MSB Select II

[Elberoth]

In native mode. I was actually wondering, what enhanced in the menu means and does.

[Alpinist]

In native mode. I was actually wondering, what enhanced in the menu means and does.

Hi Adam,

The DSD Optimized Mode converts from DSD to PCM.

Ken

[Gregm]

I also prefer enhanced, even though taking me back to PCM does seem to defeat the purpose, doesn't it? Could've stuck with 24/192 in the first place...

Comparing DSD (5.something mega) to 24/192, I preferred the latter on a Yello album (the one with "the race" on it). Both files direct from master-tape, supposedly. The 24/196 sounded more punchy, better transient attack, better dynamic rendering -- and I'm a sucker for dynamics!

[Kingsrule]

Actually MSB Enhanced mode is DSD via DoP.......

[Alpinist]

Actually MSB Enhanced mode is DSD via DoP.......

Hi King,

Hope you are well. Care to elaborate on this?

The Select User Manual says the optimized mode is the DSD decimation done using a special method developed by MSB. I looked this up and this appears to mean a DSD to PCM conversion.

I can ask Daniel Gullman if you want me to verify this.

Ken

[Kingsrule]

Hi Ken

Sure check with MSB but I'm sure its DSD via DoP

[Alpinist]

Hi Ken

Sure check with MSB but I'm sure its DSD via DoP

I guess this is possible. We’ll see how Daniel at MSB responds.

From the DCS Website:

FAQ: What is DoP (DSD over PCM)?

The original idea for DoP was invented by dCS in 2011. It involves taking groups of 16 adjacent 1-bit samples from a DSD stream and packing them into the lower 16 bits of a 24/176.4 data stream. Data from the other channel of the stereo pair is packed the same way. A specific marker code in the top 8 bits identifies the data stream as DoP, rather than PCM. The resulting DoP stream can be transmitted through existing 24/192-capable USB, AES, Dual AES or SPDIF interfaces to a DoP-compatible DAC, which reassembles the original stereo DSD data stream COMPLETELY UNCHANGED.

If something goes wrong and the data stream is decoded as PCM, the output will be low-level noise with faint music in the back ground, so it fails safely. This can happen if the computer erases the marker code by applying a volume adjustment.

[Elberoth]

DoP is a system developed to send DSD signal from a transport to a DAC. It has nothing to do with a D/A conversion.

[Elztalbiker]

DoP = DSD over PCM


Gesendet von iPad mit Tapatalk

[DSMSB]

For all current MSB DACs (Select, Reference, Premier and Discrete):

"Native DSD" is the native DSD data-stream at the native sample rate (eg. 2.8224 MHz, etc...) sent directly to a large number of parallel DSD single bit DACs without manipulation (the number DSD DACs available depends on the model). The converted result is then low pass filtered in the analog domain to remove the large amount of DSD quantization noise. Analog volume control is required because there is no manipulation of the digital data.

"Optimized DSD" removes the majority of the DSD quantization noise using digital filtering without changing the sample rate (eg. 2.8224 MHz, etc...) and then plays back the multi-bit super high sample rate data using the multi-bit capabilities of the DACs. The converted result is then low pass filtered in the analog domain to remove the very small amount of DSD quantization noise remaining. It would be accurate to call this PCM playback, but that is also an oversimplification since the "PCM" DACs are running at the native DSD sample rate and there is no sample rate conversion, just quantization noise removal. On models without analog volume control this mode also allows digital volume control.

DOP is just a way of transporting DSD on a link such as S/PDIF that would not normally be compatible with DSD. DOP is native DSD that has been packed into a PCM container and must be unpacked by a compatible decoder at the end of the link (such as in a DAC that supports DOP). All current MSB DACs support DOP unpacking if DOP data is detected on any of the inputs.

[Alpinist]

Thanks Daniel for your detailed response!

Ken

[Kingsrule]

For all current MSB DACs (Select, Reference, Premier and Discrete):

"Native DSD" is the native DSD data-stream at the native sample rate (eg. 2.8224 MHz, etc...) sent directly to a large number of parallel DSD single bit DACs without manipulation (the number DSD DACs available depends on the model). The converted result is then low pass filtered in the analog domain to remove the large amount of DSD quantization noise. Analog volume control is required because there is no manipulation of the digital data.

"Optimized DSD" removes the majority of the DSD quantization noise using digital filtering without changing the sample rate (eg. 2.8224 MHz, etc...) and then plays back the multi-bit super high sample rate data using the multi-bit capabilities of the DACs. The converted result is then low pass filtered in the analog domain to remove the very small amount of DSD quantization noise remaining. It would be accurate to call this PCM playback, but that is also an oversimplification since the "PCM" DACs are running at the native DSD sample rate and there is no sample rate conversion, just quantization noise removal. On models without analog volume control this mode also allows digital volume control.

DOP is just a way of transporting DSD on a link such as S/PDIF that would not normally be compatible with DSD. DOP is native DSD that has been packed into a PCM container and must be unpacked by a compatible decoder at the end of the link (such as in a DAC that supports DOP). All current MSB DACs support DOP unpacking if DOP data is detected on any of the inputs.

It looks like what I read about Optimized was incorrect. Why isn't the above in the owners manual and on the MSB website? And why doesn't MSB give this info to the MSB reviewers? (If they do, my apologies but it would be incumbent on them to make sure Optimized vs. Native is understood and reported correctly)

So what mode does everyone prefer?

[Alpinist]

So what mode does everyone prefer?

Hi King,

I have used DSD Optimized ever since Vince from MSB did a demonstration at Axpona, flipping back and forth between the two on the Select DAC. The Optimized Mode appeared to have more presence than the Native Mode. I will have to do my own comparison on some of my favorite tracks.

Ken

[Kingsrule]

I go back and forth but mostly listen to Optimized....

[Alpinist]

I did my own comparison of DSD Native and Optimized and I’ve now switched to DSD Native. I feel it sounds more natural and conveys more ease than DSD Optimized.

Ken

[Mike Lavigne]

you guys are pushing me to revisit this dsd question. it's been a few years since i played around with it. i know dsd 'Optimized' does apply a PCM conversion of some sort.

with the increased transparency of the Extreme TAS Alpha version maybe something will more completely sort itself out.

[Mike]

you guys are pushing me to revisit this dsd question. it's been a few years since i played around with it. i know dsd 'Optimized' does apply a PCM conversion of some sort.

with the increased transparency of the Extreme TAS Alpha version maybe something will more completely sort itself out.

Not really a conversion. It uses PCM to transfer the DSD file. Think of the DSD file piggy backing on a PCM signal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Alectiong]

I appreciate the sharings on these threads, from which I learned a great deal. Having recently listened to Discreet and Ref DAC's, I too joined the club and ordered the Select DAC & transport. Will share listening feedback in future after they arrived.

[brodricj]

Interesting....you auditioned Discrete and Reference, didn't audition Select, but bought Select? What options did you order with it?

[Alectiong]

Interesting....you auditioned Discrete and Reference, didn't audition Select, but bought Select? What options did you order with it?

Didn’t have time to listen to Select locally except in an audio show. Decided on select based on what I heard with discreet and Reference and word of mouth and forums like these. I hope I didn’t make a grave mistake. It is a bundled package nowadays except I added the proISL and the proISL/proUSB modules.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mike]

Didn’t have time to listen to Select locally except in an audio show. Decided on select based on what I heard with discreet and Reference and word of mouth and forums like these. I hope I didn’t make a grave mistake. It is a bundled package nowadays except I added the proISL and the proISL/proUSB modules.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where are you located?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Alectiong]

Where are you located?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Singapore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Alpinist]

I just purchased a lightly used MSB UMT V Signature Transport with two power bases. It is built like a tank. The transport has a solid aluminum tray and is based on the Oppo BDP-105D. The two power bases are really heavy. They feel like solid blocks of aluminum.

