Hugo M Scaler by Chord Electronics - The Official Thread
Jan 2, 2019 at 4:57 AM Post #4,726 of 18,567
I never got how less RF noise = less detail. It should be the opposite.

I'm thinking the cables with less noise were shielded much more, reducing the RFI & EMI noise, but at the same time dampening the sound, which gave it a less detailed, but cleaner sound?
I'm not an expert in this field. The following is my interpretation:
RFI & EMI noise will produce noise floor modulation. Suppose the output voltage is 1V (say) steadily for 1 second. The noise will make 1V fluctuating but with a very small amplitude. These fluctuations will make it sound as if there is a weak signal superimposed on top of the constant 1V. Then this fluctuation due to noise is interpreted as signal eventually by human. Then the impression of more details are being perceived.
 
Jan 2, 2019 at 7:01 AM Post #4,727 of 18,567
My take on what Jay means by ‘raw’ is that perhaps he means unadulterated or untainted.

And the ‘transparency, resolution and soundstage’ that he refers to and which he would trade for a more accurate hue and fuller sound are all the dispensable RF noise artefacts that bring nothing to the party except fatigue.

One has to remember that for Jay this has been a journey of understanding. Regulars in the Blu2 thread will remember the reports of when RW went to stay with Romaz and was joined by Jay. At that time there was an unnamed prototype being listened to and which turned out to be the new MScaler. When various cables and options were tried with it, Rob had difficulty in convincing Romaz and Jay that in every situation the more accurate digital connection was the least bright, least detailed option. But we prefer the detail they would say and you are wrong was what RW will have told them.

When Jay did that bnc review I think he was remembering his past inclination to like digital cables which appeared to give a bit more detail. I read his worlds as him concluding that in the end he had decided he preferred to trade that false detail in a digital cables for a ‘rawer and less glamorous sound’, ie the accuracy which you cherish.
My take on what Jay means by ‘raw’ is that perhaps he means unadulterated or untainted.

And the ‘transparency, resolution and soundstage’ that he refers to and which he would trade for a more accurate hue and fuller sound are all the dispensable RF noise artefacts that bring nothing to the party except fatigue.

One has to remember that for Jay this has been a journey of understanding. Regulars in the Blu2 thread will remember the reports of when RW went to stay with Romaz and was joined by Jay. At that time there was an unnamed prototype being listened to and which turned out to be the new MScaler. When various cables and options were tried with it, Rob had difficulty in convincing Romaz and Jay that in every situation the more accurate digital connection was the least bright, least detailed option. But we prefer the detail they would say and you are wrong was what RW will have told them.

When Jay did that bnc review I think he was remembering his past inclination to like digital cables which appeared to give a bit more detail. I read his worlds as him concluding that in the end he had decided he preferred to trade that false detail in a digital cables for a ‘rawer and less glamorous sound’, ie the accuracy which you cherish.
Hi Nick,
Jay concluded that he found three cables to his liking and they provided the best sound to his ears. Only your cables are supplied with ferrites. How do the other two cables provide comparable sound quality without ferrites? Would adding ferrites to the other two cables improve their sound quality?
Thanks for your help.
 
Jan 2, 2019 at 7:38 AM Post #4,728 of 18,567
What do you mean that "Romaz is a breathing person ?" ? Or what leads you the impression that he is not a real (breathing) person?

It was only meant to convey my feeling that, reading his posts on CA, he packed a lot into his day, to the extent that he made Bill Gates seem like an underachiever. I now accept that he is a sentient being, if that helps.
 
Jan 2, 2019 at 11:23 AM Post #4,729 of 18,567
My take on what Jay means by ‘raw’ is that perhaps he means unadulterated or untainted.

And the ‘transparency, resolution and soundstage’ that he refers to and which he would trade for a more accurate hue and fuller sound are all the dispensable RF noise artefacts that bring nothing to the party except fatigue.

