[romaz]

  I didn't realize it was a Chord only thread. 

Hi Paul, it isn't a Chord only thread and your post was a fair and balanced one.  If you had posted it on the TotalDac thread, you would have been preaching to the choir and no one would have questioned you.  When you posted it on the DAVE thread, I wasn't being ingenuous when I said there's nothing wrong with this but then you must be prepared to have your responses scrutinized and so that's what happened.  I never meant to imply your system was broken and so if that is what you inferred, I apologize.  There are few that I would trust to put together a system for me.  You are one of those people and so after all of this blows down, I hope there is still a friendship there.  I have no enemies in audio and I bear no one person or one company any ill will.  As Rob Watts has said, life is too short.
 
As we all know, Head-Fi is a community of enthusiasts which means we are all passionate about audio as well as our audio gear.  Obviously, this means there's a lot of bias going on and people are going to express those biases in any number of ways.  In the same way that I expressed my love for my TotalDac on the TotalDac thread when I had this DAC, I did not feel it proper to then express my love for the DAVE on the same TotalDac thread once I switched.  Not to say that what you did was wrong but the response to what you did should not come as a surprise.  In the end, if you are secure in the strengths of your system as I am in mine, then nothing that anyone says should matter. Your advocacy for your twelve is commendable and I respect it.  At the same time, as I do my own comparisons, the more convinced I am that the DAVE is the best DAC in the world and so hopefully, you won't be offended if we agree to disagree.  I think we should be happy for each other that we are this pleased with our systems.

 

[ecwl]

I have to say even though I'll probably disagree with Paul in the future, I do want to hear TotalDAC Twelve. The R2R DACs I've listened to I just didn't like as much as my Chord DACs. But then I have never listened to anything as high end as TotalDAC twelve. I used not to be able to clearly articulate the why but after Rob Watts posted his design philosophy, I think I can say I'm hearing what he's hearing as problems in other DAC designs. But maybe TotalDAC Twelve has a great way of pushing the R2R limits further.

So I am grateful that Paul offers his opinion on TotalDAC Twelve as I'll try harder to find it to listen to it. But I think many of us have said in this forum, different people like different sound and different DACs go into different systems so system synergy may also play a role. As long as one is happiest with what one owns, that's what matters most

 

[paul79]

Totally romaz! No worries at all. Passion for my system and my experience is why I posted my findings, and defended my findings. Nobody has heard my system here, and nobody else has heard the Twelve and the DAVE head to head. In my review, I really tried to highlight the strengths of both, and the weaknesses of both, in my system. All comparisons are done this way. I just got a bit upset when people told me I don't know what a transparent system sounds like, or how to find a bottleneck. I absolutely do. I have heard many systems, helped build many systems at different budgets, and have owned several different systems in different environments. However, after thinking it over, I agree, what else can I expect posting on the DAVE thread? 
 
We have an audio club here in Tulsa that has some of the best sounding systems in the world. I get to hear them all, and even systems that are better than mine in some ways. These are very strictly vinyl guys though, and use something like an Oppo or Sony for their digital, while having vinyl rigs that cost more than my house. They wouldn't even think of owning a high end DAC, because they would rather put a $15K cartridge on their table, or a different phono preamp instead, so when I attend I feel a bit outcast with my preference to digital overall. I am however, very new to this club, and not even really a member, but I will make them believers in that digital is good too, eventually!!

 

[Jawed]

paul79, I think your original review was sufficiently well written that it provided a sense of a lot of absolute truths about the way your system plays music. I'm not surprised that someone else who listened to your system feels the same in many ways.

I personally don't subscribe to the "everyone hears differently" school of political correctness seen on hi-fi forums. Instead I believe that people weigh-up the different compromises they hear and decide whether they like what they hear. Usually their gut leads in this assessment. There then follows a degree of justification for gut feelings and a limited amount of introspection.

