only that if you want their new Femto Clock add 10k to 90k. If you want their better power supply add another 20k to 90k. If you want a second output add 4k. Daylight robbery and wanting to squeeze the customer for every dollar. The old Select had the best available at anytime and that is what MSB always maintained as their selling story.
So people who bought the older Select are well and truly stuck and no free ride for 1 year as promised.
This is just not on from MSB. No more comments. Read everything on their site.
So people who bought the older Select are well and truly stuck and no free ride for 1 year as promised.
This is just not on from MSB. No more comments. Read everything on their site.
I know, however, I "think" they are upgrading the original SELECT owners to the new one "free". I don't think that includes their new clock, which I too was surprised to see. I must agree about the inputs which I too thought you got all the available options when you bought the SELECT. Just saw the new power supply. GEEZ, pretty big bucks to get the SELECT + New Clock + Best Power supply.
I will say, I got the new Quad USB input for my Diamond Plus and it is amazing. While the Select is clearly out of my $$ range, I will probably upgrade to the V which appears to be a decent deal. Whether or not it will be as big an upgrade as what I am getting with this new and amazing QUAD input we will see. While I understand there are disc spinners, I have never heard my Diamond Plus sound better than with my server and this new Quad input. I had a UMT+ for a prolonged demo and while I thought it was good, my server plus their old USB input was better, IMO and others by a decent margin. This new Quad USB is a whole different experience. Truly an amazing upgrade. MSB got it right on this.
Hi Priaptor,
Do you know why the UMT Plus is inferior to your server?
I have similar experience : My UMT Plus & Signature Transport Powerbase was once inferior to my CAS desktop.
The reason is that MSB's Powerbases are their Achilles' Heels.
The Powerbases are not cheap and their internal photos are impressive.
However their sonic performance is mediocre.
Once I have replaced my Signature Transport Powerbase by a psu made by Mr. Ben Lau of Volent Loudspeakers, my UMT Plus becomes another animal!
Now I am waiting for the second Ben Lau psu for my UMT Plus.
If you have interest, Ben can be reached at http://www.volent.com.hk/?page_id=54
The upgrade path from Diamond IV to V is very, very cost effective and a great tribute to MSB. The Diamond V is supposed to be a bit better than the old Select in performance and you should do that upgrade for sure whenever funds are available.
I am also informed that going through the MSB Renderer (through a NAS) is the biggest improvement and even superior than the Quad USB input. Right now the Renderer is only available for the Analog DAC. Hoping to hear it soon but heard very good reports.
I am also informed that going through the MSB Renderer (through a NAS) is the biggest improvement and even superior than the Quad USB input. Right now the Renderer is only available for the Analog DAC. Hoping to hear it soon but heard very good reports.
The renderer is already available?
Last time I asked MSB (January perhaps) it was still on tests and not available for purchase.
Can you share any info about its performance?
Thanks!
There are two groups of thought on the renderer v. QUAD USB. Some are claiming the former and some the latter. I can't say as I haven't heard both. However, my intuition is that they should be close to equal. Both offshoot their data bits to the PROI2S board, one connected via a short ethernet cable and the Quad USB via direct 16 pin plug (no cables); at least that is my understanding how the renderer will connect to the PROI2S board. One can make the argument that there is potentially better shielding on the renderer, although one look at the shielding on the QUAD board may make one question which is superior while the connection between the QUAD USB input and PROI2S board is better. Of course you can get both, but I am sticking with USB. I have had enough of the rendering world and for now LOVE what I am getting.
I agree the upgrade path looks very reasonable. I will do it, but want to do it when I will be out of town for a few weeks because right now I am really enjoying.
The Renderer input will always be superior than the Quad USB or any other input. With the Renderer you need to go the NAS route. This is what I have been told by people who understand this better.
