Valin's new MSB Reference dac & transport review, AS Product Year Award

[DaveyF]

Thanks, Davey!

In any case, if you are ever in the Boston area I'll gladly invite you to listen to my system and experience the spatial layering and 3D imaging. You may be very surprised.

Thanks, Al. I would like that very much, same to you...if you are ever in San Diego, La Jolla area.

 

[Al M.]

Thanks, Al. I would like that very much, same to you...if you are ever in San Diego, La Jolla area.

Thanks, Davey, when I'm in your area, absolutely!

 

[Hi-FiGuy]

I am glad I am not a format snob! . I like them all, as its music first.
All I can tell you is Eric Claptons Slow Hand on SACD trumps any other version I have ever heard its amazing (if its on tape I have not heard it). I confirms my system has the potential to sound very good, for what it is.
What ever format of a particular recording sounds best to me is what I go with, source is king.
These "discussions" while informative, just so you know, leave me giggling just a little bit.
I agree with Mike here, what ever you like go with and enjoy.

 

[bonzo75]

I am glad I am not a format snob! . I like them all, as its music first.
All I can tell you is Eric Claptons Slow Hand on SACD trumps any other version I have ever heard its amazing (if its on tape I have not heard it). I confirms my system has the potential to sound very good, for what it is.
What ever format of a particular recording sounds best to me is what I go with, source is king.
These "discussions" while informative, just so you know, leave me giggling just a little bit.
I agree with Mike here, what ever you like go with and enjoy.

Don't make so much sense, you might end the endless posting on this topic

 

[Hi-FiGuy]

Don't make so much sense, you might end the endless posting on this topic

 

[parkcaka]

If I'm paying big money for a DAC, it better play every digital music format/method available to men. I may not need it now but when I do it has to be there. I listen to 98% of the time PCM in my system but I'll never invest in a DAC that can not do DSD. Even if PCM only DAC is cost effective and a fair request, I believe most audiophiles paying anything more than 10K for a DAC won't buy it so the product will be flop. It is a much more practical way to go on relatively cheaper products. When you have only 5K for a DAC, its very logical to have the best in one area instead of getting an average performance on all. But when you buy the hiend DAC you'll better have them all.

Of course this is just an opinion.

 

[jonyung]

I represent MSB and I wish to clarify exactly what is upgradable in all of our current DACs so there is no ambiguity or confusion (Discrete DAC, Premier DAC, Reference DAC and Select DAC).

Software is all independently upgradeable via user installed firmware upgrades. This includes the user interface processor, Digital Core Engine, FPGA based digital processor and supplemental processors located in input modules such as the computer in the Renderer Input or the USB module processor. Input modules are all upgradable in all products (tool less lever) except the built in S/PDIF inputs on the discrete DAC (there are still two upgradable slots on the discrete DAC however). The clock modules in all products except the Discrete DAC are upgradable (requires tools, Premier DAC is tool less). The DAC modules in all products are upgradable, replaceable modules (requires tools). The output modules which in all products are user upgradable (tool less lever). The power supplies are external for all our DACs so those are upgradable as well.

Our 25 years of DAC design and manufacturing experience we have found that it is primarily input and format compatibility that makes DACs “age” so we made the software and input modules the most easily upgradable parts of our current DACs. We spent a lot of effort to make the input module replacement as painless as possible. A user can simply power the DAC off, pull out locking lever, pull out the module, insert a new module, push in the locking lever and power up the DAC. We found that some types of input modules also can also suffer a higher than average failure rate due to “tweaks” like custom USB cables that can damage USB receiver chips. It is much easier to ship a new module to a customer than have them send their whole DAC back to us for repair. We also found that developing multiple versions of each new input was wasting a lot of design effort (especially the design of complex inputs like the Renderer) so we standardized on one extremely capable input module format across all of our product levels. It was one of the major reasons we recently completely revamped our product lineup. The modular input design also allows up to optimize each input for the best noise isolation, best data recovery and lowest jitter possible for each input format.

We write all of our software in house and we are constantly improving and refining the software for all of our DACs. Improvements to the user interface and input module support are the most common but improvements to the core digital processing and software configurable DAC modules are released at least once a year as well.

