MSB Select II arrival
- Thread starter Mike Lavigne
- Start date
Yes, good point. Or upsample via the PCM route (DXD) rather than DSD. I'd really be curious about the result.
True, there is always re-clocking, but the less of it is needed, the better it probably is. Delivering data packets rather than a continuous data stream, USB needs more re-clocking rather than less.
For example, the Berkeley Alpha USB interface re-clocks the USB signal and then routes it to the DAC via AES/EBU or SPIDF output. In Berkeley's own application, when the signal is transmitted from a transport to one of their DACs, it is re-clocked once: at the DAC chip. Yet when the signal is transmitted from a computer/server (file playback), the signal is re-clocked twice: once at the Berkeley Alpha USB interface, and the second time at the DAC chip.
As Robert Harley's review of the Berkeley Alpha USB interface states:
"As noted, USB was never designed for audio; it is a “packetized data” format in which data are split up into discrete chunks, wrapped up with information about those chunks, transmitted, and then put back together at the receiving end. This is in sharp contrast with the continuous bitstream of digital audio formats such as S/PDIF."
Yes, also the cables between the Vivaldi components may make a difference.
Last edited:
Perhaps RH also thinks that CD was never designed for audio - the digital information is spread in the track according to complex coding mechanisms and then put back again.
Digital information per se is perfect - the process of representing it by electrical signals varying in time to transmit it injects noise in the system. No system is per se is better than any other - in the end it depends on the implementation. Probably putting the noisy USB receiver away from the DAC is a good idea - we have now several alternatives to the Berkeley Alpha. Mutek from Germany manufactures several units that can be combined to built a challenging system: USB -> AES/EBU with an input for an external SOTA clock (unfortunately rather expensive) followed by several re-clocker units if the user wants to do so. https://www.mutec-net.com/produkte.php
I'm not sure where Jones99 is from and maybe he can reply, but based on that amazing system he is showing us, I'm assuming this is a person who goes all out and has tried whatever can be tried with the gear he chooses.
Perhaps RH also thinks that CD was never designed for audio - the digital information is spread in the track according to complex coding mechanisms and then put back again.
Here you may have a point. See also sub-heading "Data structure" in the Wiki article on the Compact Disc:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Disc_Digital_Audio
Perhaps RH also thinks that CD was never designed for audio - the digital information is spread in the track according to complex coding mechanisms and then put back again.
Digital information per se is perfect - the process of representing it by electrical signals varying in time to transmit it injects noise in the system. No system is per se is better than any other - in the end it depends on the implementation. Probably putting the noisy USB receiver away from the DAC is a good idea - we have now several alternatives to the Berkeley Alpha. Mutek from Germany manufactures several units that can be combined to built a challenging system: USB -> AES/EBU with an input for an external SOTA clock (unfortunately rather expensive) followed by several re-clocker units if the user wants to do so. https://www.mutec-net.com/produkte.php
eh! eh! eh!
Hi Astrostar59
I tried the normal 44.1 on comparing to the Select but the 2x DSD is one of my favorite settings for my tastes so that is what I based most of my listening/comparison around. I really appreciate the plethora of settings the Vivaldi offers and have honed them to what I prefer.
No unfortunately I cannot feed my current system direct form Vivaldi as I need 2 XLR for Pendragon . For what it is worth I did run the the Vivaldi briefly in to Mephisto driving some Dynaudio Sapphires I preferred Gryphon Pandora pre in the chain for that testing.
I had not really thought about selling Vivaldi but I can see it getting used less and less when a transport is released by MSB ....so I yes I guess it will some time soon.
I did try the DXD setting initially ...both the Select II and Vivaldi were locking on to the signal but when I switched back from a comparison I could not get the MSB to lock again. I am very familair with the DXD setting though.....please take my comments about being muddier in context ....it is only in direct comparison with the Select II this statement becomes apparent. I really like Vivaldi superb DAC I just think the Select II brings a whole lot more to my system.
I tried to run the same cables to even the playing field......same clock cables, AES/EBU , XLRs and power cables.....if anything the dCS was running the better cables all the time.
I have tried a few but I am always open and looking for the little improvements
Jones99
Last edited:
Hi Mike,
My current system looks like this:
MSB Signature UMT V
MSB Select DAC II, Femto33, 2xmono powerbases
Dan D'Agostino Momentum S250
Vivid Giya G3
Don't think I will elaborate on the merits of directly driving power amp, as others have already described them.
I'm using taoc racks, decent products from Japan. If you are looking for the best, I would suggest Critical Mass - they have a new flagship series Olympus. BTW, MSB have also designed a new rack specifically for Select II - 3 decks for dac and 2 powerbases.
