[nachocheese70]

Since we're talking about external amps, one other point to note that Rob mentioned before (forgot which thread but wasn't this TT one) is SE versus balanced.

Balance has superior noise rejection and supports longer runs, but Rob explicitly mentioned the DAC output requires significantly more analog components that overall reduces SQ (transparency I believe was the work he said).

Single-ended may have its flaws but from DAC end is very simple to design and adds much less analog component.

So for those connecting an external amp to the TT, it may be worthwhile to compare both RCA and XLR. I've only got the Hugo so no choice.

Thanks to Jazz suggestion, I've been both playing around with PEQ and also "digital overdrive" via VST plugin to see if I can get some of the warmer characteristics that I like with certain music, and do so without adding tube amps.

 

[x RELIC x]

Since we're talking about external amps, one other point to note that Rob mentioned before (forgot which thread but wasn't this TT one) is SE versus balanced.

Balance has superior noise rejection and supports longer runs, but Rob explicitly mentioned the DAC output requires significantly more analog components that overall reduces SQ (transparency I believe was the work he said).

Single-ended may have its flaws but from DAC end is very simple to design and adds much less analog component.

So for those connecting an external amp to the TT, it may be worthwhile to compare both RCA and XLR. I've only got the Hugo so no choice.

Thanks to Jazz suggestion, I've been both playing around with PEQ and also "digital overdrive" via VST plugin to see if I can get some of the warmer characteristics that I like with certain music, and do so without adding tube amps.

Rob's quotes on the topic:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Watts

Quote:
Originally Posted by agisthos
Rob you should give a definitive 'why SE is better' explanation. Get it over with, because many (most) audiophiles have been biased towards balanced and are not going to understand where you are coming from.

One good argument I heard from the Densen founder (Thomas Sillesen) is that each half of the signwave runs through a series of components that will always have tolerances different from each other, so when combining the signal they will not ever match, causing an increase in distortion (of some kind I cannot remember).

Charles Hanson, of Ayre, who is a proponent of fully balanced equipment, has even stated that for pure sound quality SE will always sound better, but this is on the bench, where the power supply and analog signal stages can be kept physically apart. When putting them in a box he prefers balanced.
Well this is a complex subject, and sometimes a balanced connection does sound better than single ended (SE) - in a pre-power context - but it depends upon the environment, and the pre and power and the interconnect. But the downside of balanced is that you are doubling the number of analogue components in the direct signal path, and this degrades transparency. In my experience every passive component is audible, every metal to metal interface (including solder joints - I once had a lot of fun listening to solder) has an impact - in case of metal/metal interfaces it degrades detail resolution and the perception of depth. So going balanced will have a cost in transparency.

In DAC design, going balanced is essential with silicon design; there is simply too much substrate noise and other effects not too. But with discrete DAC's you do not need to worry about this, so going SE on a discrete DAC is possible, and is how all my DAC's are done. But differential operation hides certain problems (notably reference circuit) that has serious SQ effects; so going SE means those problems are exposed, which forces one to solve the issue fundamentally. In short, to make SE work you have to solve many more problems, but the result of solving those problems solves SQ issues than differential operation hides when you do measurements.

Rob

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Watts
Component count is very important for transparency. Doubling the number of parts in the direct signal path does degrade depth perception and detail resolution.

But there is another problem with balanced operation. Imagine a balanced differential in, differential out amplifier. The input stage is normally a differential pair (maybe cascoded) with a constant current source. Now the input stage is free to move up and down to accommodate the common mode voltage - but the input stage common mode impedance is non linear, and if the common mode voltage has a signal component (it always will have due to component tolerances) then this will create a signal dependent error current, thereby generating distortion. Unfortunately, the negative feedback loop of the amplifier can't correct for this distortion as it can't see the error on the summing nodes. So there will always be a limit to the performance. With SE operation, this problem does not occur, as the differential input stage is clamped to ground.

Now DAC designers are well aware of this - that's why all high performance DAC's use two single ended I to V converters from the current OP of the DAC's, then use a differential to SE converter to create the voltage OP. There are other reasons for doing this as well, as the DAC requires a very low impedance virtual ground for low distortion, and you can only get this using dual SE amps - another problem is RF and its much easier to decouple SE than differentially - this in turn creates a lot more noise floor modulation, making it sound less smooth.