Of course , the latest , soon to be upgraded MSB Select without the new Femto33 & additional input which will cost usd3995
You keep saying that but there is NO basis in fact for that. ZERO. It is an opinion, just as there are others in the MSB Circle who think the QUAD USB is better. As I have said before, THEORETICALLY they should both be very similar if not equal to sound signature as they are offloading their bits to their PROI2S interface, the memory of which is buffered and clocked perfectly to the limitations of whatever clock you are using in their DAC. One of the benefits the new USB interface is just that. IF you were comparing their other USB interfaces to the renderer, yes, I would say that what you are saying is probably true.
In any case, I will be getting one for review and let all of you know. Until then making your repeated and unsubstantiated statement that "The Renderer input WILL ALWAYS BE SUPERIOR than the QUAD USB or any other input" is utter nonsense.
I believe that you have got persons mixed up. This was the 1st and only time I have spoken about the Renderer and that also an opinion of some people I have spoken to.
Let us see what you come up with when you get both in for review.
Let us see what you come up with when you get both in for review.
"The Renderer input will always be superior than the Quad USB or any other input"
What is it that makes you state that? You are making a definitive statement that I would hope is more objective than "the opinion of some people" especially as it pertains to a product that really hasn't been released on the Diamond series nor does it have any architecture "in theory" that one could concievable make a statement that it "will always be superior". If you are making that comment because it is bypassing a computer, there are many other factors involved and "in theory" one of the wonderful things about how MSB handles their bitstream with their PROI2S is that the memory buffer of the card is what is being clocked, so theoretically it shouldn't matter how it gets there. Having said that, I was not a big fan of the network server solution of the UMT+ which utilizes the PROI2S solution.
I have heard DIFFERING opinions by those at MSB but none that are definitive one way or the other. By the way renderer solutions do not equal better and many companies have found this out. The famous "Bridge" of PS Audio was just such a product and there are others.
But hey, I will keep an open mind and am not married to anything but when I hear something that sounds better, not just different, I will applaud it and this QUAD USB is a huge step.
AB,
Is MSB going to upgrade original SELECT purchases (of over a year ago) to the new SELECT (minus new FEMTO33 and Renderer) for "free" ?
All things beeing equal, it is Ethernet input that should sound superior to USB, as it offers:
- galvanic isolation,
- TCP/IP protocol, which ensures 100% corect data delivery (contrary to the common belief, USB Audio 2.0 does not guarantee 100% correct data delivery as there is no 'resend' function built in into that protocol).
Ofc, as always, the Devil is in the detail, so there may be other factors to the MSB design we do not know.
The folks at MSB were pretty firm in their belief that their new Quad i2s USB input sonics were on a par with any alternative source, which was a first for them with their new implementation.
My IV should come back as an upgraded V with a Quad USB later this week. I'll test the new quad i2s USB against the Ethernet-based chain (which I used previously), which in prior iterations did beat their best USB based alternative
My IV should come back as an upgraded V with a Quad USB later this week. I'll test the new quad i2s USB against the Ethernet-based chain (which I used previously), which in prior iterations did beat their best USB based alternative
Much of what you state is true in the perfect world. I am not sure "renderers, at least this I have tried no matter what potential benefit I have heard have ever lived up to the potential of what they claim. I am not sure if this is MSB's "ultimate" renderer solution or they have other plans.
In any case despite the supposed pitfalls of USB I have never encountered one with my MSB. What has never made sense to me was that MSB has always raved about their PROI2S solution as the ultimate memory buffer for their clock and however the bits arrive shouldn't make a difference and why they never implemented it on USB. One had to use one of their transports which is what they touted as "sounding best".
Now I do not know the full details of their renderer but I believe it plugs into the PROI2S board via a short Ethernet cable compared to the shielded QUAD USB direct 16 prong connector. "Theoretically" both are delivering bits to the same board and hence being dealt with exactly the same unless there is some difference the connection to the PROI2S board makes.
Lastly "Ethernet" is no panacea of eliminated noise. However again the buffering by the ProI2s board "should" alleviate most if not all issues no matter which solution one likes. I think it will boil down to comfort of interface and setup by the enduser rather than any sonic difference but we will see.
I can unequivocally state their new Quad USB is much better and like I told Vince they shouldn't even offer the other variants.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |