Yes but on a HORN / SET system otherwise it makes no sense lol
MSB's new Sentinel DAC
- Thread starter QuadDiffuser
- Start date
Yes but on a HORN / SET system otherwise it makes no sense lol
Why drag analog into it?
Most proples analog is not at your level. Its highly likely the digitql is much better.
...and maybe the complete multibox CHP 10 series DAC stack
I thought the digital director or some device in the MSB was a streamer. Why waste your money on a server. I thought I have read elsewhere people find the built in streamer to be the best source.
To clarify, I have not followed the whole Taike XDMI. Maybe opinions have changed.
AFAIK, adding Olympus XDMI connection to MSB was a benefit in comparison to MSB alone.
Maybe it is different with Sentinel, who knows...
...I think there are a few perspectives on the above workflow. I sold MSB Reference/DD because I found that it was very close to the Olympus with the internal DAC card. Rex, it may be that you had recalled that idea from a while back.
I know folks that would prefer the MSB workflow with XDMI vs. internal. I tested it here extensively.
Many more would prefer the Cascade XDMI over the internal dac. That seems to be a widely held, position, perhaps approaching 100%.
I imagine the Sentinel would also be preferred over the internal card. I am less familiar with other high-end dacs vs. Taiko internal card sound. The MSB engineering is excellent, IMO.
I know folks that would prefer the MSB workflow with XDMI vs. internal. I tested it here extensively.
Many more would prefer the Cascade XDMI over the internal dac. That seems to be a widely held, position, perhaps approaching 100%.
I imagine the Sentinel would also be preferred over the internal card. I am less familiar with other high-end dacs vs. Taiko internal card sound. The MSB engineering is excellent, IMO.
because unless you have an in-system reference you are left with preferences instead of degrees of truth to a reference. you could add great tape and have two legit references that are slightly different to accommodate more skeptical people.
agree of those who go after super uber digital mostly are not as serious with vinyl. they might have it but are not doing it as serious as i do.
but unless you have serious analog then it does not help understanding just where super digital is. like these reviews that just do hyperbole. for entertainment purposes only. those reviews with at least general references to in system high level analog are preferred.
do you really think that? please qualify that if you can.
Last edited:
...in my case, because I found things to be close sonically, I sold the Ref and DD to eliminate three boxes. A PCIe card in the server vs. rack with three boxes, cables, etc.
@Mike Lavigne
If someone were to be focused on digital and vinyl is an aside, then their digital is probably a lot better than their vinyl. That is my qualification.
I don't believe half hearted vinyl is as good as well applied digital. Its different. There will still be stuff to appreciate in the vinyl. But there may be more to appreciate with the good digital.
Which brings me around to my original point. If you're only half hearted attempting to build a vinyl system, then comparing digital to vinyl as a reference to what the digital is doing is not a robust analysis.
I think digital is very good today. If you don't want to bother with vinyl, I don't feel like you're missing out because you don't have it. Just focus on the digital and make it as best as you want it to be.
It may be true the best vinyl is better than the best digital. But there is no reason to tie your time, emotions and effort into something your not passionate about. Especially if its because others tell you your missing out. Or you need it as a gauge or tool.
If I were a digital forward thinking person focused on obtaining the best digital possible, I would only compare DAC and servers and other devices such as transports, switches, clocks etc. You don't need vinyl to tune. I agree it gives a point of view. But a point of view does not improve the digital. It may even cause neurosis. Chasing ones tail. Trying to make digital what its not. Instead of simply relaxing and enjoying fantastic music.
i miss my vinyl. But this last year of digital only has been just fine. I'm not rushing to reinstall my vinyl. I'm actually working on other things. Digital is easily good enough and my time focused elsewhere gives larger returns.
If someone were to be focused on digital and vinyl is an aside, then their digital is probably a lot better than their vinyl. That is my qualification.
I don't believe half hearted vinyl is as good as well applied digital. Its different. There will still be stuff to appreciate in the vinyl. But there may be more to appreciate with the good digital.
Which brings me around to my original point. If you're only half hearted attempting to build a vinyl system, then comparing digital to vinyl as a reference to what the digital is doing is not a robust analysis.
I think digital is very good today. If you don't want to bother with vinyl, I don't feel like you're missing out because you don't have it. Just focus on the digital and make it as best as you want it to be.