In my experience if you question someone very closely you will discover that they will end up describing the sound of a system in the same way as someone else who is also questioned closely. Listeners who don't have much experience expressing their feelings about systems will hit the ceiling of their perception and ability to express their perception sooner... When these people are asked to compare two systems their preferences will survive the questioning.

Personal preferences (in extreme: bass head, soundstaging-addict, PRAT-aholic) are the reasons people choose the stuff they own.

I really do think that what you've said about Twelve versus DAVE is very much "the truth" in your system. I expect most people would agree with what you've written after spending time with your system.

It appears to me that most people would be thoroughly smitten by your system, too.

I think the only question anyone can reasonably have is: does your system synergise with Twelve and hinder DAVE or is your system a representative depiction of the difference between Twelve and DAVE?

If we take, at face value, your and your friend's criticism of DAVE as being much less transparent then there's only two aspects of DAVE that can be meaningfully questioned: the entire algorithm of DAVE (WTA over-sampling, noise-shaping, 104MHz 5-bit 20-element digital to analogue conversion); and the electrical qualities of the circuitry, the power supply, noise control, and the quality of current to voltage conversion. Some would say that the electrical qualities of the circuitry, the R2R voodoo, is the entire point of Twelve, so of course DAVE is worse...

I believe you both when you say DAVE is less transparent feeding directly into your power amp than via the pre-amp. If it were my system I'd be looking for a new power amp. It's kinda puzzling to me that you are absolutely certain that there is nothing wrong there. That's really the beginning and end of my contention with what you've posted.

---

Here on Head-fi there's a consensus that Hugo sounds better than Mojo. Tens of people at least, it seems, have compared these two DACs directly and concluded the same. But there is a small group that prefers Mojo. So, even with gear that's been heard by so many people round here there is not 100% agreement.

So, sadly, with the ultra-fi gear there aren't that many comparisons, a consensus isn't going to arise easily. People who are interested in the pecking order of ultra-fi DACs just take whatever crumbs fall their way!

On the other side of the coin, I think it's fair to say that performance that once cost tens of thousands of dollars now costs a fraction of that. So normal people are now getting access to ultra-fi performance levels from yesteryear.

Now, has anyone compared DAVE or Twelve with dCS Vivaldi?

 

[paul79]

"I believe you both when you say DAVE is less transparent feeding directly into your power amp than via the pre-amp."

All good, but here you mention that I think the DAC's are more transparent through the preamp. Not so. It is just a different presentation. Both DAC's can be viewed as more accurate without the preamp, I just prefer the presentation with it, and don't notice anything missing with it in. If I carefully listen, the DAC's direct are more articulate, but lack the body, scale, and dimension the preamp provides.

 

[Crgreen]

I agree that consensus is irrelevant. We all have our own priorities and preferences. All that matters is whether my system helps me enjoy music. Trying to persuade someone else of the merits of my system, or taking issue with their system, seems to me to be not only a fruitless, but misconceived activity. Aside from providing the opportunity to write reams of detailed and polished prose, where does it actually get anybody? Such skills would be better employed elsewhere.

 

[Jawed]

Generally I post to learn. Crgreen, why are you posting?

 

[JaZZ]

Hi Paul
 
I hope it's not me you were referring to with this sentence...
 

I just got a bit upset when people told me I don't know what a transparent system sounds like, or how to find a bottleneck.

 
...but I fear it is so. Let me tell you that I enjoyed your comparative review a lot, and it was well-balanced and absolutely compatible with this thread, a great service for the community. Probably I'll never get the chance to audition a TotalDAC d1-twelve, so your review covers at least a bit of my curiosity. I absolutely don't expect or demand that everyone likes the same gear as me, so I can live with your preference.
 
