Moon 891 streaming preamplifier Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

I performed a full set of measurements on the Moon 891 using my Audio Precision SYS2722 system, repeating some of the testing with the magazine's higher-performance APx555 analyzer. For logistic reasons, I measured a different sample from that reviewed by JVS; mine had the serial number 310A22426340. Before I lifted the Moon onto the test bench, I unfastened the three transit bolts on its base—a good thing I read the startup guide before starting the testing! I installed Moon's MiND app on my iPad mini, which allows the 891's volume to be controlled but doesn't allow settings to be adjusted.

As JVS only auditioned the Moon 891's digital inputs in his review—I understand that another reviewer will be reporting on the sound of the 891 as an analog preamplifier in a follow-up—I looked first at the performance of the Moon's DAC. I used the AES3 and coaxial and optical S/PDIF inputs, all of which accepted data sampled at rates up to 192kHz, as well as USB data sourced from my MacBook Pro. Apple's USB Prober utility identified the Moon as "USB HD Audio" from "MOON," with the serial number string "2 (None)," and indicated that the USB port operated in the optimal isochronous asynchronous mode. The AudioMIDI utility revealed that the 891 accepts 16-bit and 24-bit integer data via USB sampled at all rates from 44.1kHz to 768kHz.

The Moon's digital inputs preserved absolute polarity from the balanced and unbalanced outputs. As set up out of the box, the volume control operated in accurate 0.5dB steps. (Smaller, 0.1dB steps can be selected with the front-panel Set-Up button and menu.) With the control set to the maximum of "80," the Moon 891's output level with a full-scale 1kHz tone was 6.52V at both output types. Switching the output levels to "Fixed," the maximum levels were 2.13V. As the maximum voltage in variable mode is well below the level where the output stages clip (see later), the Moon 891's DAC offers a well-managed gain architecture.


Fig.1 Moon 891, digital inputs, impulse response (one sample at 0dBFS, 44.1kHz sampling, 4ms time window).


Fig.2 Moon 891, digital inputs, wideband spectrum of white noise at –4dBFS (left channel red, right magenta) and 19.1kHz tone at 0dBFS (left blue, right cyan) into 100k ohms with data sampled at 44.1kHz (20dB/vertical div.).


Fig.3 Moon 891, digital inputs, frequency response at –12dBFS into 100k ohms with data sampled at: 44.1kHz (left channel green, right gray), 96kHz (left cyan, right magenta), and 192kHz (left blue, right red) (1dB/vertical div.).

Fig.1 shows the Moon 891's impulse response with USB data sampled at 44.1kHz. The filter is a minimum-phase type with all the ringing following the single sample at 0dBFS. The magenta and red traces in fig.2 show the filter's ultrasonic rolloff with 44.1kHz white noise data at –4dBFS. They reach full stop-band attenuation just above half the sample rate (this indicated by the vertical green line), with the aliased image at 25kHz of a full-scale tone at 19.1kHz (cyan, blue) suppressed by >80dB. The frequency response with 44.1kHz, 96kHz, and 192kHz data (fig.3) is flat in the audioband, with a sharp rolloff just below half of each sample rate.


Fig.4 Moon 891, digital inputs, left channel, 1kHz output level vs 24-bit data level in dBFS (blue, 20dB/vertical div.); linearity error (red, 2dB/small vertical div.).


Fig.5 Moon 891, digital inputs, spectrum with noise and spuriae of dithered 1kHz tone at –90dBFS with: 16-bit data (left channel cyan, right magenta), 24-bit data (left blue, right red) (20dB/vertical div.).

The red trace in fig.4 plots the error in the analog output level as a 24-bit, 1kHz digital tone stepped down from 0dBFS to –140dBFS. Even at the lowest level, the amplitude error is <0.5dB, which implies superbly high resolution. An increase in bit depth from 16 to 24, with dithered data representing a 1kHz tone at –90dBFS, dropped the Moon 891's noisefloor by 30dB (fig.5). This implies a measured resolution of 22 bits.


Fig.6 Moon 891, digital inputs, waveform of undithered 1kHz sinewave at –90.31dBFS, 16-bit data (left channel blue, right red).


Fig.7 Moon 891, digital inputs, waveform of undithered 1kHz sinewave at –90.31dBFS, 24-bit data (left channel blue, right red).

With undithered data representing a tone at exactly –90.31dBFS, the waveform was symmetrical, with negligible DC offset, and the three DC voltage levels described by the data were clearly defined (fig.6). With undithered 24-bit data, the Moon 891 output a superbly clean sinewave (fig.7).


Fig.8 Moon 891, digital inputs, balanced output, spectrum of 50Hz sinewave, DC–1kHz, at 0dBFS into 100k ohms (left channel blue, right red, linear frequency scale).


Fig.9 Moon 891, digital inputs, HF intermodulation spectrum, DC–30kHz, 19+20kHz at 0dBFS into 100k ohms, 24-bit, 44.1kHz data (left channel blue, right red; linear frequency scale).

The Moon's digital inputs produced very low levels of distortion. The second and third harmonics are the highest in level (fig.8), but at close to –120dB (0.0001%) are negligible. Intermodulation distortion with 24-bit data representing an equal mix of 19 and 20kHz tones, each at –6dBFS, was also very low (fig.9).


Fig.10 Moon 891, 16-bit TosLink data, high-resolution jitter spectrum of analog output signal, 11.025kHz at –6dBFS, sampled at 44.1kHz with LSB toggled at 229Hz (left channel blue, right red). Center frequency of trace, 11.025kHz; frequency range, ±3.5kHz.


Fig.11 Moon 891, 24-bit TosLink data, high-resolution jitter spectrum of analog output signal, 11.025kHz at –6dBFS, sampled at 44.1kHz with LSB toggled at 229Hz (left channel blue, right red). Center frequency of trace, 11.025kHz; frequency range, ±3.5kHz.

Fig.10 shows the spectrum of the Moon 891's output when it was fed 16-bit J-Test data via TosLink. All the odd-order harmonics of the undithered low-frequency, LSB-level squarewave lie at the correct levels, and the central spike that represents the high-level tone at one-quarter the sample rate is appropriately narrow. Repeating this analysis with 24-bit J-Test data via both TosLink and USB gave a superbly low noisefloor (fig.11).—John Atkinson

COMPANY INFO
Simaudio Ltd.
1345 Newton Rd.
Boucherville, Quebec, J4B 5H2
Canada
(450) 449-2212
ARTICLE CONTENTS

COMMENTS
PeterG's picture

Great review, sounds like a super low real estate solution. Please advise on the QKore6--how do you allocate your 8 boxes across its 6 inputs? Thanks

Jason Victor Serinus's picture

The Nordost QKore, which comes in three iterations, is a passive grounding device. At this point, I only connect it to one of my components. But that may change down the line after I make modifications to my room treatment. Please check out the explanation on their website.

PeterG's picture

Thanks, Jason. I should have been more clear. I have a QKore 6 and a QBase already. They are terrific, but I am sometimes capacity constrained with the QKore able to handle only 5 components in addition to the QBase. As you mentioned 8 boxes and only one QKore, I was thinking you had a way to increase the single QKore capacity with Y cables or similar.

Of course, now I wonder why you have not plugged in 5 of the components, and why room treatments would change the value of passive grounding? I have not checked each of my components in isolation for QKore effect, and (due to spouse acceptance factor) I do not have room treatments. But a couple of times while reconfiguring wires in general, QKore wires have come undone and there was an immediate change in sound.

Cheers

Ortofan's picture

... sufficient satisfaction listening to music via the $ 5,499 "superb" NAD M66, or would using the $25K "state-of-the-art" Moon 891 result in five times the enjoyment, even though the 891 lacks a room correction function?

https://www.stereophile.com/content/nad-m66-streaming-preamplifier

snowbuffalo's picture

My thoughts precisely, as the similarly full-featured NAD measures well and has met with positive listening reviews. The room correction software would be the killer feature for me, as my listening space is less than perfect (as most people’s is). The Moon gear looks fantastic, but I have to think the NAD is within reach of many more readers without unlimited budgets.

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture

A/B vs. D. Moon 891 made in Canada vs. NAD Made in China. A 50 lb. Moon vs. a 16.7 lb NAD. I would say that the NAD may sound really nice FOR THE MONEY, but someone with Jason's ability to differentiate and hear nuance (in music as well as audio) would hear the difference. Build quality, quality of parts and amplifier technology. This is not a knock on NAD equipment which has always punched above its weight. Impossible to say whether it's worth 5x the amount. It is worth that to the person that wants it and can pay for it and hear the difference. I stand by the belief that Jason would feel it was worth it because one would sound better. Superb measurements are not the final arbiter as we all know.

Ortofan's picture

... Moon preamp versus those in the NAD?
What percentage of the electronic components in the Moon preamp are made in Canada?

JohnnyThunder2.0's picture

But we are talking about Canadian labor and something that is not mass produced and an artisanal product. The MOON weighs 3 times as much so if you are paying by the pound it is worth it (joke.)Honestly I don’t have too much invested in this discussion but it does seem like one product is more robustly constructed. But then again, all the people who love their featherweight class D watt monsters would say that doesn’t matter. Everyone’s mileage may vary.

X