[Sampajanna]

Fair enough. i’ll sheath my sword for now. Back to the Dave and its marvelous transparency and instrument separation!

 

[SoupRKnowva]

Welcome to the club!
Are u using a HMS too?

Looking forward to your impressions.. i see wavedream also does upsampling inside

Ive had my Dave for quite a while and ended up keeping it over the my Wavedream Signature XLR, below is a review I wrote up comparing the two on another site.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When I purchased my Wavedream Signature XLR I thought for sure it was going to be my endgame dac. My impressions were glowing. It did everything at such a higher level than anything else I had heard. The main thing it did that really wowed me was in separation. This is a facet of sound that I care a great deal about and it blew everything else Ive heard out of the water. The Wavedream never sounded congested no matter how complex the song got, it never even flinched.

I was incredibly happy with where I was, and honestly, I wasnt even interested in any other dacs that were out. None of them peaked my interest at all, I was spending my time tweaking my digital front end for the Wavedream, contemplating spending too much money on a Wavedream NET player to pair with it.

I can't remember anymore what caused it, but at some point 2-3 months ago, the Dave caught my eye. I don't remember if it was a post somewhere, or a video on Youtube. But something made me pay attention to it. It was then that I started reading more about the Dave and watching some of Rob Watt's presentations. I don't think it's a stretch to say that Chord products don't have a good rep here at ****, so I hadn't ever even considered them or paid attention to them or their tech outside of seeing people meme about the tap counts Rob Watts talks about.

The more I read about the tech inside, the more intrigued I got about the Dave. The things Rob Watts was saying about digital filtering lined up alot more with what I know about digital sampling from my signals and systems classes in school and reading I've done since. (As an aside, Rob Watts has alot of ideas, right or wrong, about why we hear differences in things that we do, his blog on head-fi is an interesting read). I never in a million years thought the Dave would actually be my preferred DAC versus the Wavedream. Based on the other impressions I have read I thought it would turn out to just be soso, and I would sell it off and go about my business, but I was still interested enough to want to hear one, and I wanted to give it a fair shake, postulating that the filtering may take time to appreciate, so I decided to purchase one.


I have learned to trust my gut when it comes to gear. This sometimes gets me into trouble as I often don't take the time to pick apart why I like or dislike something, making it very difficult to write impressions. Usually when I swapped other DACs into my system in place of the Wavedream, I would immediately want to switch back, and rather than fight that urge, I would do just that, rather than waste time with the new DAC.

The first thing I can say about the Dave, is that that did not happen. I plugged it in and felt no urge to switch back to the Wavedream. Within half an hour or so that first night I was writing to friends saying that it had impressive depth presentation. I then listened to the Dave exclusively for 2 weeks. This is my preferred method of evaluating new gear, throw it in the rig, leave it alone for a while to get accustomed to it, and then switch back and do some comparisons. During those two weeks I really dug the Dave, subjectively it was pulling me into the music in a way that the Wavedream hadn't. It was getting my toes tapping and my head bopping more than before, I was more involved with the music. I continued to be impressed by the depth presentation, but even more impressive was the separation it was providing.

After the two weeks I popped the Wavedream back in and something happened I never thought I would say. The Dave makes the Wavedream sound congested on my most difficult tracks, this was the biggest surprise of this entire endeavor. Another thing I had heard peope tell me was that I wouldn't like the Dave as it wouldn't have this "drive" I call it to the music, the ability to effectively portray the energy of the track. I think I have done a crappy job trying to explain this facet of sound I like so much and first heard in the Gungnir DS, that Convert 2 and for the most part Wavedream Sig had, because I wouldnt say the Dave is lacking at all. When I put on some deathcore, the Dave will abso-****ing-lutely slam, and slam ****ing hard. Dave knows how to crack to 11 when it needs to, but what it also does, is dance like a feather when it needs to when I put on some close mic'd female vocals.

