"The other important goal is physical and electrical isolation from computer audio noise. All servers and plain computers deliver the exact same bit perfect file, so the musical data is identical. They sound different because of jitter and electrical noise (different from audible noise). This noise can come from your own network equipment and at much higher frequencies from cell towers, TV, and radio stations, etc., conducted along the Ethernet cables."
I agree 100% with this quote. Note that jitter does not apply to asynchronous connections only synchronous connections. Another statement of fact is that fiber optic cable does not carry electrical noise at any level. Notice that their Pro USB uses fiber optic cable for complete electrical isolation (their words).
So if you place fiber optic couplers between your source and DAC the only noise injected into your system will come from the second coupler.
So a poor mans directer would be two fiber optic couplers with the second coupler warped in a Faraday fabric (check amazon). This option is about 200 dollars. Just a thought.
Please see the response below the ==== I received from MSB Technology regarding the announcement of the MSB Director. His explanation makes perfect sense, was very helpful and I better understand MSB’s future product strategy. For example, "the Director was designed to be a brick wall against any of these noises and associated jitter. From the beginning of the company MSB has always considered and respected the customer’s investment and tried to bring the customer along with new technologies as much value as possible".
For the time being, I am keeping my MBS Premier DAC. I listened to my system yesterday and it sound great to my ears.
======================================
"The technology for the current DAC models are going on 7 years old. Lately we have been often asked when are coming out with a new DAC. Bu the core digital engine, the ladders and the clocks are still almost better than what is needed for audio at each price point. Therefore, our ability to do a major improvement pretty much lives in the front end of the DAC. Much more powerful processors were needed that didn’t exist when these DACs were designed. The original design retains the original processors but then adds new processors allowing bigger and better digital filters among other significant refinements. The other important goal is physical and electrical isolation from computer audio noise. All servers and plain computers deliver the exact same bit perfect file, so the musical data is identical. They sound different because of jitter and electrical noise (different from audible noise). This noise can come from your own network equipment and at much higher frequencies from cell towers, TV, and radio stations, etc., conducted along the ethernet cables. The Director was designed to be a brick wall against any of these noises and associated jitter. Early tests say that this has been achieved to a high degree. Also, the difference between connection methods, RCA, AES-XLR, USB, and direct ethernet streaming was designed to be as identical as possible.
Historically, many if not most companies would understandably just come out with a new DAC when they have accomplished something significant. From the beginning of the company MSB has always considered and respected the customer’s investment and tried to bring the customer along with new technologies as much value as possible. In the two previous decades the platforms lasted 10 years always being able to upgrade to the next level models within the 10 years. Due to the intent of the design, this 3rd and current platform could go longer.
MSB works on cost-plus so a new chassis, a new motherboard, new more expensive internal components, and 3 years of design and development have a significant cost. In the end we want to assure you this is not “audiophile pricing”. We believe it is a fair price for a significant improvement in performance from any existing source, also improving the best source one might already have. Importantly, you do you not need to sell your DAC. We believe it is much more frustrating to have to keep your DAC and know the "next model” DAC that was recently introduced is better. And…. your DAC is worth much less money on the used market. In this case your DAC retains its full value. And you are right, your DAC as it is, sounds amazing and you are satisfied with it compared to other DACs you may have considered at its price point and maybe far above. If, and when, you decide to upgrade to the Director, your investment is additive. We believe it is hard to find such value in the high-end audio hobby".
=========================
If you have any comments or thoughts to the above, please post them. Thanks.
Please see the email below (in quotes) I received from MSB dated May 12,2022. The email says the MSB Director is a DAC upgrade. See below:
"We have been working towards this point for a few years now and are wildly excited to share the results with you. Introducing, The Digital Director. I want to take a moment to try my best at explaining what this product is and how it works. As it is a new product category, we are still figuring out the right words.