I think the sound quality of my Select II DAC with Renderer V2 Module and Roon Nucleus Plus is terrific but the asynchronous transport with its proprietary Pro I2S connection surpasses it in transparency, ease and noise floor. Stunning vocals and instrumentals emanate from dead silence. The noise floor isn’t quite as low as MSB’s new Pro ISL optical connection but having listened to this transport and the new Reference Transport, I can tell you that sonically, it is damn close. The Pro ISL optical connection really excels when used with the Pro USB Module for computer audio, where electrical noise is much more of an issue than on the transport.

Consequently, I am very happy with this purchase as I can now spin CDs and SACDs again, and have improved sound quality for a fraction of the price of the Reference Transport.

Ken

[no32]

Very interesting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kingrex]

Isn't it shocking how much component to component noise there is between audio equipment.

[Mike]

Isn't it shocking how much component to component noise there is between audio equipment.

It’s Roon. I keep telling you guys. Roon is noisy as hell. Ken finally heard the difference this weekend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Kingrex]

I don't doubt that at all Mike. I dumped Roon a long time ago. Qubuz direct and HQ Player direct. Although I don't like HQ 4. I liked 3 a lot better.

[Alpinist]

It’s Roon. I keep telling you guys. Roon is noisy as hell. Ken finally heard the difference this weekend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Would using HQPlayer processing in Roon reduce the noise that you referred to?

Ken

[no32]

I don't doubt that at all Mike. I dumped Roon a long time ago. Qubuz direct and HQ Player direct. Although I don't like HQ 4. I liked 3 a lot better.

How do you stream qobuz directly without Roon ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mike]

How do you stream qobuz directly without Roon ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aurender


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Kingrex]

How do you stream qobuz directly without Roon ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My server is Linux based. The manufacturer added the link.

Sometimes I though I missed Roon. But of late, I find a lot more music I like by reading the various What Are You Listening To Now threads in forums and going to what members are suggesting.

[apdoc2004]

It’s Roon. I keep telling you guys. Roon is noisy as hell. Ken finally heard the difference this weekend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Mike,
Have you soured on Roon? Have you stopped recommending it to your customers? I am streaming Tidal directly on my Lumin player. Do you think that is superior to using Roon as an interface?
Anshul

[Mike]

Mike,
Have you soured on Roon? Have you stopped recommending it to your customers? I am streaming Tidal directly on my Lumin player. Do you think that is superior to using Roon as an interface?
Anshul

If they want the best sound, yes we recommend something other than Roon. If they want the best interface, no, Roon’s has the best interface.

Many of our devices are Roon enabled - including preamps with built in DAC’s. If someone wants the all in one with Roon solution, fine. We will help them get the best sound from Roon. If they want the best sound overall, then no, Roon is not the direction we recommend.

I guess you haven’t been following. . I’ve been pretty vocal about my concerns with Roon and overall sound quality for quite some time. Their customer support has also been highly lacking. The Taiko guys agree about the Roon sonics and their own software is miles better sonically.

Yes, I think you should try the Lumin app.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Ritmo]

I went from Lumin to Roon back to Lumin. For the same reasons Mike mentioned.

If I had Esoteric (N-01XD) or any Aurender, I would use their music app VS Roon.

I do like the Roon user interface but that’s it.

[Kingsrule]

Roon thru the Taiko Extreme, especially with the latest driver update, is pretty good...

[still-one]

Roon thru the Taiko Extreme, especially with the latest driver update, is pretty good...

I would hope a ~$30k solution would sound better than Roon for under $3k. Same goes for Aurrender's W20SE answer at ~$20k.

I can tell you that the Innuos Statement in a A/B in my set-up running with and without Roon wasn't better.

[Kingsrule]

It's like anything the better stuff costs more
U have like $30k + in Shunyata and Transparent... basically copper wire and band-aids. And u scoff at 30k for real hardware, 24Tb of storage, real software and amazing support? Oh yea and best in class sonics....


Really missing your point

[still-one]

It's like anything the better stuff costs more
U have like $30k + in Shunyata and Transparent... basically copper wire and band-aids. And u scoff at 30k for real hardware, 24Tb of storage, real software and amazing support? Oh yea and best in class sonics....


Really missing your point

You usually do.

[Kingrex]

I would hope a ~$30k solution would sound better than Roon for under $3k. Same goes for Aurrender's W20SE answer at ~$20k.