This gets to the real crux of my impression of the Dave. I think it is more "expressive" than other dacs I have heard. Sometimes it will have the flattest stage you've ever heard, other times it will be absolutely cavernous, but one thing it isnt, is either one of those, all the time, it is a chameleon like that. It can slam, but it can also flutter, and I think it is exactly this that draws me so into the music when listenint to the Dave. There is also an "ease" I'll call it to the music. When you listen to it back to back with the Wavedream, there is an ever so slight harshness you woudln't have noticed on the Wavedream on it's own, but when compared to the Dave, you realize this is a sin of commission. But that slight harshness or edge, isnt required to bring the energy I want either.

It isn't all roses and rainbows for the Dave though, there are some areas where I think it loses to the Wavedream. The main two being clarity and realism in the upper midrange and microdynamics. I wrote a lot about microdynamics in my Wavedream impressions, and I stand by all of that, it gives the Wavedream a certain realism that is astounding, Dave doesn't quite have the liquidity that the superb microdynamics bring. The Wavedream also has this absolute midrange clarity, most obvious on some female vocals, that the Dave lacks.


All of these comparisons were done using a ultraRendu direct into the Dave's USB port. This is another very interesting thing. The Dave sounded better via USB direct than using the Audiobyte Hydra-Z I had previously replaced my pi2aes with. The Dave was also connected directly to my Coda No 8 v1, power amp, using the internal pre on the Dave just like I do with the Wavedream. Call it heresy if you want, but I havent heard a pre yet beat the digital volume control in Wavedream.


For the last few days I have also had the mega scaler in the chain, and I can say this lifts the performance of the Dave across the board. There are three main areas though that I think it improves. First separation is taken to an even more absurd degree, but unlike some, I dont ever think this sounds bad or like it is taken too far. Things aren't spread apart further than they should be, they just never get mixed up, you never have trouble telling one sound from another. Second, clarity, particularly in the midrange takes a step up. That deficit Dave had versus Wavedream on female vocals, isn't eliminated, but it is narrowed. And Lastly, bass delineation. The ability to separation tone and pitch and placement in the bass is dramatically improved with the mega scaler. Bass also has more snap and impact.


Overall the Dave experiment, as heretical as some friends thought it was, saying I was buying it just to crap on it like I did the D90SE, turned out to be an incredible sucess. Don't let the opinions of others stop you from trying something if it catches your eye, heck, you might even find your new favorite DAC in the process.

TLDR: The Dave does separation better than anything I've heard, including the Wavedream, gets my toes tapping and my head bopping unlike any other dac, and also has an incredible USB input, when combined with the mega scaler, this is easily the best digital I have ever heard.

 

[SteveHulk]

Ive had my Dave for quite a while and ended up keeping it over the my Wavedream Signature XLR, below is a review I wrote up comparing the two on another site.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When I purchased my Wavedream Signature XLR I thought for sure it was going to be my endgame dac. My impressions were glowing. It did everything at such a higher level than anything else I had heard. The main thing it did that really wowed me was in separation. This is a facet of sound that I care a great deal about and it blew everything else Ive heard out of the water. The Wavedream never sounded congested no matter how complex the song got, it never even flinched.

I was incredibly happy with where I was, and honestly, I wasnt even interested in any other dacs that were out. None of them peaked my interest at all, I was spending my time tweaking my digital front end for the Wavedream, contemplating spending too much money on a Wavedream NET player to pair with it.

I can't remember anymore what caused it, but at some point 2-3 months ago, the Dave caught my eye. I don't remember if it was a post somewhere, or a video on Youtube. But something made me pay attention to it. It was then that I started reading more about the Dave and watching some of Rob Watt's presentations. I don't think it's a stretch to say that Chord products don't have a good rep here at SBAF, so I hadn't ever even considered them or paid attention to them or their tech outside of seeing people meme about the tap counts Rob Watts talks about.

The more I read about the tech inside, the more intrigued I got about the Dave. The things Rob Watts was saying about digital filtering lined up alot more with what I know about digital sampling from my signals and systems classes in school and reading I've done since. (As an aside, Rob Watts has alot of ideas, right or wrong, about why we hear differences in things that we do, his blog on head-fi is an interesting read). I never in a million years thought the Dave would actually be my preferred DAC versus the Wavedream. Based on the other impressions I have read I thought it would turn out to just be soso, and I would sell it off and go about my business, but I was still interested enough to want to hear one, and I wanted to give it a fair shake, postulating that the filtering may take time to appreciate, so I decided to purchase one.


I have learned to trust my gut when it comes to gear. This sometimes gets me into trouble as I often don't take the time to pick apart why I like or dislike something, making it very difficult to write impressions. Usually when I swapped other DACs into my system in place of the Wavedream, I would immediately want to switch back, and rather than fight that urge, I would do just that, rather than waste time with the new DAC.

The first thing I can say about the Dave, is that that did not happen. I plugged it in and felt no urge to switch back to the Wavedream. Within half an hour or so that first night I was writing to friends saying that it had impressive depth presentation. I then listened to the Dave exclusively for 2 weeks. This is my preferred method of evaluating new gear, throw it in the rig, leave it alone for a while to get accustomed to it, and then switch back and do some comparisons. During those two weeks I really dug the Dave, subjectively it was pulling me into the music in a way that the Wavedream hadn't. It was getting my toes tapping and my head bopping more than before, I was more involved with the music. I continued to be impressed by the depth presentation, but even more impressive was the separation it was providing.

After the two weeks I popped the Wavedream back in and something happened I never thought I would say. The Dave makes the Wavedream sound congested on my most difficult tracks, this was the biggest surprise of this entire endeavor. Another thing I had heard peope tell me was that I wouldn't like the Dave as it wouldn't have this "drive" I call it to the music, the ability to effectively portray the energy of the track. I think I have done a crappy job trying to explain this facet of sound I like so much and first heard in the Gungnir DS, that Convert 2 and for the most part Wavedream Sig had, because I wouldnt say the Dave is lacking at all. When I put on some deathcore, the Dave will abso-****ing-lutely slam, and slam ****ing hard. Dave knows how to crack to 11 when it needs to, but what it also does, is dance like a feather when it needs to when I put on some close mic'd female vocals.

This gets to the real crux of my impression of the Dave. I think it is more "expressive" than other dacs I have heard. Sometimes it will have the flattest stage you've ever heard, other times it will be absolutely cavernous, but one thing it isnt, is either one of those, all the time, it is a chameleon like that. It can slam, but it can also flutter, and I think it is exactly this that draws me so into the music when listenint to the Dave. There is also an "ease" I'll call it to the music. When you listen to it back to back with the Wavedream, there is an ever so slight harshness you woudln't have noticed on the Wavedream on it's own, but when compared to the Dave, you realize this is a sin of commission. But that slight harshness or edge, isnt required to bring the energy I want either.

It isn't all roses and rainbows for the Dave though, there are some areas where I think it loses to the Wavedream. The main two being clarity and realism in the upper midrange and microdynamics. I wrote a lot about microdynamics in my Wavedream impressions, and I stand by all of that, it gives the Wavedream a certain realism that is astounding, Dave doesn't quite have the liquidity that the superb microdynamics bring. The Wavedream also has this absolute midrange clarity, most obvious on some female vocals, that the Dave lacks.


All of these comparisons were done using a ultraRendu direct into the Dave's USB port. This is another very interesting thing. The Dave sounded better via USB direct than using the Audiobyte Hydra-Z I had previously replaced my pi2aes with. The Dave was also connected directly to my Coda No 8 v1, power amp, using the internal pre on the Dave just like I do with the Wavedream. Call it heresy if you want, but I havent heard a pre yet beat the digital volume control in Wavedream.


For the last few days I have also had the mega scaler in the chain, and I can say this lifts the performance of the Dave across the board. There are three main areas though that I think it improves. First separation is taken to an even more absurd degree, but unlike some, I dont ever think this sounds bad or like it is taken too far. Things aren't spread apart further than they should be, they just never get mixed up, you never have trouble telling one sound from another. Second, clarity, particularly in the midrange takes a step up. That deficit Dave had versus Wavedream on female vocals, isn't eliminated, but it is narrowed. And Lastly, bass delineation. The ability to separation tone and pitch and placement in the bass is dramatically improved with the mega scaler. Bass also has more snap and impact.


Overall the Dave experiment, as heretical as some friends thought it was, saying I was buying it just to crap on it like I did the D90SE, turned out to be an incredible sucess. Don't let the opinions of others stop you from trying something if it catches your eye, heck, you might even find your new favorite DAC in the process.

TLDR: The Dave does separation better than anything I've heard, including the Wavedream, gets my toes tapping and my head bopping unlike any other dac, and also has an incredible USB input, when combined with the mega scaler, this is easily the best digital I have ever heard.

Sounds like you are in love...

Put the DAVE and m scaler on Farad3 lps and you can elope together!

 

[pichler]

Ive had my Dave for quite a while and ended up keeping it over the my Wavedream Signature XLR, below is a review I wrote up comparing the two on another site.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When I purchased my Wavedream Signature XLR I thought for sure it was going to be my endgame dac. My impressions were glowing. It did everything at such a higher level than anything else I had heard. The main thing it did that really wowed me was in separation. This is a facet of sound that I care a great deal about and it blew everything else Ive heard out of the water. The Wavedream never sounded congested no matter how complex the song got, it never even flinched.

I was incredibly happy with where I was, and honestly, I wasnt even interested in any other dacs that were out. None of them peaked my interest at all, I was spending my time tweaking my digital front end for the Wavedream, contemplating spending too much money on a Wavedream NET player to pair with it.

I can't remember anymore what caused it, but at some point 2-3 months ago, the Dave caught my eye. I don't remember if it was a post somewhere, or a video on Youtube. But something made me pay attention to it. It was then that I started reading more about the Dave and watching some of Rob Watt's presentations. I don't think it's a stretch to say that Chord products don't have a good rep here at SBAF, so I hadn't ever even considered them or paid attention to them or their tech outside of seeing people meme about the tap counts Rob Watts talks about.

The more I read about the tech inside, the more intrigued I got about the Dave. The things Rob Watts was saying about digital filtering lined up alot more with what I know about digital sampling from my signals and systems classes in school and reading I've done since. (As an aside, Rob Watts has alot of ideas, right or wrong, about why we hear differences in things that we do, his blog on head-fi is an interesting read). I never in a million years thought the Dave would actually be my preferred DAC versus the Wavedream. Based on the other impressions I have read I thought it would turn out to just be soso, and I would sell it off and go about my business, but I was still interested enough to want to hear one, and I wanted to give it a fair shake, postulating that the filtering may take time to appreciate, so I decided to purchase one.


I have learned to trust my gut when it comes to gear. This sometimes gets me into trouble as I often don't take the time to pick apart why I like or dislike something, making it very difficult to write impressions. Usually when I swapped other DACs into my system in place of the Wavedream, I would immediately want to switch back, and rather than fight that urge, I would do just that, rather than waste time with the new DAC.

The first thing I can say about the Dave, is that that did not happen. I plugged it in and felt no urge to switch back to the Wavedream. Within half an hour or so that first night I was writing to friends saying that it had impressive depth presentation. I then listened to the Dave exclusively for 2 weeks. This is my preferred method of evaluating new gear, throw it in the rig, leave it alone for a while to get accustomed to it, and then switch back and do some comparisons. During those two weeks I really dug the Dave, subjectively it was pulling me into the music in a way that the Wavedream hadn't. It was getting my toes tapping and my head bopping more than before, I was more involved with the music. I continued to be impressed by the depth presentation, but even more impressive was the separation it was providing.

