MSB Renderer v2 in the house!
- Thread starter asiufy
- Start date
Yes- first they found the Renderer was defective and repaired it. That still didn’t fix the DSD playback issue I was having. They then determined their firmware was bad in terms of how it was handling DSD playback. Their resident DSD guy created a new firmware and that has fixed the issue for good. I’ve been using the Renderer v2 for some time now and it’s sounds heavenly. I love this DAC- I wish I could afford the Discrete DAC right now but I may buy in the future. The MSB sound is terrific!
i'm no expert, but do know one.
my son recalled (from 8 months ago now) it was 100Base when he connected it. he thought that was why it would not work with the optical interface we set up.
when i'm home tonight i will observe the light on the giga-switch, which my son said would indicate which one it was.
Thanks - It would be nice to know if there is a difference in sound quality between the two modes. Now the difficult question - does this imply that only two twisted pairs of the cable are being used for connecting the DAC to the network?
To put things in perspective, that's 1MB/sec, and a hi-res file would require 192Kbps, which means 5x the headroom, at 10Base. 100Mbase, 50x the headroom.
I don't think it's a mistake, as Gigabit receiver chips might as well be noisier, and simply not required for the purpose.
Besides, if Gigabit becomes absolutely necessary, it's just a module change away. Try that with other DACs, which, AFAIK, are mostly always 10/100Base as well.
Now, where Gigabit IS necessary is at the NAS/server level, as that one unit might be serving multiple devices. So, 5 streams at 192Kbps from one server might become problematic on 10Base.
I don't think it's a mistake, as Gigabit receiver chips might as well be noisier, and simply not required for the purpose.
Besides, if Gigabit becomes absolutely necessary, it's just a module change away. Try that with other DACs, which, AFAIK, are mostly always 10/100Base as well.
Now, where Gigabit IS necessary is at the NAS/server level, as that one unit might be serving multiple devices. So, 5 streams at 192Kbps from one server might become problematic on 10Base.
You are missing my point which is compatibility. You would hope MSB could figure out the noise........
It would mean you cannot bridge the network connection to a 1000Base network adapter as some like to do to "isolate" the renderer from the network. You will also need a switch supporting mixing 100Base and 1000Base connections, a lot of switches will switch all ports down to 100Base when there is a 100Base device connected. And indeed you would need a 100Base supporting FMC (not very common but available) if you want to use fibre networking. But like you said, 100Base is fast enough for virtually all formats, as stereo 32/768 PCM and DSD512 top out at around 50Mbps!
As someone who is averse to computer audio, but is feeling more and more compelled to have to dip my toe in the water, do you pro streaming guys realise how offputting these discussions are?
Yes I can imagine. You get confronted with a lot of information in a relative short amount of time. Back in the day, with the introduction of CD playback, or even further back, analogue playback advances, you would not be confronted with live online discussions. Just a manufacturer ad or review in for example Stereophile magazine you would buy in your local bookstore. Discussion of technological advances would be limited to your social circle. The daring would maybe attempt to write a letter to a manufacturer and hope for a response. With the rise of the internet as the main source of information, open discussion forums and a speed up in technological advances, I can imagine some sort of information overload fatigue syndrome setting in.
Again, inconsequential, as most people will create their own little network, hooking up their server and DAC/renderer to a dedicated switch. So yeah, that Gigabit switch will now be 100Base. So what? Still plenty of bandwidth to go around, specially as most people will just have that one server serving that one renderer, all hooked up to the same switch. As I said, if you're going to be streaming dozens of DSD512 streams all over the house, then by all means invest in a proper network infrastructure so your switch won't fall down to 100Base.
I know some times real life gets in the way of silly audiophile discussion, but this is a perfect example of audiophilia nervosa getting in the way of enjoying the hobby.
All these extraneous, computer/network terms are wreaking havoc to the poor audiophile's mind, and all they do is confuse normal folk who want to enjoy good sound from their digital.
Bringing back an old thread.
I have an Analog DAC in route to me (Thanks to Vince at MSB!) and I’m wondering if anyone has any more to share on comparisons between the MSB Renderer and stand alone Streamers. Specifically I have a Lumin U1 mini but I’m interested in any comparisons.
I have an Analog DAC in route to me (Thanks to Vince at MSB!) and I’m wondering if anyone has any more to share on comparisons between the MSB Renderer and stand alone Streamers. Specifically I have a Lumin U1 mini but I’m interested in any comparisons.
A little bit off topic but, I like the SQ of the Renderer V2 a lot. Maybe it´s not as pin point as the one I get from the MSB Pro USB but it´s warmer and more life like, if I can make myself understand.
Also, I love HQPlayer. I don´t need Roon or other players highly resource consuming in the streamer. I think the Renderer V2 would benefit if their firmware/software could include the NAA code. The implementation would be something like - Streamer » Network Bridge enabled to avoid switches » MSB Renderer V2 with NAA enabled » DAC. This implementation simulates the 2 machines version, without the cost of the second one.
Just a guess, but I beleive if MSB wanted to do this step it would be a forward one.
Also, I love HQPlayer. I don´t need Roon or other players highly resource consuming in the streamer. I think the Renderer V2 would benefit if their firmware/software could include the NAA code. The implementation would be something like - Streamer » Network Bridge enabled to avoid switches » MSB Renderer V2 with NAA enabled » DAC. This implementation simulates the 2 machines version, without the cost of the second one.
Just a guess, but I beleive if MSB wanted to do this step it would be a forward one.
You’re saying you use it as a digital input or is it your network Bridge?
Have you compared it to any stand alone streamers (Innous, Auralic, Lumin, Aurender, etc)?
Similar threads