But for me the most important is transparency. I had an amp that had two modes - differential or SE - listening in balanced mode flattened the sound stage depth dramatically,and it sounded harder, less smooth. That said, there are circumstances when balanced operation can be better than SE, for example when you are looking at connecting a pre-amp to a power amp, and what is best depends upon particular circumstances. In short, if SE operation is noisy, try balanced.

Rob

 

[rgs9200m]

I send the SE output of the TT to the SE input of my Rudistor RP010B amp but then use (various) balanced headphones on this amp. The Rudistor has a phase converter that claims to produce a balanced signal from its SE input.
Somehow, it sounds great.

 

[SAP7]

My Hugo TT is connected to my Cyrus mono x300's by balanced LAT International XLR cables. Short, metre long run.

I haven't tried RCA ones.

I may have to? I can't quite work out whether Rob is advocating that in his posts. I know it's a out what sounds best, but I'm guessing he would consider one the best option into my power amps.

 

[TomGi]

My amplified monitors are connected to the unbalanced (RCA) output. For my taste, I found them better than the balanced especially the attack and the transparency. But with the unbalanced cables, I had to move away a supply (linear supply for USB 5V) because it was producing an hum in my monitors !

 

[stersa]

Hi from Spain
 
Another  happy owner of the Chord Hugo TT.
 

 
 
TT works as a Dac for Audiovalve Luminare and as amp...Very ,very happy with TT..a great music machine
 
Regards
 
Sisco.  

 

[Whazzzup]

For various TT owners that amp, what happends if you don't and run direct to TT? What happends when you do? I'm not trying to start a no amp amp argument and don't want to put anyone on the spot.
Lastly not trying to direct the line of talk here but continue with examples.

 

[gnomen]

I run my HD800 headphones straight out of the TT and the sound is marvellous.  Settled on this combo after extensive auditioning of alternatives last year.  I also connect the TT directly to my powered ATC-SCM50A speakers -- again, very transparent.  I used to use a Mark Levinson No. 380S pre-amp with the ATCs -- we are talking £8,000 of beautifully engineered pre-amp here -- but when I purchased the TT I found that running it directly edged the ML in terms of transparency, so sold the pre-amp.
 
Having seen this discussion/debate many times on various threads at Head-Fi I will say it depends on your music sources and expectations.  I mostly listen to classical music.  Transparency is really important to me so I can hear the contributions of all the different instruments.  Even with popular music I prefer natural instruments and live sessions more than the electronically manipulated recordings which are so prevalent nowadays.  I can well imagine that someone listening for excitement, energy, body, dynamics etc. would choose a different combo.  And that's a good thing too!
 
PS And I don't get the supposed 6K spike with the HD800 phones either.  The frequency chart does not show it and I do not hear it.  I do wonder sometimes if these beliefs become legendary because of the internet's "echo" levels.

 

[AlanYWM]

For various TT owners that amp, what happends if you don't and run direct to TT? What happends when you do? I'm not trying to start a no amp amp argument and don't want to put anyone on the spot.
Lastly not trying to direct the line of talk here but continue with examples.

 
For the sake of repeating  

 I will say from my own experience, based on what I hear, adding an amp does improve my listening pleasure with the TT. The two things I can hear improved are the bass and treble. The bass is tighter and more defined and there is better extension in the treble.
 
For those sitting on the fence, I can only say this : I am sure Rob did not put those outputs in the TT for nothing. So give it a try and if you do not like the sound, just stick with the TT.
 
Please do not get me wrong. I am not saying that the TT is not a good DAC/Amp. It is good. But so is the Chord Hugo. To me, there is no such thing as a perfect sound. We all hear things differently. This hobby is about finding the ideal sound – for our listening pleasure.
 
Just to be clear, I am from the camp that thinks that the sound of TT and even the mighty Dave can be improved upon. Just that with the Dave, one needs to be more discerning as to the components used.
 
Again, this is based on my ears and experience. YMMV.