When you go back you'll notice that I never directly insinuated that in a different system you would acknowledge the DAVE's superiority. I guess you would still like your TotalDAC better. But one thing I consider a fact: To make your system sound best with the DAVE as source, you have to color it with the preamp in the signal path. Considering that every electronics components reduces transparency, you definitely haven't heard what the DAVE is capable of in terms of transparency. This doesn't just apply to the DAVE, but also your TotalDAC. So the conclusion is justified that your system needs the specific coloration from your preamp to sound at its best and sounds less pleasing or realistic with maximum transparency and minimum coloration. That leads to the logical conclusion that something in your system makes it not entirely compatible with a signal alteration as low as possible and a transparency as high as possible. I would even venture the guess that it's more about (un)forgivingness than coloration.
 
When I was into speakers and speaker building, I once replaced my then preamp (a Conrad Johnson PV6 IIRC) with a hand-equipped switched attenuator. The increased transparency and accuracy was immediately noticeable, but the sound of my then speaker prototypes was terribly out of balance nonetheless. This after having reached a very good sound in the previous configuration. It took me weeks of careful retuning of the crossover networks which obviously afforded much higher care and precision than with the forgiving colorations from the preamp. In the end the system sounded clearly better than before, though. Later, when I was into headphones exclusively, I experimented with the direct connection to the line out of my then DAC, a Theta Pro basic II, with its 5 ohm output impedance. It was fascinating to actually «hear» what the different headphone amps really sound like, i.e. to get to know their coloration characteristics. Despite superior transparency and transient response from the direct connection I gave the nod to my favorite headphone amp at that time instead. Because since I didn't have a software equalizer then (just an analogue parametric equalizer with much too obvious signal degradation) there was no way I could make up for the tonal imperfections causing the need for the forgivingness introduced by the amp.

 

[Sonic77]

 
That's true. But who? That is the question.... I post a difference, and everyone tells me my system is broken because the DAVE didn't win me over. So ya, I suppose that would cause a defense, but my butt feels fine.

When I made the butt hurt comment it was not directed at anyone, but you responded, so as they say, "if the shoe fits........"

 

[Crgreen]

Generally I post to learn. Crgreen, why are you posting?

Well, my last post to express a view, not to learn.

I follow some of the posts to learn how I might improve the performance of my Dave, to read Rob's posts, which are of interest, and to hear about possible future developments. Nothing I said is inconsistent with any of that.

I'm pleased that you're anxious to learn, however.

 

[Ampus]

I have been following the recent thread from the sideline and now feel obligated to voice my opinions.

I find it to be so strange that two seasoned Hifi veterans like Paul and Roy having such vast difference in opinions about the DAVE and TotalDac. DAC technology has advanced so much over the last few years to the current state of the art that for most people it would be difficult to hear night and day difference in SQ, as wisely and eloquently demonstrated in Paul's posts. After all, there is only so much that can be squeezed out of a digital file. Granted DAVE has better specifications than most other DAC's; however, it has been shown that better specifications do not always translate into better sound. Don't get me wrong, I now own a DAVE and like it a lot but still cannot hear a night and day difference in the SQ compared to my other high end DAC's, not just Mojo.

I find this forum to be somewhat biased, favoring DAVE over any other DAC. Just review the posts for yourselves and you will see what I mean. When I posted my observation about Mojo vs DAVE, even the people who never did an A/B comparison between Mojo and DAVE came out to DAVE's defense. If DAVE doesn't sound supremely good in one's system, there must be something wrong in that person's system! I realize that this is the DAVE forum but isn't forum there to help people share unbiased opinions and learn from one another?

I think that Roy means well and is really trying to help forum members but sometimes his posts come across as authoritarian. One gets the perception that any deviation from his ideas / observations is simply not acceptable. I am sure that Roy is an accomplished and successful person; however, one does not have to brag about himself to get the points across the audience. Reading some of Roy's posts reminds me of Trump bragging about himself in the debates!

In medical field, one simply cannot publish a peer-reviewed article without having done due diligent research and having validated data to back up his or her conclusion. Being a physician, Roy should know this. It is a bad practice and legally irresponsible to post disparaging opinion about a manufacturer's product based on the opinion of a single disgruntled business partner. For us the consumers, it is easy to walk away from one product to find another product; however, for the affected manufacturer, this can potentially hurt the company's livelihood and reputation in a major way! Slandering your competition to get more business to yourself unfortunately is a common practice, even in medical field. I admire straightforward and honest people like Rob Watts.