After the two weeks I popped the Wavedream back in and something happened I never thought I would say. The Dave makes the Wavedream sound congested on my most difficult tracks, this was the biggest surprise of this entire endeavor. Another thing I had heard peope tell me was that I wouldn't like the Dave as it wouldn't have this "drive" I call it to the music, the ability to effectively portray the energy of the track. I think I have done a crappy job trying to explain this facet of sound I like so much and first heard in the Gungnir DS, that Convert 2 and for the most part Wavedream Sig had, because I wouldnt say the Dave is lacking at all. When I put on some deathcore, the Dave will abso-****ing-lutely slam, and slam ****ing hard. Dave knows how to crack to 11 when it needs to, but what it also does, is dance like a feather when it needs to when I put on some close mic'd female vocals.

This gets to the real crux of my impression of the Dave. I think it is more "expressive" than other dacs I have heard. Sometimes it will have the flattest stage you've ever heard, other times it will be absolutely cavernous, but one thing it isnt, is either one of those, all the time, it is a chameleon like that. It can slam, but it can also flutter, and I think it is exactly this that draws me so into the music when listenint to the Dave. There is also an "ease" I'll call it to the music. When you listen to it back to back with the Wavedream, there is an ever so slight harshness you woudln't have noticed on the Wavedream on it's own, but when compared to the Dave, you realize this is a sin of commission. But that slight harshness or edge, isnt required to bring the energy I want either.

It isn't all roses and rainbows for the Dave though, there are some areas where I think it loses to the Wavedream. The main two being clarity and realism in the upper midrange and microdynamics. I wrote a lot about microdynamics in my Wavedream impressions, and I stand by all of that, it gives the Wavedream a certain realism that is astounding, Dave doesn't quite have the liquidity that the superb microdynamics bring. The Wavedream also has this absolute midrange clarity, most obvious on some female vocals, that the Dave lacks.


All of these comparisons were done using a ultraRendu direct into the Dave's USB port. This is another very interesting thing. The Dave sounded better via USB direct than using the Audiobyte Hydra-Z I had previously replaced my pi2aes with. The Dave was also connected directly to my Coda No 8 v1, power amp, using the internal pre on the Dave just like I do with the Wavedream. Call it heresy if you want, but I havent heard a pre yet beat the digital volume control in Wavedream.


For the last few days I have also had the mega scaler in the chain, and I can say this lifts the performance of the Dave across the board. There are three main areas though that I think it improves. First separation is taken to an even more absurd degree, but unlike some, I dont ever think this sounds bad or like it is taken too far. Things aren't spread apart further than they should be, they just never get mixed up, you never have trouble telling one sound from another. Second, clarity, particularly in the midrange takes a step up. That deficit Dave had versus Wavedream on female vocals, isn't eliminated, but it is narrowed. And Lastly, bass delineation. The ability to separation tone and pitch and placement in the bass is dramatically improved with the mega scaler. Bass also has more snap and impact.


Overall the Dave experiment, as heretical as some friends thought it was, saying I was buying it just to crap on it like I did the D90SE, turned out to be an incredible sucess. Don't let the opinions of others stop you from trying something if it catches your eye, heck, you might even find your new favorite DAC in the process.

TLDR: The Dave does separation better than anything I've heard, including the Wavedream, gets my toes tapping and my head bopping unlike any other dac, and also has an incredible USB input, when combined with the mega scaler, this is easily the best digital I have ever heard.

Hi, I agree when you call Dave "chameleon". Well wrote

 

[Reactcore]

Hi, I agree when you call Dave "chameleon". Well wrote

Nice writeup!

Try also source > optical > Scaler > optical > Dave > headphones (or amp) with nothing else connected.

This way you break all groundloops..
I wonder what u think..

 

[SoupRKnowva]

Nice writeup!

Try also source > optical > Scaler > optical > Dave > headphones (or amp) with nothing else connected.

This way you break all groundloops..
I wonder what u think..

I did try running optical into the MScaler from my pi2aes, and it was very good, but I thought usb from my ultrarendu did just barely edge it out in refinement. As for connecting the MScaler and Dave with optical, im not willing to spend the money on the opto-dx kit to find out. Im also not really interested in psu rolling.

Since I wrote the review I have also upgraded from the Coda No8 to the Coda 16.0, they totl amp.