 

[JaZZ]

 

For various TT owners that amp, what happends if you don't and run direct to TT? What happends when you do? I'm not trying to start a no amp amp argument and don't want to put anyone on the spot.
Lastly not trying to direct the line of talk here but continue with examples.

 
For the sake of repeating  

 I will say from my own experience, based on what I hear, adding an amp does improve my listening pleasure with the TT. The two things I can hear improved are the bass and treble. The bass is tighter and more defined and there is better extension in the treble.
 
For those sitting on the fence, I can only say this : I am sure Rob did not put those outputs in the TT for nothing. So give it a try and if you do not like the sound, just stick with the TT.
 
Please do not get me wrong. I am not saying that the TT is not a good DAC/Amp. It is good. But so is the Chord Hugo. To me, there is no such thing as a perfect sound. We all hear things differently. This hobby is about finding the ideal sound – for our listening pleasure.
 
Just to be clear, I am from the camp that thinks that the sound of TT and even the mighty Dave can be improved upon. Just that with the Dave, one needs to be more discerning as to the components used.
 
Again, this is based on my ears and experience. YMMV.

 
«Those outputs» are meant to feed a power amp in a two-channel speaker system.
 
I can tell you that you can't «improve» the signal from DAVE – as little as you can «improve» any signal. Don't forget that with these Chord DACs/headphone amps you don't replace/bypass the built-in (line-stage!) amp when you add a headphone amp, instead you re-amplify the given signal that's meant to drive headphones directly and has more than enough power to do so in 99% of the cases.
 
I'm not speaking from an ideological standpoint – since I advocate any adaptation of the sound to one's own sonic ideal –, but from a technical viewpoint: As long as you haven't tried to «improve»/adapt the sound from the headphone out to your liking and to match the sonic characteristic/tonal balance of your headphone with a more plausible method – a software equalizer –, you don't know how «good» your headphones can sound even without addition of euphonic distortion. Rob Watts is absolutely right in explaining how the latter can lead to a pleasing and more spectacular sound – at the expense of transparency. So why not benefit from the theoretically best method!?
 
Somehow I don't understand people who insist in using amps for equalizing purposes and at the same time strictly refuse to use equalizers (some of them even based on a «puristic» approach!). Amps are heavily overrated. Even Rob Watts concedes: No amp sounds neutral (the difference between direct drive and your added amp is the contribution of the latter) and absolutely transparent. Not even cables do. And with that in mind it should be easy to decide for as little electronics components in the signal path as possible. Granted: doing so won't offer you the same sonic characteristics as the amplifier route you're used to – fortunately! (from the perspective of a perfectionist).
 
One caveat addresses balanced headphone drive. It's still not clear if and how (much) this can improve the sound compared to single-ended drive. However, even if there's a substantial gain, I can't imagine that it compensates enough for the loss of transparency by the added electronics components themselves.

 

[Whazzzup]

Thanks Allan and jazz. The issue for me is theoretical and emotive in its ideal. Theoretically I understand the pure signal path from a dac amp direct to hp. I do not beleive that eq alone can make mojo sound like Dave just to leave the brothers Hugo out of this for this extreme example. On the emotive level I can see why an amp could produce a fuller tonal experience that to a listener negates the signal degradation that will ensue. I don't doubt the experiences of listeners on both sides from Allan to genomen with their TT. I don't have access to the hp amps I may be interested in as they are made direct to order from the USA, to test myself.
Being a little OCD the desire to acquire additional components may be strong but my enjoyment of TT as is, is undeniable. Lots of engineering effort has gone into all components of this hobby, the belief of improving the listening experience is the end result, and I congratulate head fi for providing the forums in which one can get a better understanding of what may be important to achieve this sonic ideal.
Theoretically I guess I'll keep listening and reading. But to add to the component list, my cables do improve my listening experience as controversial as that may be, I don't understand exactly why or care, except that it does to me. So the jury is still out and look forward to others input.

