MSB Select II arrival

[koalakoala]

my renderer playing 128dsd

 

[Mike Lavigne]

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

thanks Koalakoala,

very nice system you have there. thank you for the recs on the racks. I am thinking that one over right now. trying to decide which way to go with so many boxes (5 +tt.......or 7 +tt if I include my grounding boxes). i want to isolate each box on it's own shelf. but that many active devices will get crazy spendy.

i do really like my SGM server and all it's support and upgradability. i know when the new MSB 'Select-level' transport comes out i will at least try it in my system. see my comments above on my views of servers and transports. just the way it looks for now.

cheers,

 

[Steve Williams]

thanks Koalakoala,

very nice system you have there. thank you for the recs on the racks. I am thinking that one over right now. trying to decide which way to go with so many boxes (5 +tt.......or 7 +tt if I include my grounding boxes). i want to isolate each box on it's own shelf. but that many active devices will get crazy spendy.

i do really like my SGM server and all it's support and upgradability. i know when the new MSB 'Select-level' transport comes out i will at least try it in my system. see my comments above on my views of servers and transports. just the way it looks for now.

cheers,

you've had a few now Mike who suggest you go CMS. As for the CMS Olympus rack, it is mind boggling good but priced in the ozone

 

[Steve Williams]

Here's a photo of one I took at this year's LAAS

View attachment 32986

 

[Mike Lavigne]

you've had a few now Mike who suggest you go CMS. As for the CMS Olympus rack, it is mind boggling good but priced in the ozone

when one of those 'few' comment on how CMS compares to active then i'll pay attention.

if I go passive, it will be Artesania Exoteryc.

the $$$'s for uber level (or near uber level) CMS would push me to stay with Taiko active devices for each box.

 

[Al M.]

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.

Mike, I have no doubt that servers can exhibit superlative performance. But as with your SGM server, it comes at a considerable price.

What is clear to me now is that the, for the longest time unquestioned, dogma of the file fundamentalists, which states that computer audio is automatically superior to disc playback, just doesn't hold water.

I am not sure what to make of your suggestion that disc players, rather than servers, have a ceiling. One review of my CD transport *) (Simaudio Moon 260 DT; ca. $ 2 K w/o optional DAC) states that its performance could have been had fifteen years ago only for about $ 10 K. Their conclusion, quote, "now that's progress". So yes, transports appear to be improving as well.

_______

*) http://www.tonepublications.com/review/simaudio-moon-neo-260d-cd-transportdac/

 

[Legolas]

Quote Originally Posted by Al M. View Post
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 was a remarkable difference on particularly complex orchestral music.


Not sure, I am way past my (mid fi) CEC belt drive CDP now even in my Mac Mini (optimed with LPS and using Rednet). Everything his better.

I would have one word for poor sound on a PC or Mac: Noise. Then up sampling. I find it sounds better without up sampling, and then dropping USB output. The latter was a big jump in my case.

I agree with Mike, music server are getting better. Though for a pre-built I think the TotalDAC and Lampizator units are good value. Not sure if spending 15K is mandatory?

 

[bonzo75]

What is clear to me now is that the, for the longest time unquestioned, dogma of the file fundamentalists, which states that computer audio is automatically superior to disc playback, just doesn't hold water.
_______

*) http://www.tonepublications.com/review/simaudio-moon-neo-260d-cd-transportdac/

Seldom read this

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Mike, I have no doubt that servers can exhibit superlative performance. But as with your SGM server, it comes at a considerable price.

What is clear to me now is that the, for the longest time unquestioned, dogma of the file fundamentalists, which states that computer audio is automatically superior to disc playback, just doesn't hold water.

I am not sure what to make of your suggestion that disc players, rather than servers, have a ceiling. One review of my CD transport *) (Simaudio Moon 260 DT; ca. $ 2 K w/o optional DAC) states that its performance could have been had fifteen years ago only for about $ 10 K. Their conclusion, quote, "now that's progress". So yes, transports appear to be improving as well.

_______

*) http://www.tonepublications.com/review/simaudio-moon-neo-260d-cd-transportdac/

allow me to then re-phrase my comment. transports have matured, servers are not close to maturing. and the whole world of technology and it's inertia is behind server performance forward progress and that momentum will overwhelm disc progress.

 

[Al M.]

allow me to then re-phrase my comment. transports have matured, servers are not close to maturing. and the whole world of technology and it's inertia is behind server performance forward progress and that momentum will overwhelm disc progress.

And there is still incentive for development of transport performance as well. I have heard that my CD transport is selling extraordinarily well in Europe, Russia and Asia. There people still seem to be spinning discs to a much higher degree than audiophiles in the US.

 

[Steve Williams]

when one of those 'few' comment on how CMS compares to active then i'll pay attention.

if I go passive, it will be Artesania Exoteryc.

the $$$'s for uber level (or near uber level) CMS would push me to stay with Taiko active devices for each box.

I'd love to know as well how Artesania racks work against active Mike and once you find out then we can put Artesania and CMS together. Where's the science behind Artesania. Was that a glass shelf in the link you sent. The last thing I would ever do is put a component on glass (been there, done that and mea culpa) or steel

 

[Legolas]

Mike, I have no doubt that servers can exhibit superlative performance. But as with your SGM server, it comes at a considerable price.