Now a day, all speakers / writers, not just the ones in medical field, are required to disclose any financial interest / kick back that they have with any organization. I suggest that HiFi.org has similar requirements for the posters to hopefully avoid any biased posting. For the record, I receive NO financial interest or kick back from any company.

Those are my 2 cents. This is a great, informative forum; however, improvements and transparency are sorely needed. I am aware that I can get flamed or even banned from this forum for posting this; however, if that happened, so be it!

 

[paul79]

 
When I made the butt hurt comment it was not directed at anyone, but you responded, so as they say, "if the shoe fits........"

Wow dude.

 

[paul79]

I have been following the recent thread from the sideline and now feel obligated to voice my opinions.....

Nice post, and thanks for sharing your opinions.

 

[paul79]

  Hi Paul
 
I hope it's not me you were referring to with this sentence...
 

JaZZ, I completely agree with you. No doubt the preamp can do nothing but get in the way of perfect transparency. The presentation sounds fine with the DAVE direct to amps, it really does, and most would love it this way, even in my system. I just really like what my preamp does to my system. The fact that it does what it does, and still sounds very transparent to me, makes it kind of special too, to me. I do not agree it is about forgivingness.... The preamp does not forgive, whatsoever. It is a single ended, Class A, No feedback, non-inverting, with one single tube in the linestage, and 2 Copper Foil (Jupiter) Capacitors in the signal path (one for each channel). It is built to be as transparent as possible and will provide about 10db of gain above unity. It is essentially a 1 tube linestage. I would however, agree that it makes my amps happy giving the drive they like, as they were made to work together. The tube count is quite low for the whole system. Most tube preamps have more tubes than my whole system does. As a set, it is glorious. I can hear any change in my system, so I believe it to be quite true. I would go out on a limb and say that even you, in your system, my preamp would surprise you. I never made a sweeping statement that it would be the case for everybody to use a preamp with their systems or the DAVE. I also understand the questioning of my system, but I do disagree that it is far from transparent.
 
I can judge the DAC's no problem, with or without the preamp, and I did.
 
I also favor very neutral German and American signal tubes in my system. Valvo, Sylvania..... There are no Mullards, Amperex, etc. Coloring tubes. Clean very resolute, and very neutral tubes throughout.

 

[romaz]

I have been following the recent thread from the sideline and now feel obligated to voice my opinions.

I find it to be so strange that two seasoned Hifi veterans like Paul and Roy having such vast difference in opinions about the DAVE and TotalDac. DAC technology has advanced so much over the last few years to the current state of the art that for most people it would be difficult to hear night and day difference in SQ, as wisely and eloquently demonstrated in Paul's posts. After all, there is only so much that can be squeezed out of a digital file. Granted DAVE has better specifications than most other DAC's; however, it has been shown that better specifications do not always translate into better sound. Don't get me wrong, I now own a DAVE and like it a lot but still cannot hear a night and day difference in the SQ compared to my other high end DAC's, not just Mojo.

I find this forum to be somewhat biased, favoring DAVE over any other DAC. Just review the posts for yourselves and you will see what I mean. When I posted my observation about Mojo vs DAVE, even the people who never did an A/B comparison between Mojo and DAVE came out to DAVE's defense. If DAVE doesn't sound supremely good in one's system, there must be something wrong in that person's system! I realize that this is the DAVE forum but isn't forum there to help people share unbiased opinions and learn from one another?

I think that Roy means well and is really trying to help forum members but sometimes his posts come across as authoritarian. One gets the perception that any deviation from his ideas / observations is simply not acceptable. I am sure that Roy is an accomplished and successful person; however, one does not have to brag about himself to get the points across the audience. Reading some of Roy's posts reminds me of Trump bragging about himself in the debates!

