DEAR Daniel， if we only use the one pair XLR Output of Sentinel DAC，does it means we only got 8 channel DAC parallel output ？or it works as 16 channel DAC parallel and copy a isolated output?
@wekin , we are currently planning for it to be configurable based on use case. If only one output is used, all 16 modules will be combined. If the output is split, we can configure it into two 8 channel DAC’s. We want every configuration to be the highest performing possible.
Hi Daniel
Just out of curiosity, since seems like Sentinel will be very configurable, that leads me to ask… will it be possible to configure the Sentinel for surround sound. With 16 DACs, 9.1 surround would be easy, you could even assign 2 DACs to the L, R and C channels.
Or you could do 9.1.6 Atmos. Not common in homes but for someone mixing Atmos is would be really as good as you would every need.
Of course, it would reduce the quality of the output, but we are talking surround/Atmos, not HiFI. All the sample rates for surround are relatively low.
Of course that would require a new, and very interesting, output module 
.
It might not seem a good choice for home surround, but with an appropriate GUI (like on a tablet) interface, it would eliminate the need for an AVP. As long as he Sentinel had an HDMI input an AppleTV box or an Roku or Google or ?? could provide the streams.
Dan
@Dan , that would be SO COOL! I personally have always wanted to dabble with multi-channel, but it is unfortunately not something we can break into. The only issue is the decoding and licensing. We have looked into it and the pricing is completely unreasonable for a small manufacturer. They are only looking to work with large companies moving many many boxes.
We used to circumvent this with our transports that piggybacked off the Oppo player. We were able to use their decoding and licensing connected with our Theater Master DAC. Those were some pretty fun installations. Multi-channel needs better DACs!
2 Likes
@Daniel_Francis That’s too bad. It would be reference level surround!
Dan
1 Like
@Dan and @Daniel_Francis
It would also make me wonder what level of speakers would be needed to make this worthwhile. I run an almost complete in-wall system (Other than the 2 REL S/812s) as they are NOT possible to wall mount but my existing system HT while very good would be massivly inferrior to the DAC, so what would be a good in-wall compliment (I dont like the Focals, B&W doesnt make anything at that caliber, the Martin Logan Monument system I use isn’t really going to get me there).
Now if I could in wall mount a pair of ALSYVOX!
Your thoughts?
Some surround systems, like Trinnov, can provide digital out (managed by in the Trinnov configuration just like the analog ones are), in addition to analog out. So you can use whatever DACs you want for surround.
When I first setup my Trinnov surround I used Cascade digital input for L/R. I had some issues, not sound quality, that made me switch to using the analog L/R from the Trinnov.
It’s not uncommon to use external DACs with Trinnov… not Cascade though!
Trinnov makes for an amazing surround system, provided you can find someone who can configure it properly.
BTW, I use 4 B&W subs in my surround and with Trinnov configuring then there is no problem with LFE!
Dan
Ahh but I think you might have missed the gist of my day dreaming question.
If you were using the Sentinal as a surround DAC what level of speakers would you need to do it justice and does anyone even make architectural speakers of that caliber.
Of course floor standing ones exist but…
I missed that 
…
To me Surround is surround and I want to be good for movies, but it is not HiFi. I put more emphasis on spacial imaging and LFE than on fidelity for surround.
I know one acoustician, who I feel is very knowledgable, who does media / theater rooms, including many high end ones. He feels Perlisten are the best choice for surround ex subs. He recommends installing external DACs on Trinnov.
I currently have Sonos faber architectural speakers. They are fine, my system never fails to please , but is it weren’t such a hassle and expense I would consider switching to Perlisten…
Dan
I agree and I have the same philosophy, I really dont like hifi in atmos it was more the idea of a 300K DAC connected to 30K of speakers seems a bit misaligned.
But the reality is I dont expect to upgrade from my Cascade
I received my Sentinel DAC a few months ago, and was wondering what the default configuration for the 16 DACs driving ‘Analog Output 1’ and ‘Analog Output 2’ on each channel. If two mono block amplifiers are used for each channel to bi-amp my speakers by connecting two XLR signal cables on each channel, how many of the DACs are operating for each output? Are all 16 DACs driving each channel simultaneously, connected in parallel to the two XLR outputs, doubling the output impedance? Or are 8 DACs driving each output, with a loss in resolution of ~3dB?
Hi QD,
The modules are divided up into 8 for output 1 and 8 for output 2.
You have to go into the configuration to enable Bi-amp mode.
I don’t think there is a cross-over setting like some bi-amp capable amps have, like the MC 901.
This is speculation on my part, but I think it works like this because the outputs are all passive (on Palisade, Cascade, and Sentinel) so there is no way to just split the output of the 16 modules without adding some electronics to buffer it.
So choosing bi-amp in the Sentinel just reconfigures the DAC modules into two independent sets, so each output is passive.
Being passive is. good thing, BTW.
Dan
1 Like
So in Bi-Amp it’s like having 2 parallel Cascades :), now I am curious as what I don’t see above is the Confluence connector but I assume it disables all other outputs?
1 Like
yes, when a confluence connection is made the Sentinel will automatically change to that output and turn off XLR outputs 1 and 2. When the Sentinel Amp is released that segment will be added to the manual.
Thanks Kevin
Are the consequences of engaging the bi-amp mode equal to a loss of 3dB in resolution, and a doubling of the output impedance? In other words, instead of 4 Cascades driving one pair of XLR outputs, the Sentinel in bi-amp mode becomes 2 Cascades driving one pair of XLR outputs, and another 2 Cascades driving another pair of XLR outputs (for the same L/R input source)?
1 Like
Yes, the output impedance doubles, for single output mode it is 18.75 Ohms, bi-amp it is 37.5 Ohms
Beyond that I can’t really say what would happen without knowing all the details of the circuits and software. The current MSB DAC architecture is unlike any other in audio DAC world and using simple parallel DACs, even Cascade DACs, could not duplicate what Sentinel does.
Dan
2 Likes
I think the penalty of doubling the output impedance by halving the number of DAC modules per output depends on how one’s loudspeaker responds to passive bi-amplification. Not an easy or inexpensive experiment to conduct.
Sentinel output into M500 monoblocks (until Sentinel monoblocks exist) driving speaker via single run of cable…
Or
Both Sentinel outputs into a pair of S500 amplifiers driving both mid-hi and low sections of passive crossover via separate runs of cable.
A variety of data from optical media from my PS Audio PMG Signature SACD transport are being fed into my Sentinel DAC.
I’m wondering how legacy data formats are being ‘decoded’ (or not) for the following. Team MSB Technology - please advise.
-
Redbook CDs from the mid-1980s with pre-emphasis: does the Sentinel DD perform de-emphasis in the digital domain?
Emphasis (telecommunications) - Wikipedia -
HDCD encoded CDs from the mid-1990s; likely, the 16th bit in word is left ‘as is’, with no dynamic range expansion / decoding?
High Definition Compatible Digital - Wikipedia -
MQA CDs (and MQA-encoded streaming from TIDAL); does the Sentinel fully decode all of the various MQA files in a manner which is 100% compliant with the MQA ‘standard’? What is MSB Technology’s current obligation for continual payment of the various hardware/software licensing agreements? What happens say 5+ years from now when MQA becomes irreversibly extinct in the marketplace when the Sentinel encounters a MQA-encoded file? Will decoding (“unfolding”) still be performed by the Sentinel for the extinct legacy format in the absence of licensing payments?
Master Quality Authenticated - Wikipedia
I believe that the transport does decoding for emphasis digitally. You can check this on your DACs display to see if it is 16bit (de-emphasis not applied) or 24-32bit (de-emphasis applied digitally). With I2S there is no signaling for de-emphasis, as there is with s-pdif, so the DAC is completely unable to apply it, because it cannot know it is needed. With s-pdif MSB DACs all apply de-emphasis digitally when instructed to do so by the s-pdif metadata. As for MQA or HDCD no decoding is done unless the transport is doing it. Current MSB DACs have no provision for decoding HDCD at all. The interfaces that support MQA are limited to ProUSB, USB and the Renderer. No other interfaces support MQA and no other interfaces will support MQA in the future. These three interfaces will be able to decode MQA into the future but they are the only ones. If perpetual support for MQA is a deal breaker for you, I recommend investing in one of these three interfaces and keeping it. My personal choice would be the ProUSB since it will likely interface with any future MSB DAC and with any near term server or computer. Since MQA is a completely digital construction it may be decoded anywhere in the signal chain, so in theory transports could do the decoding. The best outcome for MQA however would be some future (not currently produced) file converter. Think of MQA in terms of Betamax Video tape, if you want to play Beta tapes you need a Beta player, the ProUSB is equivalent to a Beta deck, it will work as long as you can connect it to a DAC and a transport.
3 Likes