Curiously, I have this (old) renderer module but not usb. I think the (old) renderer is very good, but I like the transport better. Comparing renderer vs transport on the same file format, I would prefer the latter.
I have a Fidata hfas1-xs20u NAS (a nice audiophile grade NAS popular in Japan, 648000yen) directly feeding Select DAC renderer via Ethernet (Kubala Sosna Elation us$2500). Playing Bill Evans Waltz for Debby 24/192 file, as against a pure audio bluray of same 24/192 resolution on the transport, I think the latter just sounds a shade better, more contrast, better separation and realism etc.
Cheers
My current system looks like this:
MSB Signature UMT V
MSB Select DAC II, Femto33, 2xmono powerbases
Dan D'Agostino Momentum S250
Vivid Giya G3
Don't think I will elaborate on the merits of directly driving power amp, as others have already described them.
I'm using taoc racks, decent products from Japan. If you are looking for the best, I would suggest Critical Mass - they have a new flagship series Olympus. BTW, MSB have also designed a new rack specifically for Select II - 3 decks for dac and 2 powerbases.
Curiously, I have this (old) renderer module but not usb. I think the (old) renderer is very good, but I like the transport better. Comparing renderer vs transport on the same file format, I would prefer the latter.
I have a Fidata hfas1-xs20u NAS (a nice audiophile grade NAS popular in Japan, 648000yen) directly feeding Select DAC renderer via Ethernet (Kubala Sosna Elation us$2500). Playing Bill Evans Waltz for Debby 24/192 file, as against a pure audio bluray of same 24/192 resolution on the transport, I think the latter just sounds a shade better, more contrast, better separation and realism etc.
Cheers
Just to learn from an ex-user - what power and digital cables were you using with your stack?
I have posted it before - the Vivaldi can play exceptionally well, but really needs a lot of fine tuning. I am still using my old Metronome setup as a comparison, and getting the best of both - dynamics, density and image plus the fluidity and extremely clear sound of the last is a challenging exercise but pays for the effort. It is great to know that your new DAC achieved it immediately.
Can I ask what type of music do you listen?
My music tastes are very very varied.......I do not really have a favorite genre.....rock,orchestral,country,pop,alternative,jazz... I enjoy it all.
For cables I have flirted from Audioquest ,Nordost and now have settled on Goebel...... I still do have quite a few Valhalla in the cupboard but Goebel seems to be my flavor at the moment. I did try to organize a comparison with my current Goebel cables with Odin II but the dealer unfortunately could not deliver.
I too also love the swiss army capability of the Vivaldi and the endless adjustments available ........just a lovely system.
Microstrip have you heard the Select II in your system?
No. But I hope to be able to listen to it in our MSB distributor sometime. No experience at all with Goebel cables - it is the first time I read about them. Our systems are very different, I found that moving to Transparent Audio Opus gave me the grain free lifelike sound I was looking for - I am one of the very few people in this forum that says that top digital in some important aspects sounds more like reality than analog.
My musical preferences are mainly classical and jazz.Interesting. I had the same kind of experience with a comparison file vs. my CD transport in a high-resolution system. As you say, more contrast, better separation and realism. The better separation of instruments and instrument groups on the transport was a remarkable difference on particularly complex orchestral music.
One less incentive for me to pursue computer audio.
Components that were as resolving as to expose the differences that I just described with great clarity.
I think the maturity of server technology is the culprit here. we are comparing a 30 year old, now mature, digital disc technology to a 6-7 year old serious server technology. there are lots of variables in the execution of every part of what a server does.
in my case, I use the SGM server; a 60 pound brute with over the top mechanical, thermal and circuit development. and the advantage of HQ Player and a very customized and proprietary OS. it is the cutting edge for servers.
when I compared it to the Aqua La Diva transport playing CD's (using the i2S interface) into the Aqua Formula dac at first the SGM was quite a bit better. then I placed the La Diva on top of the stack on the active isolation Herzan TS-150 and the performance came up almost equal to the SGM. then I got a software upgrade for the SGM and the SGM decidedly pulled ahead.
we see where this is going. disc players have a ceiling. servers are just now reaching maturity and there is lots of demand pushing their performance. servers will keep improving because that's where the focus is now. the SGM server is designed in a modular way with upgradability in mind. and all the research and advancement of computers (especially gaming and it's need for performance) will continue to feed the bettering of performance.
and dxd and 2xdsd/quad dsd is only accessible with a server. and these formats are superior (all other things being equal) in my experience.
Similar threads