What is clear to me now is that the, for the longest time unquestioned, dogma of the file fundamentalists, which states that computer audio is automatically superior to disc playback, just doesn't hold water.

I am not sure what to make of your suggestion that disc players, rather than servers, have a ceiling. One review of my CD transport *) (Simaudio Moon 260 DT; ca. $ 2 K w/o optional DAC) states that its performance could have been had fifteen years ago only for about $ 10 K. Their conclusion, quote, "now that's progress". So yes, transports appear to be improving as well.

_______

*) http://www.tonepublications.com/review/simaudio-moon-neo-260d-cd-transportdac/

Lets go back to basics.
Were have a digital file at the studio / factory, that is then 'burnt' to a CD on a massive scale at faster than play speed. Then we put said CD in our transports, and a laser then reads the data in real time to send that data out to our DAC. So laser, lens, mechanism, motor, jitter, PS and noise in all of this and any errors along the way.

Now lets take that same Were have a digital file and send that direct to a DAC. Now you tell me how you can say any CDP is going to be one better with MORE processes in the path. Sorry, to my ears it isn't happening, and on paper (and logically) it isn't happening either.

Then we have higher res, another subject but regardless is something extra to CD Redbook. Don't forget in all of this digital is not perfect, there are errors in CD manufacture and errors in the extraction process (laser and mechanics).

 

[Mike Lavigne]

And there is still incentive for development of transport performance as well. I have heard that my CD transport is selling extraordinarily well in Europe, Russia and Asia. There people still seem to be spinning discs to a much higher degree than audiophiles in the US.

'extraordinary well' might be in the hundreds (or maybe a few thousand) of units. that does not drive further disc transport technology development.

if one wants to have a SOTA CD/SACD transport you have to go to Esoteric and pay over $5k OEM per unit. or develop your own. not too 'progress' friendly.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I'd love to know as well how Artesania racks work against active Mike and once you find out then we can put Artesania and CMS together. Where's the science behind Artesania. Was that a glass shelf in the link you sent. The last thing I would ever do is put a component on glass (been there, done that and mea culpa) or steel

no; there is no white paper I have seen. only lots of positive feedback.

the glass shelf happened to be in the picture.

here is the Krion tt shelf I would use.

https://onahighernote.com/shop/acce...platforms/artesania-krion-turntable-platform/

in my situation I would continue to use my Herzan TS-140 on top of the tt platform anyway; so the glass would not likely have an influence if I did choose it.

 

[Legolas]

'extraordinary well' might be in the hundreds (or maybe a few thousand) of units. that does not drive further disc transport technology development.

if one wants to have a SOTA CD/SACD transport you have to go to Esoteric and pay over $5k OEM per unit. or develop your own. not too 'progress' friendly.

I think the Esoteric OEMs are 3K? There is the Philips Pro at 500 USD.

 

[Al M.]

Lets go back to basics.
Were have a digital file at the studio / factory, that is then 'burnt' to a CD on a massive scale at faster than play speed. Then we put said CD in our transports, and a laser then reads the data in real time to send that data out to our DAC. So laser, lens, mechanism, motor, jitter, PS and noise in all of this and any errors along the way.

Now lets take that same Were have a digital file and send that direct to a DAC. Now you tell me how you can say any CDP is going to be one better with MORE processes in the path. Sorry, to my ears it isn't happening, and on paper (and logically) it isn't happening either.

Then we have higher res, another subject but regardless is something extra to CD Redbook. Don't forget in all of this digital is not perfect, there are errors in CD manufacture and errors in the extraction process (laser and mechanics).

These are all valid points, but my reported listening experiences a page or two back suggest that there can be issues with file playback in practice that don't line up with the theoretical superiority of file playback.

Remember "perfect sound forever"? CD was also supposedly so much superior to analog -- theoretically. We all know how this worked out in practice. Only now, decades later, finally the CD medium is at a relatively mature stage, which does not mean that it will not improve further.

 

[Al M.]

'extraordinary well' might be in the hundreds (or maybe a few thousand) of units. that does not drive further disc transport technology development.

Do you seriously think that any given high end server sells in the more than a few thousands -- at best?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Do you seriously think that any given high end server sells in the more than a few thousands -- at best?

well, you missed my point completely.

the tech that servers is based on sells in billions.....with a B.

and that is where we are going. transports is where we were.

 

[Al M.]

well, you missed my point completely.

the tech that servers is based on sells in billions.....with a B.

and that is where we are going. transports is where we were.

Digital tech in general sells in billions.....with a B. High-end digital obviously does not. So frankly, I don't see your point.

 

[Steve Williams]

glass would not likely have an influence if I did choose it.

we will have to agree to disagree Mike

Anectdotal stories are just that, much the same as me espousing the virtues of CMS. The only difference is that CMS has patents and white papers on its virtues. There are none for Artesania. I just would never put a component on metal or steel. Like you however I believe that every component should sit on its own dedicated shelf. Anyhow sorry to drift OT but when it comes to having researched racks I can tell you that I did my due diligence over an entire year and feel that I have chosen the best passive device in the market