I can tell you that the Innuos Statement in a A/B in my set-up running with and without Roon wasn't better.

Interesting. Was the experience, play a song via roon, then play same song via Qobuz application? How did you analyze the playback.

[Mike Lavigne]

I went from Lumin to Roon back to Lumin. For the same reasons Mike mentioned.

If I had Esoteric (N-01XD) or any Aurender, I would use their music app VS Roon.

I do like the Roon user interface but that’s it.

Roon thru the Taiko Extreme, especially with the latest driver update, is pretty good...

I would hope a ~$30k solution would sound better than Roon for under $3k. Same goes for Aurrender's W20SE answer at ~$20k.

I can tell you that the Innuos Statement in a A/B in my set-up running with and without Roon wasn't better.

not to butt into your fun. but what each of you are saying does not actually conflict.

just say'n.

Kingsrule can like how Roon sounds (as do i) on his Extreme/MSB Select II (and still like another music management program better (TAS)) and still-one can prefer the Lumin to Roon. you can both be right as there is no conflict. apples and oranges. maybe if still-one actually dislikes Roon (which he does not say.......he merely says he likes the interface, not that he dislikes Roon......Roon maybe is 'meh' to him). one man's 'meh' is another man's like. Kingrule does not claim he likes Roon 'best'.

this is a weak basis for conflict.

[Mike Lavigne]

Interesting. Was the experience, play a song via roon, then play same song via Qobuz application? How did you analyze the playback.

it's very easy to switch back and forth between Roon and TAS music management systems to A/B tracks with the Taiko Extreme.

and Quboz is a music streaming service inside Roon or TAS. you see the Quboz in both systems. maybe Quboz has it's own playback program, but i've not tried it or heard of anyone using it.

[Kingrex]

I had JRiver loaded to my machine today. The most brief listen left me wondering if I could tell JRiver from HQ Player 4. I heard more of a positive shift changing my USB cable than the playback software.

[Battles]

Hi Folks,

I'm a happy owner of the MSB Select II w/ dual mono power bases and and MSB S202 amp (the latter I purchased from Mike). I run Roon via a remote qnap server that connects via fiber to an etherregen w/ an external clock. From there, I utilize a Gobel ethernet cable to connect the etherregen to the Select's Network Renderer V2 card. I'm thrilled with the sound quality, noise floor, etc. However, after reading posts herein, I can't help but wonder whether the quality of my playback would be materially improved by utilizing an audiophile server (Taiko Extreme, Aurender, etc)? However, that comes with a sizable investment, so in the spirit of not having to start completely over, I'm wondering whether the "elite" audiophile servers output interfaces are exclusively USB or if they also support streaming that would allow me to continue using my Gobel's ethernet cable and Network Renderer Module? What I'm trying to assess is the "real cost" of switching to an audiophile server which may include the additive cost of a new MSB USB module, reference USB Cable, reference power cord, isolation platform, etc...

Separately, I'm likely one of the few who's using an MSB Select as a preamplifier for both my DAC as well as my phono stage. Out of curiosity, have others besides Ken had the opportunity to compare the sonic quality of using the Select's preamp modules to that of a separate reference preamplifier? If so, I'd appreciate your relaying your experience.

Thanks in advance,
Battles

[Mike Lavigne]

Hi Folks,

I'm a happy owner of the MSB Select II w/ dual mono power bases and and MSB S202 amp (the latter I purchased from Mike). I run Roon via a remote qnap server that connects via fiber to an etherregen w/ an external clock. From there, I utilize a Gobel ethernet cable to connect the etherregen to the Select's Network Renderer V2 card. I'm thrilled with the sound quality, noise floor, etc. However, after reading posts herein, I can't help but wonder whether the quality of my playback would be materially improved by utilizing an audiophile server (Taiko Extreme, Aurender, etc)? However, that comes with a sizable investment, so in the spirit of not having to start completely over, I'm wondering whether the "elite" audiophile servers output interfaces are exclusively USB or if they also support streaming that would allow me to continue using my Gobel's ethernet cable and Network Renderer Module? What I'm trying to assess is the "real cost" of switching to an audiophile server which may include the additive cost of a new MSB USB module, reference USB Cable, reference power cord, isolation platform, etc...