 

[Reactcore]

I did try running optical into the MScaler from my pi2aes, and it was very good, but I thought usb from my ultrarendu did just barely edge it out in refinement. As for connecting the MScaler and Dave with optical, im not willing to spend the money on the opto-dx kit to find out. Im also not really interested in psu rolling.

It was actually after i tried both optical in and out i noticed the effect.. even at 250 taps you can hear more refinement

 

[ZappaMan]

I’m wearing headphones, ether 2.

I have mscaler connected on dnc 3/4.
When I select dnbc 3 input the music is full says sample rate 705.
When I accidentally lol, switch to BNC 4, the music sounds tinny in comparison, says sample rate is 352.

Is this the mscaler effect ? Or have I got the cables the wrong way round - including using opto dx ….

And with the cables the wrong way round could it be not actually delivering the proper signal to the dac ?

The major sound difference is a big shift in depth.

Maybe if it is the mscaler effect, then other may find it more easy to perceive the change this way rather than toggling the sample rate change on the mscaler.

And the song for reference is the last track on orbitals - in sides - out there somewhere pt 2.


—
When I toggle through sample rate on mscaler while on d Bnc 3. Dave registers 44, 88, 176, then skips to 705.
If I switch to Bnc 4, it will only register when mscaler is full upscaling, but it only registers the 352 rate.

 

[Powersquat]

I’m wearing headphones, ether 2.

I have mscaler connected on dnc 3/4.
When I select dnbc 3 input the music is full says sample rate 705.
When I accidentally lol, switch to BNC 4, the music sounds tinny in comparison, says sample rate is 352.

Is this the mscaler effect ? Or have I got the cables the wrong way round - including using opto dx ….

And with the cables the wrong way round could it be not actually delivering the proper signal to the dac ?

The major sound difference is a big shift in depth.

Maybe if it is the mscaler effect, then other may find it more easy to perceive the change this way rather than toggling the sample rate change on the mscaler.

And the song for reference is the last track on orbitals - in sides - out there somewhere pt 2.


—
When I toggle through sample rate on mscaler while on d Bnc 3. Dave registers 44, 88, 176, then skips to 705.
If I switch to Bnc 4, it will only register when mscaler is full upscaling, but it only registers the 352 rate.

I believe this behaviour is normal, Ive experienced exactly the same thing, albeit in a 2 channel set up.

As I understand it, when connected to BNC 3 and 4 the dual signal from the MScaler is only active when Bnc 3 is selected on the Dave, if you switch to Bnc 4, the Dave only detects The signal from 1 Bnc cable, (Bnc 4), hence the lower sample rate and associated drop in sound quality.

 

[ZappaMan]

I believe this behaviour is normal, Ive experienced exactly the same thing, albeit in a 2 channel set up.

As I understand it, when connected to BNC 3 and 4 the dual signal from the MScaler is only active when Bnc 3 is selected on the Dave, if you switch to Bnc 4, the Dave only detects The signal from 1 Bnc cable, (Bnc 4), hence the lower sample rate and associated drop in sound quality.

And just to doubly confirm, the lower sample rate is the full single, as in all of the music information, but just upsampled to 300ish…
Because the change seems much re pronounced them toggling through mscaler sample setting.

 

[HeeBroG]

and it's a mono signal i think so a dramatic drop in SQ

 

[Icenine2]

I am correct that connecting HMS to 1/2 is the same as 3/4 yes?

 

[Icenine2]

I would be surprised if I am alone in finding the refusal of some posters to move on from the ASR review, becoming increasingly tedious.

Yes. Please take yourselves over to the Head-Case forum instead. They have ZERO tolerance of tedium, post and say whatever they like. You will not escape.

 

[alxw0w]

I am correct that connecting HMS to 1/2 is the same as 3/4 yes?

Basically yes.
But some people found (me also) that 3 and 4 inputs sound just a bit better (smoother, darker) than 1&2, when used with the m scaler.

 

[Icenine2]

I will switch them now and check it out. Thank you.