To start, this is a DAC Upgrade. This works with all existing Discrete, Premier, Reference, and Select DACs. Any version of the digital director works with any version of our DACs. It is an additional product chassis that marries with the DAC to do extraordinary things. New firmware will be required for the DAC. Current input modules are removed from the DAC and installed into the Digital Director. With the Pro ISL and Optical control link providing two way communication will allow the DAC display and controls to operate the Digital Director as a seamless experience. This will not work as an independent product. The Reference and Select level Digital Directors have integrated linear power supplies, whereas the Premier Digital Director has an integrated switching power supply.
The creation of this product stems from the ever diversifying market of digital sources. Servers, computers, and renderers etc. We set out to find a way to bring all bit perfect sources onto an equal footing. This required more power, processing, and perfect isolation. Mission accomplished. Having this as an external product was key for isolation. We are doing everything possible to further quite down the DAC chassis where the conversion process is most vulnerable to noise.
Lastly, we have offloaded the digital processing from the DAC into the Digital Director. Using new high-performance DSPs along with all-new digital filters our DACs have taken a huge step forward. I was blown away hearing the soundstage snap into even sharper focus! I love how our favorite recordings continue to surprise us with new details and experiences. It seems our digital journey is not yet complete and we are excited to discover what’s next".
Additional MSB Director production information is:
"Note: Production begins this year, but we ask for patience with new orders as we navigate severe chip shortages and difficult supply lines. Once the new firmware is installed, The Digital Director is compatible with all existing Discrete, Premier, Reference, and Select DACs. All new Digital Directors are manufactured according to our most recent designs and production standards and are not guaranteed to be a perfect finish match to existing systems. That being said, they’ll have stacking compatibility and will follow the correct sizing and shape. All new orders placed between May 2022 and the shipping release of the Digital Directors will be an exact match. Current and new DAC orders will ship when ready and the Digital Director will be sent at a later date when production schedules allow".
My Comments: I know MSB Technology is about innovation, advanced design, state of the art products, etc. but the new MSB Director upgrade price is HIGHER than what I expected. I never thought my next MSB Premier DAC upgrade would cost this much and require a third box.
To be honest, it is frustrating that the next MSB DAC upgrade requires a $14,500 expenditure, another box, more cables, etc. In any case, I am not happy with MSB’s expensive upgrade path for my MSB Premier DAC and will ‘probably’ keep my Premier DAC since it sounds excellent and is paid for. Thanks.
As a (amateur) musician i love my MSB dac. It's the dac that tells the story of music to me. Many other DA converters I have listened to are reproducing notes in a technical way. If I study my teacher sometimes tells me: you're playing vertical notes instead of musical sentences.
I have learned using a good cable with a low impedance is key as the output impedance from the MSB is rather low. Matching with the "wrong" cable does affect the result. But i assume that matching gear and it's connections isn't an unknown here. Also important is to make sure you have the connections right. A MSB dac is fully balanced and when connected to a single ended design trough it's balanced output...it will perform mediocre.
Warranty and product support from this company is extraordinary... and that also has it's price. If you just bluntly say it's expensive and promote another brand...it gives true credit to MSB for making exeptional gear.
"Some people like NOS DACs, most do not. I would go on a limb and say no one could reliability tell you whether a DAC was R2R or DS without being told."
I am no sure whether r2r vs d-s aren't discernible. The whole idea is, if implemented properly, the technology should actually be transparent to the end user. The dacs should ideally sound the same. But technically or psychoacoustically, they do not. Some devices to sound fatiguing over the long term, this is essentially what all these discussions boil down to. But that's a complex issue. After a hard day of work, I could be fatigued easily listening to music vs a nice pleasant day, in the same system with the same tracks.
NOS vs OS may be far easier to discern. R2R does not have to be NOS, BTW. Most (all?) Schiit dacs are OS r2r dacs. All NOS dacs will attenuate the high frequency by ~3db due to the nature of signal processing. Sinc(x)/x function. By reading many topics over years in this space, I realized even some pro reviewers do not know this. This attenuation doesn't mean treble will sound bad. But treble is definitely rolled off if the DAC is NOS. And you can counter that if you choose to, by using software to oversample prior to sending the signal to the NOS dac. Then the attenuation happens beyond the limit of human hearing. Most of us probably do not have the capability to hear up to 20KHz, last I checked I could discern up to 17KHz. So if the r2r dacs starts to attenuate at 15KHz, this will not be very noticeable as most of our music rarely contains components within the extremities of the bandwidth anyway.
That's also something everyone should test, there are plenty of web based or youtube based signal generators to test your hearing (and your system).
"FPGA is not a type of DAC. It is a method of implementating digital logic and algorithms."
I know that. I meant the class of dacs that use FPGA chips could be called FPGA dacs. PS Audio, Chord Dave etc. The chips can be modified by software. Hence PS Audio dacs are modifiable by software updates.
"
The MSB may be a marvel of engineering but how much does it differ on
the analog output from the Benchmark? In my opinion it isn't so much how
we get the result as what is the result."
Seems to me that finding an opportunity to go listen to one for yourself is probably the only way to answer your question one way or the other
to your satisfaction.
I'm not an engineer but I do know a bit about the difference in design and implementation of MSB DACs and say Benchmark DACs. I understand building discrete R2R that will measure and sound great is an achievement in engineering and it's, at least to me, mesmerizing to look at the inside of them. But I still question the superiority as far as music reconstruction is concerned. The MSB may be a marvel of engineering but how much does it differ on the analog output from the Benchmark? In my opinion it isn't so much how we get the result as what is the result.
Oh no..... what did I say Atdavid?? (oops! meant Roberttid, oops again, it's Dannad this time around). I merely asked a question. Is it so hard to share? You seem very well versed on various DACs, must really have tried many, so I am curious as to what you own currently. I am genuinely curious
I couldn’t agree with you anymore. But it appears the hobbyist here are under constant scrutiny from the measurement crowd demanding proof.
djones51,
For some folks, the ’better’ defines as minimum cost necessary to achieve audibly neutral sound (to their ears atleast) when playing back the music. They tend to rely heavily on price of admission, reviews, accolades and measurements are the bases of their primary selection criteria.
For others, their interest in reproducing recording’s faithful to the source where other aspects of DAC’s performance are more relevant in determining what means ’better’. The discernible differences in DAC's come from well designed power supplies, properly routed with separate analogue and digital paths, well laid out PCBs, accurate and stable clock, jitter reduction, high quality analogue op-amps, well designed analogue filters, aesthetics (why not) and these are the bits where meticulous implementation of one DAC over another determines why DAC X is better than DAC Y.
Once you are open to appreciate the fundamental differences in the implementation of MSB or EMM Labs DAC’s, you are less likely to question their superiority over the competition.
(Sorry for the slight off topicness) @nitewulf In the past year I've had a PS Audio PWD & Directstream, Matrix X-Sabre Pro, Shiit Bifrost II, Audio Mirror T3-SE, Lampizator Amber 3, and ifiIDSD Pro in my house for extended auditions (10-30 days)... all except for the Directstream at the same time. Unfortunately despite the great measurements, I didn't like the Matrix. It just sounded bland and involving. I started kind of dreading when it would come up in the rotation. I chose the Analog Devices based Audio Mirror, which makes beautifully coherent, natural,and real music, with the most three dimensional soundstaging of the group. That's the reason I continue to read about high end r2rs.
Why should anyone be subjected to constant testing what they were listening to ...
They shouldn't. This is a hobbyist's group, not a scientific forum, and users should be free to post their experiences here without being attacked by demands for blind testing. Those who are interested in blind testing are free to conduct their own research. (If they do, I hope they share their experiences with us.) Those who insist that sighted listening tests are of no value are really being disingenuous because, again, this is not a scientific forum. If that's truly what a user seeks, then he is in the wrong place on A'gon.
“My point is....could they consistently tell which one they were listening to. Could anyone tell the least expensive MSB from the most expensive?”
djones51,
Why should anyone be subjected to constant testing what they were listening to once it’s determined that DAC X is better than DAC Y?
You remind me of one of the poster, he once wrote,
“Lets run an experiment. You have to be blindfolded and sitting in your listening position. Have a friend or your wife plug and unplug the unit. All he or she can say is "OK" when they make a change. You say "on" or "off" after every "OK" That person keeps a record of your responses by writing down R for right and W for wrong. Record 50 responses then determine the percentage of right and wrong answers. Let us know the results.”