Separately, I'm likely one of the few who's using an MSB Select as a preamplifier for both my DAC as well as my phono stage. Out of curiosity, have others besides Ken had the opportunity to compare the sonic quality of using the Select's preamp modules to that of a separate reference preamplifier? If so, I'd appreciate your relaying your experience.

Thanks in advance,
Battles

hi Battles,

last question first; yes; i have directly compared my MSB Select II passive pre direct into my darTZeel 468 mono blocks....................to my spendy battery powered darTZeel NHB-18NS preamp into my dart 468 mono blocks. the darTZeel is a little better, a clear small step up. more meat on the bones, slightly more scale and micro-dynamics. but i have 4 turntables, and three RTR tape decks. and multiple phono preamps. and the tt's are all fairly high level and the tape decks are tip top level. if i was digital only there would be no question it would be the MSB only. i would not hesitate to use the MSB for the preamp for my phono stage. it plays near the same level as my big boy dart pre.

but note that my preamp is $50k, and it might be as good as anything out there at any price. so it takes alot to better the MSB passive. and my dart pre has the advantage of synergy with the dart amps.

as far as USB and top level servers; it seems that USB is getting the most development attention. and is able to do the highest rez formats. it's the least compromised approach. recently Taiko added their own USB card to their Extreme and it did jump the performance up a notch. i use the MSB Pro USB interface and it also was a step up over standard USB. i have the MSB Renderer V2 which at the time was a step up; but USB now has a few notches of advantage. USB is best for streaming. if you do get the Taiko; the TAS, Taiko Audio System, is a better sounding file/streaming package than Roon. but you don't have to give up Roon, you can choose.

the great thing about MSB is the modularity. so you are covered in any case for the future.

as far as your Renderer V2, keep it, and add the Pro USB; it's not that much money in the context of your digital investment. and your Gobel Ethernet cable can still be used in your LAN to good advantage even if it's not your dac <-> server cable.

[nonesup]

Emile has announced that together with his new Switch they are going to present a new network card. Maybe this can change things.

[Mike Lavigne]

00

[Battles]

hi Battles,

last question first; yes; i have directly compared my MSB Select II passive pre direct into my darTZeel 468 mono blocks....................to my spendy battery powered darTZeel NHB-18NS preamp into my dart 468 mono blocks. the darTZeel is a little better, a clear small step up. more meat on the bones, slightly more scale and micro-dynamics. but i have 4 turntables, and three RTR tape decks. and multiple phono preamps. and the tt's are all fairly high level and the tape decks are tip top level. if i was digital only there would be no question it would be the MSB only. i would not hesitate to use the MSB for the preamp for my phono stage. it plays near the same level as my big boy dart pre.

but note that my preamp is $50k, and it might be as good as anything out there at any price. so it takes alot to better the MSB passive. and my dart pre has the advantage of synergy with the dart amps.

as far as USB and top level servers; it seems that USB is getting the most development attention. and is able to do the highest rez formats. it's the least compromised approach. recently Taiko added their own USB card to their Extreme and it did jump the performance up a notch. i use the MSB Pro USB interface and it also was a step up over standard USB. i have the MSB Renderer V2 which at the time was a step up; but USB now has a few notches of advantage. USB is best for streaming. if you do get the Taiko; the TAS, Taiko Audio System, is a better sounding file/streaming package than Roon. but you don't have to give up Roon, you can choose.

the great thing about MSB is the modularity. so you are covered in any case for the future.

as far as your Renderer V2, keep it, and add the Pro USB; it's not that much money in the context of your digital investment. and your Gobel Ethernet cable can still be used in your LAN to good advantage even if it's not your dac <-> server cable.

Thanks Mike. As always, I appreciate your help and thoughtful answers. I think for now, I'm be happy with my Select serving as both a preamp and DAC. Plus, at this juncture, I only have room for one more component, and my instinct is that's best invested in a music server vs. a preamp. To this end, for those who've heard both, I would enjoy hearing their comparison of the Taiko Extreme and Aurender N30.