One has to remember that for Jay this has been a journey of understanding. Regulars in the Blu2 thread will remember the reports of when RW went to stay with Romaz and was joined by Jay. At that time there was an unnamed prototype being listened to and which turned out to be the new MScaler. When various cables and options were tried with it, Rob had difficulty in convincing Romaz and Jay that in every situation the more accurate digital connection was the least bright, least detailed option. But we prefer the detail they would say and you are wrong was what RW will have told them.

When Jay did that bnc review I think he was remembering his past inclination to like digital cables which appeared to give a bit more detail. I read his worlds as him concluding that in the end he had decided he preferred to trade that false detail in a digital cables for a ‘rawer and less glamorous sound’, ie the accuracy which you cherish.

I have been re-reading the post by Romaz #2929 which I presume is the report which you refer to. When you say that, Rob had difficulty in convincing Romaz and Jay that in every situation the more accurate digital connection was the least bright, least detailed option I agree that Rob Watts clearly preferred the least bright cable, source etc.as he believed it was the most accurate but I am struggling to find where he (Rob) said that the least detailed was the most accurate option.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2, 2019 at 12:54 PM Post #4,730 of 18,567
I have been re-reading the post by Romaz #2929 which I presume is the report which you refer to. When you say that, Rob had difficulty in convincing Romaz and Jay that in every situation the more accurate digital connection was the least bright, least detailed option I agree that Rob Watts clearly preferred the least bright cable, source etc.as he believed it was the most accurate but I am struggling to find where he (Rob) said that the least detailed was the most accurate option.

I admit I had not recently read those posts and you will be right. Thanks for going back to the source. What I had in mind was that the brightness and false detail are both attributes of a less accurate option. Robs later statements on this subject widen the descriptions to include the false detail, false soundstage etc as being indicators of the less pure digital signal but his initial description and suggestion was, as you say, to always opt for the least bright option.
 
Jan 3, 2019 at 4:42 AM Post #4,732 of 18,567
I admit I had not recently read those posts and you will be right. Thanks for going back to the source. What I had in mind was that the brightness and false detail are both attributes of a less accurate option. Robs later statements on this subject widen the descriptions to include the false detail, false soundstage etc as being indicators of the less pure digital signal but his initial description and suggestion was, as you say, to always opt for the least bright option.

Where exactly does Rob say that the M Scaler and DAVE as supplied suffer from false detail and false soundstage and fatigue?
 
Last edited:
Jan 3, 2019 at 5:05 AM Post #4,733 of 18,567
How do you differentiate between the suggested less bright sounding cable and just a dull poor cable.

Does this go for all cables or just digital or specifically the dual BNC coax cables used here.

For me, I'd compare the sound to that using a good-quality optical cable, such as from Sysconcepts. It should be identical.

In OLD DACs, an increase in jitter resulted in a duller, less clear sound, but that isn't an issue nowadays. Without USB isolation (eg: In the Hugo 2) a worse digital transport/cable results in a harsher sound. This is true even with a very long, cheap, optical cable. That, at a guess, is probably the result of the Hugo 2 having to work harder to correct the jitter and generating more electrical noise itself.

Where exactly does Rob say that the M Scaler and DAVE as supplied suffer from false detail and false soundstage and fatigue?

Discussion in the past has centred around the different "sound" with different USB cables, though what I've seen has mostly been with the Hugo and Hugo 2, which don't have isolated USB. With those two, noise from the transport (computer or whatever) can result in the sound seeming to be "brighter" and/or have more detail, when the reality is that the effect of noise getting into the components is what is being heard.

So to paraphrase what I remember of Rob's advice, it was that between two cables, the one that results in a less bright sound is probably the better one.
 
Last edited:
Jan 3, 2019 at 7:48 AM Post #4,736 of 18,567
If you stuck a fork through your tweeters your system would sound more raw, and be less resolving and transparent. Surely this would not be a good thing. I think it might be better if Jay spoke for what Jay means, but as it stands his words don’t make much sense to me.