 

[JaZZ]

Thanks Allan and jazz. The issue for me is theoretical and emotive in its ideal. Theoretically I understand the pure signal path from a dac amp direct to hp. I do not beleive that eq alone can make mojo sound like Dave just to leave the brothers Hugo out of this for this extreme example. On the emotive level I can see why an amp could produce a fuller tonal experience that to a listener negates the signal degradation that will ensue. I don't doubt the experiences of listeners on both sides from Allan to genomen with their TT. I don't have access to the hp amps I may be interested in as they are made direct to order from the USA, to test myself.
Being a little OCD the desire to acquire additional components may be strong but my enjoyment of TT as is, is undeniable. Lots of engineering effort has gone into all components of this hobby, the belief of improving the listening experience is the end result, and I congratulate head fi for providing the forums in which one can get a better understanding of what may be important to achieve this sonic ideal.
Theoretically I guess I'll keep listening and reading. But to add to the component list, my cables do improve my listening experience as controversial as that may be, I don't understand exactly why or care, except that it does to me. So the jury is still out and look forward to others input.

 
Of course there are other qualities than a specific frequency curve necessary to make a DAC sound like DAVE. But the point is: No amp is able to do that either. After all equalizing instead of coloring by re-amplifying lets you get the best out of your existing DAC by avoiding added distortion from added electronics and moreover a linearised sonic balance adapted to your headphone(s) – instead of an arbitrarily coloring amp thus (passably) synergizing with one specific headphone's characteristic.
 
Don't underestimate the power of equalizers! I'm rather sure most people would prefer the clear and natural warmth achieved by a linearized sonic balance (or a slightly sloping curve, depending on the sonic preferences) to the obfuscating warmth generated by harmonic distortion.
 
On the other hand, there's nothing wrong with liking amplifier colorations – to each his/her own. They also make the sound less critical in the sense of revealing sonic flaws in the chain. But most who advocate this approach aren't familiar with the actually more promising alternative.

 

[rgs9200m]

This amp-or-not thing just goes on and on, but all I know is that when I listen directly from my TT after a minute or so it just sounds sort of sharp in the vocals and upper mids and I go happily back to my big Rudistor amp and all is well again.
That's why I picked this amp in the first place a few years ago for it's sweetness, resolute bass, and fatigue-free nature, and that's the sound I like.
It's not the only amp I like (like some tube amps), but I choose an amp just because of it's particular sound. I can't deal with straight-wire-with-gain because it hurts my ears.
 
I actually feel that Chord spokesmen (and Chord advocates and fans) who insist that "it doesn't get any better than this" by plugging your headphones right into the TT may be unintentionally steering people away from the TT (and the Hugo too) 
who may not be happy with the sound but don't offer the chance of hearing how great it can sound to someone with an amp that suits their personal choice.
 
If I were selling this unit, I would want to offer the customer a choice instead of steering them into a single sonic signature that is theoretically, "objectively" best.
 
It sounds remarkable with my amp (and another amp I have), and that's that. I honestly would not be happy with just the direct feed.
 
One other point is that the Chord volume control seems to be stepped (at least it seems that way to me), and I am obsessive about getting just the right level, and I can't get it just right, so I need my good old continuous potentiometers on my amps. I have several low impedance headphones like Grados, so this is an issue.
 
(I did try some EQ with Jriver, but somehow when I use EQ, something just sounds "off" to me. Also, I should mention that I listen to a lot of popular music from various decades, so there is some digital glare inherent in these recordings, but that's the music I like a lot of the time, so I can't have a too ruthlessly revealing system here.)
 
Nevertheless, I love my TT, so thanks to everyone at Chord, I'm a happy camper.

 

[AlanYWM]

I am with you, rgs9200m. For me the argument against using an amp for the TT and even the Dave is very weak. Many things affect the sound in an audio chain. Even Chord has come out with amps for their dacs. Surely that would impact transparency since these amps are meant to drive speakers. To me, there is no such thing as perfect sound. It is all about what is pleasing to our ears and enjoying our music. Theory is just that. I dont listen to theory. I enjoy listening to my TT with my amp. The TT alone is fine but I enjoy it more with my amp in balanced mode. Does it matter if someone thinks otherwise? Absolutely not. But I am totally fine with anyone just preferring the TT alone. To each his own. If anything, I would like to hear the argument against using an amp from Chord directly

 

[JaZZ]

  This amp-or-not thing just goes on and on, but all I know is that when I listen directly from my TT after a minute or so it just sounds sort of sharp in the vocals and upper mids and I go happily back to my big Rudistor amp and all is well again.
That's why I picked this amp in the first place a few years ago for it's sweetness, resolute bass, and fatigue-free nature, and that's the sound I like.
It's not the only amp I like (like some tube amps), but I choose an amp just because of it's particular sound. I can't deal with straight-wire-with-gain because it hurts my ears.
 