It may be true the best vinyl is better than the best digital. But there is no reason to tie your time, emotions and effort into something your not passionate about. Especially if its because others tell you your missing out. Or you need it as a gauge or tool.
If I were a digital forward thinking person focused on obtaining the best digital possible, I would only compare DAC and servers and other devices such as transports, switches, clocks etc. You don't need vinyl to tune. I agree it gives a point of view. But a point of view does not improve the digital. It may even cause neurosis. Chasing ones tail. Trying to make digital what its not. Instead of simply relaxing and enjoying fantastic music.
i miss my vinyl. But this last year of digital only has been just fine. I'm not rushing to reinstall my vinyl. I'm actually working on other things. Digital is easily good enough and my time focused elsewhere gives larger returns.
I think both records and streaming take extra steps to get right. I found that reducing router noise, applying proper grounding, installing a great switch, and using great, not merely good, cables made digital much more musical.
so why bring it up? it's a throw away comment that serves no purpose.
degrees of vinyl have much to do with pressing and recording quality. past a certain point pretty good vinyl hardware well set up with great pressings will markedly surpass any digital in realism. but unless you have......how would you even know?
great digital at the tip top does many high level vinyl type things and can be good enough so you don't miss the vinyl. even with great vinyl sitting there which is absolutely my experience. and justify it's high cost to some. to me that is why we bring up vinyl in an MSB Sentinel thread. obviously no one has heard it yet but we are giving it the benefit of the doubt right now.
agree. again.....why go there as a reference compare when the execution of the vinyl is mediocre.? but there can be any number of reasons to have vinyl in your system. and how each person approaches vinyl is personal.
sure.
Is that really why vinyl is brought up in almost every digital thread. Or is it hard for people to let digital sit as just digital and appreciate what it has become on its own merits. When I was thinking about ditching my Rega RP6 and getting the STST Motus II, I had a couple people with fantastic vinyl as well as digital tell me don't. Don't waste your money on Vinyl. Digital has come so far.
I will never be a Sentinel owner. I won't even be a Cascade owner. Thats not in my cards. But its been interesting seeing Wadax, Vivaldi and MSB slug it out for the top spot. I'm interested to see the Feedback on the Sentinel.
I agree. My vinyl is very good indeed. But if it and my record collection were lost in a fire tomorrow, I would invest the insurance funds in the best digital I could afford on top of my MSB Reference DAC + Director, i.e., a Cascade DAC.
With my present MSB rig, even high-resolution digital transfers from analog tapes sound as good or better than their vinyl equivalents (whether they be mint originals or reissues), assuming the same mastering process. And that is streaming via Roon (Nucleus Plus) into the Network Renderer module inside the Digital Director (optical decoupling upstream noise from the DAC).
I would argue that the sonic differences between mastering efforts or recordings are far greater than any sonic differences between my digital and analog front ends. Can both be improved (subjectively)? No doubt, but I recognise how far along the diminishing returns curve I am.
Definitely, I think the provenance of the recording matters far more than anything else.
Regarding the new uber digital from MSB, while I don’t doubt it’s a technological marvel and MSB seems like an exceedingly respectable company, I wonder about the pricing. I had to laugh when I read MSB bestows to their Sentinel customers the more rarefied status of “patrons.” Indeed!!
It seems Wadax raised the $$ bar to a new 300k level. And now DCS and MSB have joined the club.
Of course there is a large investment in R&D for these behemoths and they will sell in relatively low numbers, but I suspect the $300k barrier also has a lot to do with the psychology of luxury pricing.
Last edited:
of course, that is not what i said. you are stretching my point of a useful vinyl reference on the Sentinel thread or other super uber threads to include all digital threads. the issue is that when a dac aspires to be similar/close to/ surpass vinyl then it brings a vinyl reference into threads. and obviously these $100k--$500k dacs all bring that idea to the discussion. readers of reviews want to read about references, both other digital and vinyl or even tape. compares are an underpinning of the hobby like it or not.
personally when i post about my own dac my vinyl is the Elephant in the room.
i completely agree. but mostly posters cannot avoid making claims (like when you wrote "Its highly likely the digital is much better.")
and those claims then open up that box and others want to voice their thoughts on the subject. i have been a serial format comparer for my 30 years of Audiophile life. it's important to me to have high level efforts of each and know where they stand. so off handed zingers on the subject get my attention. i cannot help myself. it's near and dear to my heart. when i write about the question objectively my first point is that there are so many levels of each format that there are no absolutes without some huge commitments involved (which very few ever do). all the rest is just noise. YMMV.
we do see many many threads where the thread title includes digital and vinyl in some form or fashion. it's a pivot point of system building. basic stuff. and it will continue for the foreseeable future. part of the hobby.
me too. it is a fascinating subject right in my wheelhouse.