For a while you had us all believing in you that you actually come here for the education 😂
My point was never people shouldn't buy what they like but could they consistently tell which one they were listening to. Could anyone tell the least expensive MSB from the most expensive? I assume to much , I know I couldn't I guess there are those who can.
Yeah this whole thing took a very negative turn which wasn't my intention and I do regret that.
To @thyname , my current dac is a Metrum Pavane, prior to that I had a Metrum Onyx. I am very partial to Metrum dacs in so far as they just sound really, really good. But like most of us here I suspect, we are always thinking about what's next, what's even better. And unfortunately Metrum doesn't have anything higher end. There is absolutely nothing at all I am missing currently, but my mind wonders regardless.
So the next targets are really Rockna Wavedream Balanced, Chord Dave, Mola Mola Tambaqui, or even the MSB Discrete. But current situation doesn't allow me to go to a dealer and audition these side by side. It was already hard to do that prior to covid. Speaker auditioning is easy, electronics is tougher as single dealers just don't carry that many brands. And I am uncomfortable getting 4 dacs in for home audition knowing I have to send 3 back. Hence dealer auditioning is preferable to me, I know my test tracks well and I know what musical queues I am looking for. But hopefully situation is normalized and I can audition some of these early next year.
@jjss49 , yes we are on the same page. So these new r2r modules are laser trimmed. They are made very well. And I personally don't have preconceived notions that a integrated r2r chip is worse, as people absolutely adore their old 90s dacs by Theta etc (even in this thread and elsewhere the Tubadour is lauded which is made from Analog Devices chips). Newer r2r dacs are just linear enough for 20+ bits, yielding SNR of 110 dbs, which is basically way beyond what we need. So the peace of mind is there. I have never liked a D-S dac for long, but even then I am highly curious about the Matrix Sabre Pro dac, which is relatively cheap, and measures flawlessly. There's a reason for this, a $300 Matrix mini was the first dac I heard that blew my mind with price/performance ratio. Even back then I knew that tiny, cheap dac was doing something magical. I have heard far more expensive D-S dacs that just didn't sound as good.
pertaining to the aspect of your post regarding audiophile preferences for point to point wired components versus those that are pcb based... as an analog for a potential preference for discrete r2r dacs using physical resistors vs silicon-based r2r dac chips...
it really isn’t a hard choice... with ’modern’ (even from 15-20 years ago) chipmaking techniques using photolithography, ion doping, physical/chemical vapor deposition and so forth, it is certainly true that silicon-based versions are not only successfully miniaturized, but also made to significantly tighter tolerances than using physical (discrete) resistors ... this is essential for most and least significant bit representations during D/A conversion using the such ladder networks, especially as one moves into calcs beyond 16-18-20 bits to real 24 bit conversions - physical resistors just aren’t precise enough...
so just like small makers of phone and linestages may use kits and point to point wiring (and audiophiles may desire this for romantic reasons), anyone who works at scale and understands proper modern design and manufacturing engineering to meaningful QC and proper tolerances will adopt the more effective and efficient ways to get it done
the fact that r2r chips from the heyday of such as the td1545a, ad1782 or bb pcm63 are not made today is not because they perform worse, it is because of demand for such chips have declined with the advent of low cost DS chips that do the same work for less and incorporate more related functionality like dsp...
Hey @nitewulf : good posts. Thanks for sharing. I mean it.
I used to own the first version of the Holo Spring DAC. It was Level 3, the KTA version (which is Kitsune Tuned Edition, Kitsune being a small company in California). It was certainly a great DAC for the money. It took me spending more than double that money to beat it. I have owned over a dozen DACs over the years.
@arafiq , yes, ASR is a good resource for measurements obviously but measurements are not everything. Hence why these very cheap but excellent measuring dacs like the Topping actually do not sound good.
But we also have to keep in mind that devices like single ended zero feedback amplifiers, or NOS r2r dacs have inherent distortions, harmonic and intermodulation. Its just that, we tend to like those distortions.
MSB uses discrete r2r chips, much like Metrum, Rockna, Holo Audio and some other recent manufacturers. Manufacturing refinements since MSB’s older dacs like the Analog have enabled designers to implement resistors with lower tolerances and thermal restrictions, as well due to manufacturing of scale, these discrete chips are cheaper to produce currently (pre-covid). Based on that, discrete chips engineered by Metrum designer Cees Ruijtenberg and Rockna designer Nicolae Jitariu are very low tolerance and high performing. For instance if you read up on how Cees designed the r2r modules in Metrum dacs to split the bitrates and handle the MSB (most significant bits) vs the LSB (least significant bits) you will see that its a very elegant and clever solution to reduce noise. There is an art to it. That’s where the value proposition comes in, did a particular designer use something very clever to achieve a very high quality sound, IMO you can’t ignore this aspect even though Metrum dacs may be "cheaper" than MSB, for example. Same goes for Jeff Zhu, the designer at Holo Audio. It’s precisely the way he designs his r2r May dacs that they measure almost perfectly even though typical r2r dacs do not measure well.
This class of r2r dacs are different than integrated circuits based r2r dacs such Schiit Yggdrasil, these dacs use r2r integrated circuits like by TI, Burr-Brown, Analog Devices etc. Whether discrete modules are better than integrated circuits may be up to your tastes. People may immediately consider discrete components better (there is a typical Audiogon forum love for anything hand wired point to point) but Schiit dacs are widely loved as we know.
And r2r dacs are yet again different from other implementations such as Delta-Sigma or FPGA dacs. D-S dacs use off the shelf chips by Sabre or Audio Technica or Asahi Kasei Semiconductors for the actual conversion. DCS, Audiobyte etc fall into the FPGA category.
Then there’s the whole challenge of non oversampling vs oversampling. Whenever you are sampling a analog waveform, you are creating mirror image multipliers of the musical frequencies. OS dacs oversample the incoming signal to very high frequencies, so the mirror images are at even higher multipliers and are easier to filter out with gently sloped analog filters, as its easier to design gently sloped analog filters than steep sloped analog filters. NOS dacs do not use filtering with the assumption being that at the nyquist sampling rate of at least 44.1 khz, the waveform mirror images are beyond normal human hearing. But many software media players such as J-River or Tidal can perform the oversampling at the software level before sending it to the dac, further ensuring the mirror images are at much higher frequencies. There are other reasons to design OS dacs, but ultimately it all depends on what the designer wants to achieve.
Going back to the topic: " Msb dacs why not alot of postings", the assumption was cost. But I don’t think that’s true. As a lot of people own Dacs like the Chord Dave, Rockna or TotalDac or even Lampizator models that rival MSB in price and there are a lot more discussions and reviews on these products all over the internet.
Also another assumption was by recommending something well reviewed and measured which costs a bit less I was doing a disservice, because I (and few others posting here) can’t apparently afford a MSB (even though my first line was literally that I was considering an MSB dac at one point). That assumption is also, not true.
If only the norm was education. Sounds good. Let's take the DAC in question MSB, how is it better than other DACs regardless of price? Is there technology used no other manufacturer uses? If so, how does it perform what does it do? Is there a link showing measurements so one can at least begin to get an impartial idea on its performance? Has it been subjected to controlled listening tests? Anything objective where noone has any skin in the game? Pontificating subjective opinions back and forth on the sonic ability is hardly education. I would be more than happy to get an education about this DAC. I'm not interested in how it sounds in your room we don't learn anything about the component but your impression of it. I think you're wrong in your assessment, audiogon is loosing contributors because they aren't interested in education..
Based on all the hoopla and excellent measurements I bought the Topping D90 a few months ago. I really, really, really tried to love the DAC, kept it for almost 2 months, but it just didn't click with me. I sold it to a friend who absolutely loves it ... and he has had more expensive, relatively speaking, DACs in the past. I bought an Audio Mirror Tubadour III recently, and it ticks all the boxes for me. To each his own!