I actually feel that Chord spokesmen (and Chord advocates and fans) who insist that "it doesn't get any better than this" by plugging your headphones right into the TT may be unintentionally steering people away from the TT (and the Hugo too) 
who may not be happy with the sound but don't offer the chance of hearing how great it can sound to someone with an amp that suits their personal choice.
  (I did try some EQ with Jriver, but somehow when I use EQ, something just sounds "off" to me. Also, I should mention that I listen to a lot of popular music from various decades, so there is some digital glare inherent in these recordings, but that's the music I like a lot of the time, so I can't have a too ruthlessly revealing system here.)

 
As I said, there's nothing wrong with liking the pleasing colorations introduced by additional amplification that make the sound more forgiving in terms of tonal flaws in the chain (mainly caused by the headphones, but even the DAC itself isn't entirely excluded, and of course the recording belongs to the factors, too). I understand this approach. It's just that more than often the claim «you need an amp to maximize the sound of your headphone» comes up in the context of Chord DACs with headphone output, irrespective of the impossibility to bypass the internal «amp». Together with the «not enough power» argument.
 
If your RudiStor sounds anything like the RP5cav I've once had in my system for two weeks (on loan from a friend), I understand that you're not happy without it. It is maybe the most euphonic sounding amp I've heard. Everything was coated with a shiny gloss. Details weren't really polished away, but massively smoothed. The music sounded spectacular and liquid-smooth at the same time, very ear-friendly, but lacked the third dimension and in particular immediacy, thus the soul that I need for a deep involvement. On the other hand it's definitely an ideal amp for concealing tonal flaws and guaranteeing a stress-free listening experience.
 
I was just proposing an alternative approach which is technically much more appropriate: equalizing. Now you tried it with JRiver... but let me tell you that halfheartedly trying is prone to fail. It takes careful and intensive dedication over an extended period to finally get to the point. Note that it's not about equalizing the signal from the DAC, but equalizing the signal for your nonlinear headphones to match your ears and your sonic ideals.
 
 

I am with you, rgs9200m. For me the argument against using an amp for the TT and even the Dave is very weak. Many things affect the sound in an audio chain. Even Chord has come out with amps for their dacs. Surely that would impact transparency since these amps are meant to drive speakers. To me, there is no such thing as perfect sound. It is all about what is pleasing to our ears and enjoying our music. Theory is just that. I dont listen to theory. I enjoy listening to my TT with my amp. The TT alone is fine but I enjoy it more with my amp in balanced mode. Does it matter if someone thinks otherwise? Absolutely not. But I am totally fine with anyone just preferring the TT alone. To each his own. If anything, I would like to hear the argument against using an amp from Chord directly

 
If you think that speaker amps alter the sound more than headphone amps, that's an inappropriate assumption. After all headphone amps have the better precondition due to the lower power requirements, at least with respect to the price.
 
As already mentioned, I absolutely advocate tayloring the sound of your gear to your liking. I'm not strictly against re-amping the signal if you like the resulting sound. I'm just telling that you don't improve it objectively, in the sense of high fidelity, by doing so. It all depends on your sonic ideals. If you like a more pleasing and forgiving interpretation of the original recording, it's certainly a logical approach. But if you're interested in a sound as close to the original recording as it gets and nevertheless without unnatural harshness (but with preserved harshness if it's in the recording), there are alternatives waiting to get explored (if you dare).
 
And BTW, apart from equalizing there's another component that has an often underestimated impact on the sound: cables. You would be surprised how much a good/matching headphone cable contributes to an ear-friendly sonic experience. Since no cable is absolutely neutral and none of them can be called more neutral than any other, you're in fact entitled to use any cable without questioning the degree of coloration or smoothing it adds.