Much appreciated!

[Ritmo]

Hi Battles,

I will chime in with a perspective regarding regarding the Aurender N30 and the Taiko Extreme. To be fully transparent, I do not own either. However, I did have the opportunity to hear both in the same system during a 3 or so hour session.

The system consisted of both the Taiko Extreme and the Aurender N30. The DAC was the MSB Select II with Boulder Pre and Power Amps driving a pair of Vivíd G1 Spirits.

In this particular system, to my ears, my preference was with the Aurender N30. Why? I thought the presentation with the Aurender had better pace , rhythm and realism. Violin strings sound had a wonderful texture that was not present in the Taiko. Piano notes were more realistic. And, I felt the Taiko had a little bit of grain that was not present in the N30’s presentation. Was this a huge problem? No, but doing a back to back listening of the same music highlighted the differences to me.

Also, this may/may not be important to you but the Aurender seemed easier to use and it has the large screen with album art. We had some challenges getting the Taiko and Roon to work. The Aurender operation was flawless.

Lastly, this is my perspective as a result of a single session. Clearly, both are top notch machines.

[Battles]

Hi Battles,

I will chime in with a perspective regarding regarding the Aurender N30 and the Taiko Extreme. To be fully transparent, I do not own either. However, I did have the opportunity to hear both in the same system during a 3 or so hour session.

The system consisted of both the Taiko Extreme and the Aurender N30. The DAC was the MSB Select II with Boulder Pre and Power Amps driving a pair of Vivíd G1 Spirits.

In this particular system, to my ears, my preference was with the Aurender N30. Why? I thought the presentation with the Aurender had better pace , rhythm and realism. Violin strings sound had a wonderful texture that was not present in the Taiko. Piano notes were more realistic. And, I felt the Taiko had a little bit of grain that was not present in the N30’s presentation. Was this a huge problem? No, but doing a back to back listening of the same music highlighted the differences to me.

Also, this may/may not be important to you but the Aurender seemed easier to use and it has the large screen with album art. We had some challenges getting the Taiko and Roon to work. The Aurender operation was flawless.

Lastly, this is my perspective as a result of a single session. Clearly, both are top notch machines.

Hi Mike…Thanks for your thoughtful reply. Clearly having had the opportunity to demo both servers in the same room and with identical hardware back to back makes your assessment in credibly helpful. Most postings I’ve read on the web presume the Taiko would continue to reign high, but according to your ears, this doesn’t appear to the be case nor is one server in a different league than that of the other. By any chance have you had an opportunity to compare the sonic quality of the N30 to the N20 on this system or others? I’ve heard the N20 offers 95% of the performance of the N30 but at half the price. Thx again

[still-one]

Hi Battles,

I will chime in with a perspective regarding regarding the Aurender N30 and the Taiko Extreme. To be fully transparent, I do not own either. However, I did have the opportunity to hear both in the same system during a 3 or so hour session.

The system consisted of both the Taiko Extreme and the Aurender N30. The DAC was the MSB Select II with Boulder Pre and Power Amps driving a pair of Vivíd G1 Spirits.

In this particular system, to my ears, my preference was with the Aurender N30. Why? I thought the presentation with the Aurender had better pace , rhythm and realism. Violin strings sound had a wonderful texture that was not present in the Taiko. Piano notes were more realistic. And, I felt the Taiko had a little bit of grain that was not present in the N30’s presentation. Was this a huge problem? No, but doing a back to back listening of the same music highlighted the differences to me.

Also, this may/may not be important to you but the Aurender seemed easier to use and it has the large screen with album art. We had some challenges getting the Taiko and Roon to work. The Aurender operation was flawless.

Lastly, this is my perspective as a result of a single session. Clearly, both are top notch machines.

Like you I compared the Taiko Extreme to the Aurrender and preferred the Aurrender. After all of the hyperbole surrounding the Taiko I was stunned. This was using the Taiko software not Roon.

It is a stretch to call the Taiko interface beta level. It has so far to go to get close to the UI of either Roon or Aurrender.