PS And are you saying that an M Scaler and DAVE is fatiguing with the supplied cable?


The products themselves don’t cause interference, but other things do and they can affect the above products. My wifi router which is sitting right next to my TT2 and MScaler combo is a perfect example, so much so that TT2 and HMS manuals both tell you to not place it near wifi devices.

Nick’s cables in that respect helped me fix the problem that my wifi router was causing. It was making the sound too bright, especially with H2, not so much with TT2, but the transition to Nick’s cables over the stock cables was immediate, music now sounds more realistic, not as pin sharp as it was and much easier to listen to for extended periods.

The RFI thing

Think of it like this. Non internet FM radio on our phones only work if we plug the earphones in to the phone, why does it do that ? It’s because the earphone cable is needed to act as the aerial and to capture the radio signals. In the process allowing us to listen to the radio on our phones. No aerial, no radio.

It’s the same in the house. The cables themselves are acting like aerials and picking up interference. Thus allowing it to get into whatever device the cables are plugged into. Now that we know that, we can take steps to mitigate the problem. Either we use a faraday cage or try different cables. The former being nuts.

You may think Nick’s cables don’t work, but I have a set and my post history tell’s you that if they didn’t work, I would say so, and I would say it in public at the same time.

Nick’s Cables really do work. They have tamed the brightness / sharpness to such a degree that its extremely easy for me to notice, and I don’t have golden ears. Your fatigue comment, before trying Nicks cables, listening to music for extended periods was fatigueing, now its smooth all the way,
 
Jan 3, 2019 at 9:28 AM Post #4,738 of 18,567
The products themselves don’t cause interference, but other things do and they can affect the above products. My wifi router which is sitting right next to my TT2 and MScaler combo is a perfect example, so much so that TT2 and HMS manuals both tell you to not place it near wifi devices.

Nick’s cables in that respect helped me fix the problem that my wifi router was causing. It was making the sound too bright, especially with H2, not so much with TT2, but the transition to Nick’s cables over the stock cables was immediate, music now sounds more realistic, not as pin sharp as it was and much easier to listen to for extended periods.

The RFI thing

Think of it like this. Non internet FM radio on our phones only work if we plug the earphones in to the phone, why does it do that ? It’s because the earphone cable is needed to act as the aerial and to capture the radio signals. In the process allowing us to listen to the radio on our phones. No aerial, no radio.

It’s the same in the house. The cables themselves are acting like aerials and picking up interference. Thus allowing it to get into whatever device the cables are plugged into. Now that we know that, we can take steps to mitigate the problem. Either we use a faraday cage or try different cables. The former being nuts.

You may think Nick’s cables don’t work, but I have a set and my post history tell’s you that if they didn’t work, I would say so, and I would say it in public at the same time.

Nick’s Cables really do work. They have tamed the brightness / sharpness to such a degree that its extremely easy for me to notice, and I don’t have golden ears. Your fatigue comment, before trying Nicks cables, listening to music for extended periods was fatigueing, now its smooth all the way,
Out of interest did you try TT2/M Scaler with the router disconnected ? Did that tame any brightness ?
 
Jan 3, 2019 at 10:21 AM Post #4,739 of 18,567
Out of interest did you try TT2/M Scaler with the router disconnected ? Did that tame any brightness ?

Yes I did, and yes it did, as I had to turn off and move my router.

I use my iphone or ipads to stream to my mscaler more than I do my pc. I just use the supplied usb cable and a cck on the end and bingo, I can stream from a much less noisy device when compared to my pc. When WiFi is off they automatically jump on over to 4g and they all have 60gb per month sim cards in them.

I’m as surprised as anyone else, I really thought it was a myth, the reason I thought that was because of all my iem cables, which all more or less sound the same. I didn!t expect bnc cables to be any different.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top