There are some limitations to the basic hardware on all of these DACs without motherboard and DAC replacement (which is possible). They have been designed to anticipate future trends as much as possible to ensure the longest life span out of these DACs as possible. The DACs, Core Engine and input module slots support multibit PCM of up to 32 bits and up to 6Mhz sample rate. The DACs, Core Engine and input module slots support Native DSD to DSD 16x (DSD 1024). Multibit Delta Sigma (2, 4 and 6 bit) is also natively supported to 12.288Mhz sample rates even though this is not a currently an available format. Input modules each have a varying capability that is dependent upon reliable support of each format. For example S/PDIF is limited to 24 bits and 192Khz PCM sample rates (good for 1x DSD also). Our current renderer supports PCM at 32bit resolution and 768Khz sample rates (good for 4x DSD also). Our Pro ISL input is our most capable current input and supports 32bit PCM resolution at up to 3Mhz sample rates (good for 16x DSD also).

DMSB

Thank you for your information. May I ask another question ?

What is MSB's position on filters used in your DACs?
How does it alter the sound quality?
I assume it is software upgradable?

merry Christmas anyway!

 

[Al M.]

I am glad I am not a format snob! . I like them all, as its music first.
All I can tell you is Eric Claptons Slow Hand on SACD trumps any other version I have ever heard its amazing (if its on tape I have not heard it). I confirms my system has the potential to sound very good, for what it is.
What ever format of a particular recording sounds best to me is what I go with, source is king.
These "discussions" while informative, just so you know, leave me giggling just a little bit.
I agree with Mike here, what ever you like go with and enjoy.

And I am giggling about the audiophile format craze, the audiophilia nervosa obsession with every newest format there is.

Oh I won't buy that DAC if it doesn't do double DSD. A couple years later: Oh I won't buy that DAC if it doesn't do quad DSD. Now: Oh I won't buy that DAC if it doesn't do MQA.

Yeah whatever. To each their own I guess

And I guess we have different opinions then what it means to be a 'format snob'...

 

[Al M.]

If I'm paying big money for a DAC, it better play every digital music format/method available to men. I may not need it now but when I do it has to be there. I listen to 98% of the time PCM in my system but I'll never invest in a DAC that can not do DSD.

So much for practical audiophile thinking

Even if PCM only DAC is cost effective and a fair request, I believe most audiophiles paying anything more than 10K for a DAC won't buy it so the product will be flop.

Yes, manufacturers constantly have to cave in to audiophilia nervosa. Honestly, I have more respect for those who choose not to.

It is a much more practical way to go on relatively cheaper products. When you have only 5K for a DAC, its very logical to have the best in one area instead of getting an average performance on all. But when you buy the hiend DAC you'll better have them all.

Of course this is just an opinion.

Of course, my view is just an opinion too.

 

[Joe Whip]

My view on formats.

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/ca/contributors/audio-engineering-matters-not-the-format-r760/

I have quite a few DSD files and convert them to PCM 176.4 for playback through my Yggy A2 with sensational results.

 

[Al M.]

My view on formats.

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/ca/contributors/audio-engineering-matters-not-the-format-r760/

I have quite a few DSD files and convert them to PCM 176.4 for playback through my Yggy A2 with sensational results.

Yes, I read that article. Great write-up, Joe!

I loved it when someone in the comment section said "what the hell is wrong with you Joe Whip, have you gone completely sane?". Hehe.

 

[Al M.]

It is a much more practical way to go on relatively cheaper products. When you have only 5K for a DAC, its very logical to have the best in one area instead of getting an average performance on all. But when you buy the hiend DAC you'll better have them all.

Or the manufacturer still has to compromise performance even in a very expensive DAC. That is why I like very much the elegant concept that MSB offers, see post #159 by DMSB on the previous thread page.

 

[Hi-FiGuy]

And I am giggling about the audiophile format craze, the audiophilia nervosa obsession with every newest format there is.

Oh I won't buy that DAC if it doesn't do double DSD. A couple years later: Oh I won't buy that DAC if it doesn't do quad DSD. Now: Oh I won't buy that DAC if it doesn't do MQA.

Yeah whatever. To each their own I guess

And I guess we have different opinions then what it means to be a 'format snob'...