BTW here are your own words, from your system description:
"Since then, I have gone through three major upgrades and what you see now it’s my attempt to enjoy that lush, warm and organic sound synonymous with some of the finest tube and solid state components."
"Lush", "warm", "organic", ie, not neutral. You guys always think your systems are highly resolving and transparent because of airy treble, and intakes of breaths, or hands sliding on guitar strings. And that Diana Krall track. Whatever the Diana Krall track is.
Guess what, any moderate system should be capable of those things, and if not, it's not a good system.
I haven't yet heard a single word about what tracks you used, what your listening notes were but I'd assume your comments would be nebulous such as airy treble, blacker background, tighter bass and wider soundstage - when component A was switched to component B.
I haven't asked about anything remotely scientific, just even a nuanced statement such as: this is the test track I used, at 3:05, the high hats ring in a certain way, and it was a lot more discernable with the EMM Labs dac than on the Rockna.
But nope, none of that. Anyway, the point wasn't about downplaying MSB, but comparative lack of MSB reviews vs similarly priced dacs make MSB harder to recommend for blindly buying. Whereas every single dac I mentioned have been well reviewed by respected publications.
No one is saying you cant get at home trials in, unsure about the "chops" comment. I'll ruminate on it while driving my 911 Carrera S.
@lalitk, Don't assume things about me or my capabilities.
But based on the meandering rhetoric in your post, I know your type as well. Suffice to say, your opinion has an audience here assuredly, but none of your opinions cut muster in any objective sense and like I initially mentioned, it's fanboy hyperbolic nonsense. Drivel, even.
Well my man I'm the only person in my house so when components, cables, etc. get moved in and out guess what - non-blind testing , the eyes see what the hands moved/connected and the ears hear - test concluded..
Nothing in music that isn't in a 32 test tone that sweeps all frequencies audible to humans. There is nothing that humans hear that can't be measured. Time to get out of the dark ages. Proclaiming you trust your ears forgetting your eyes moves nothing forward. I've been reading papers on the evolution of British monitors and even in the 1950's they accepted basic human bias and knew they needed to use blind listening tests. Jesus people.
My post was in response to your ‘value proposition’ comment. I am under no obligation to convince you how good my hearing is or what I’ve heard. You obviously can’t read nor have the ability to appreciate a highly resolved audio system thus dismissing as vintage and ‘colored’. I made a simple statement based on what’ve heard without any hyperbole or exaggeration. Key here is ‘what I’ve heard and compared’.
You on the other hand, were quick to dismiss MSB (old design, your words not mine) and touting Rockna, Mola Mola and Holo Audio based on accolades, reviews and measurements. Trust me, I know your ‘kind’ who gets excited about new products but don’t quite have the chops to hear or compare the actual component in your system.
As far I am concerned, I trust my ears and my system more than just rely on measurements. Measurements are useful tools for engineers and designers to "prove" their designs are better. Music is too complex and random to be analyzed with just numbers, test tones are too simple and predictable. Peace!
Guess I'm all screwed up because I can sure as hell tell how different components , cables, etc. sound in my systems without having to blind test myself. Likewise, I have tube amps in both systems and they don't cloud the assessment.
Only if he heard a difference between DACs without knowing which was playing and could pick it out better than chance. Then it might be of some value otherwise it's useless info.
It's a vintage system, anchored by single ended tube amps. Which while I am sure sounds very nice, but I highly doubt it is neutral in any way. Now his statement becomes even more questionable.
Before you ask, yes I have had zero feedback class A single ended tube amps, as well as push pull class A/B tube amps, and solid state amps.
"
"Once I heard DA2, I could no longer listen to Rockna Signature in my system."
these
types of hyperbolic statements are completely meaningless in any
logical discourse. What did you hear, what with, what are the comparison
notes, how good is your hearing, what was the environment, nothing is
mentioned. Par for the course.
" While he didn't specifically state what he liked better about the DA2, if I understand his post correctly both were in his system, in his room so the "with what", "what environment" are covered; and think he has the "how good is your hearing" covered.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