In medical field, one simply cannot publish a peer-reviewed article without having done due diligent research and having validated data to back up his or her conclusion. Being a physician, Roy should know this. It is a bad practice and legally irresponsible to post disparaging opinion about a manufacturer's product based on the opinion of a single disgruntled business partner. For us the consumers, it is easy to walk away from one product to find another product; however, for the affected manufacturer, this can potentially hurt the company's livelihood and reputation in a major way! Slandering your competition to get more business to yourself unfortunately is a common practice, even in medical field. I admire straightforward and honest people like Rob Watts.

Now a day, all speakers / writers, not just the ones in medical field, are required to disclose any financial interest / kick back that they have with any organization. I suggest that HiFi.org has similar requirements for the posters to hopefully avoid any biased posting. For the record, I receive NO financial interest or kick back from any company.

Those are my 2 cents. This is a great, informative forum; however, improvements and transparency are sorely needed. I am aware that I can get flamed or even banned from this forum for posting this; however, if that happened, so be it!

I'm ok with this post.  I see no reason why it should get banned.
 
I can't help how I am perceived and I have a thick enough skin to not be bothered by things I can't control but I certainly never intend to come across as being authoritarian or condescending and so if that is your perception, than I apologize.  I attempt to be balanced in my characterizations as I don't believe anything is perfect and I have great respect for the views of others even when they differ from my own but when someone hears or perceives a piece of equipment differently than I do, it is natural for me to question why and on more than a few occasions, it has been due to some influence that can be explained.  I recall your situation well and somehow, if you felt intimidated or disrespected by anything I said, know that this was not my intention.
 
As I read the reviews of others, I am naturally drawn to a reviewer who has my own sensibilities and has similar equipment that I have because these are the reviews I can relate to.  Similarly, I have felt it important to provide as much about my own sensibilities and my equipment when I provide my personal views so that others can know whether they can relate to my comments.  I do indeed feel fortunate, even privileged, to frequently be in an environment where live music is playing at a high level and I speak of this often as my reference.  If you perceive this as me being uppity, then I will take note to tone it down.  I am ok with many comparisons but Donald Trump would not be one that I aspire to.  

 
As to the Voxativ post that you find objectionable, as I stated, in hindsight, if I could do it again, I wouldn't have posted it.  Upon further reflection, as I realize that it hurt both Vincent and Holger, I have deleted that post.  Hopefully, it's clear I have no personal vendetta against Vincent or TotalDac and at worst, it was bad judgement on my part but at the time I posted it, there was no malicious intent.  I viewed Holger's opinion no differently than Paul's.  Both are experienced and respected audiophiles that have had experiences with the same DACs but came to different conclusions.  That's all I wanted to point out. 
 
As for this thread being biased, yes, I would say that is accurate but no different than the TotalDac thread or any other thread I have been a part of.  Again, this is a forum comprised of enthusiasts, not scientists or objectivists, and so no one statement by anyone should be considered an absolute truth (except maybe Rob's).   As for my views, they are my own and I readily acknowledge that they are biased by the glasses I wear that are colored by prior experiences and my own personal needs and wants.  I have been blessed to have experienced much and I have an insatiable curiosity to hear new things and compare.  When I do find something like the DAVE that I really connect with, it is natural for me to speak of it often and with exuberance.  If that comes across as arrogance, again, I apologize but it would probably be best to not read my posts since I don't know how to do it another way.
 
Having said that, I will go on record to state that I have no financial ties with any audio company or organization.  I bought my Chord DAVE at market value from an authorized Chord dealer like everyone else.  I have zero financial ties with Chord, HFC, Voxativ or anyone else that I have spoken favorably of.  I view the world as being comprised of givers and takers.  In my personal and professional life, I aspire to be the former and with Head-Fi, it has been no different.  I am not perfect and I can think of a few posts I wish I could take back but I have no ulterior agenda.