#ALL FORMATS MATTER
I was at a local Aphile meeting a few years ago and we were at that moment listening to vinyl and a track he was not interested in (it was not classical and not his favorite format), interrupts the listening and goes into a speech about how all formats are great and attempted to create a group hug kumbaya moment and then proceeds to launch into why his preferred format was the best and why.
He was told that if he wished to carry on a conversation about it to take it out to the lobby and if anyone wanted to continue the conversation the were welcome to follow him. Nobody did.
Dude did not even wait until the song was over and it was SRV to boot.

 

[KeithR]

how did this thread become a redbook vs DSD one?

unsubscribed.

 

[Hi-FiGuy]

To add I have never heard an MSB device that I was not head over heals with on all levels!

 

[microstrip]

Here is an interesting white paper by Grimm Audio on native vs. non-native DSD:

DSD Myth

Al M.,

This paper is not strictly related yo what you were debating - CD versus SACD (the only alternative format being debated, as you clearly excluded any form of HiRez). The paper mainly debates DSD versus 192/24, not with redbook.

Please note that our DACs should be considered from a consumer perspective, not a professional or archivist one. And here what matters more is the implementation and matching user systems and their preferences.

IMHO this article seems to be favorable to the ownership and use of DACs with DSD - I can not really understand why you referred to it!

 

[microstrip]

how did this thread become a redbook vs DSD one?

unsubscribed.

DSD and MSB share the same middle letter...

 

[Al M.]

Al M.,

This paper is not strictly related yo what you were debating - CD versus SACD (the only alternative format being debated, as you clearly excluded any form of HiRez). The paper mainly debates DSD versus 192/24, not with redbook.

Please note that our DACs should be considered from a consumer perspective, not a professional or archivist one. And here what matters more is the implementation and matching user systems and their preferences.

IMHO this article seems to be favorable to the ownership and use of DACs with DSD - I can not really understand why you referred to it!

The paper clearly states that, and why, there is little native DSD, with most of it having gone through PCM stages. That was my point, not CD vs. SACD; see last paragraph of my post #146, previous thread page. That post was an answer to Davey's question why I have no interest in SACD/DSD (and to his claim that CD is limiting), and pointing out the native/non-native DSD issue was part of that answer.

The fact that the authors are very favorable to DSD only underscores their valid technical points.

It shows that they have no ulterior motives, which might have lead them to disparage DSD on bogus technical points. If I would have posted a paper from someone with an axe to grind, it probably would have seemed less credible (even with the exact same technical points made).

 

[microstrip]

Maybe this will be confusing but I will try to explain how the hybrid DAC works. All data converters no matter what the format are collections of the same basic components. Precision references and switches. A normal DAC wires these basic components in only one way allowing only one type of data conversion. The Hybrid DAC is different, it is a software defined analog system that can be rewired on the fly to dedicate all of its precision analog components in almost any way. So when a Hybrid DAC module is converting PCM all of its recources are dedicated to native PCM conversion. When native DSD is converted all of those same recources are rewired for DSD conversion. So when PCM is being played back the hybrid DAC is a 100% PCM converter and when DSD is being played the hybrid DAC is a 100% DSD converter. Same components, different wiring. The prime DAC module used in our lower priced DACs operates in an identical way, it just has fewer precision analog recources than a hybrid DAC module. So to answer your question any of our current DACs are pure PCM DACs if you are playing PCM and any of our current DACs are pure DSD DACs when playing DSD. The software is responsable for the exact form the DAC actually takes so it can convert most any form of data natively. The main limitation is the ability to actually stream the data into the module and the limitation of the clock subsystem to generate the correct sample rate. That is limited to about a 500Mb per second data rate per module and sample rates to those divided from the two independant oscillators avalable in the femto clock modules.

As we do not know exactly how the hybrid DAC works in either mode your explanation does not clarify the issue. Does the Select use a 2R2 Ladder DAC to convert DSD?

 

[Ron Resnick]

Dear Al,

Regarding Schitt versus MSB why not set up an appointment at Goodwin’s, take your DAC to Goodwin’s, compare your DAC directly to an MSB in the same system, and report your detailed listening impressions and conclusions here?

I am sure you won’t have any trouble getting one or more of the other members of the WBF Boston Audio Group to accompany you.