Last edited:
I hope It was not me starting a vinyl compare to the Sentinel. I didn't mean to do that.
I do wonder how the engineer designing these DAC decide how to voice them. Do they listen to other digital. Do they cut masters like Ralph in a private studio, then play them back. What is the media they play. Do they listen to the poor recordings most of us suffer with and try to improve what you can get from them. Even the system they use matters. Is it a SS and Magico. Is it a SET and horn. Or both.
To some degree I can see the pricing. You have a couple engineer working on something. You have the tools to manufacture parts. There is a big capital investment. DAC and Servers have come a long way from a off the shelf chip and Circuit Board. They are custom bespoke parks built for the purpose. In some cases. Some of the chips still seem to be built by a dedicated chip company making millions for the market.
And in the end, I do wonder how much better a $350,000 DAC is to my $11,000 DAC. One of those things I will never know. Just like I will never know if a $18,000 power cable sounds better than my $500 cable.
I do wonder how the engineer designing these DAC decide how to voice them. Do they listen to other digital. Do they cut masters like Ralph in a private studio, then play them back. What is the media they play. Do they listen to the poor recordings most of us suffer with and try to improve what you can get from them. Even the system they use matters. Is it a SS and Magico. Is it a SET and horn. Or both.
To some degree I can see the pricing. You have a couple engineer working on something. You have the tools to manufacture parts. There is a big capital investment. DAC and Servers have come a long way from a off the shelf chip and Circuit Board. They are custom bespoke parks built for the purpose. In some cases. Some of the chips still seem to be built by a dedicated chip company making millions for the market.
And in the end, I do wonder how much better a $350,000 DAC is to my $11,000 DAC. One of those things I will never know. Just like I will never know if a $18,000 power cable sounds better than my $500 cable.
I just read and understood what I could about the sentinel , one thing it notes several times it's hot lol . Says no direct sunlight , needs HVAC to cool it .
next is it's built in streamer, a good idea but does it see local files on a local network ?
Next is USB if it has a streamer what is USB for ?
Is this for a server? Why ? I'm curious .
Anyone fully understand this ?
next is it's built in streamer, a good idea but does it see local files on a local network ?
Next is USB if it has a streamer what is USB for ?
Is this for a server? Why ? I'm curious .
Anyone fully understand this ?
The Sentinel chassis is not going to run hot under normal conditions. Because of the massive amount of analog circuitry in the Sentinels DAC section (32 DAC modules), amplifiers in the preamp section (for the analog inputs), the 2 power hungry ultra low jitter OCXOs and clock distribution circuitry, the Sentinel will consume around 100 watts split between its 2 large chassis (the DAC itself and power supply chassis). This is a huge power draw relative to most DACs but is a similar amount of power to one of our amplifiers idling (like an S500), which only run mildly warm.
The reason for our warnings are because we have found that rooms in hot climates that are left with active equipment on, without air conditioning on, can reach ridiculously high room temperatures. Direct sunlight, especially on large dark colored chassis, can add a couple hundred watts of heat to a chassis, easily overheating it. Equipment with fans can better deal with these “fault conditions” by maxing out their fan speeds to get large amounts of air velocity to cool their parts, but none of our equipment has fans built in. All our products will automatically turn off if they get too hot, but operating for extended periods at high temperatures will shorten their lifespans.
The reason for our warnings are because we have found that rooms in hot climates that are left with active equipment on, without air conditioning on, can reach ridiculously high room temperatures. Direct sunlight, especially on large dark colored chassis, can add a couple hundred watts of heat to a chassis, easily overheating it. Equipment with fans can better deal with these “fault conditions” by maxing out their fan speeds to get large amounts of air velocity to cool their parts, but none of our equipment has fans built in. All our products will automatically turn off if they get too hot, but operating for extended periods at high temperatures will shorten their lifespans.
Last edited:
So I understand, I shouldn't leave my Sentinel alone in the car with the engine off and windows up on a hot summer day? Sounds like a dealbreaker...
Similar threads
- Sticky
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |