[simorag]

After 4+ years of using the Chord DAVE, I find myself as totally addicted to its crossfeed implementation.

In the early days, I did not want to try it because I had very underwhelming experiences with my previous attempts of using crosfeed (Foobar2000, Jriver, Roon), but after trying the DAVE version, there has been no going back for me.

I now use it typically at its maximum (3), and I feel it as a necessity with most if not all acoustic music (I mainly listen to classical).
The much increased depth of field, instrument focus and slightly darker / warmer sound are what makes the experience so special to me.

With electronic music or in general with heavily processed, modern genres, I sometimes like to revert to no crossfeed to enjoy an even larger, slightly more transparent and immersive soundstage. The other situation where I do not use crossfeed is with binaural recordings.

Apart from these cases, my addiction to DAVE's crossfeed has got the point that I find it very hard to compare the DAVE to other DACs, because the experience of listening through headphones is so dramatically different to my ears. I find downright annoying, for example, listening to vintage jazz recordings with hard panning, but even a simple cello solo track becomes so much less enjoyable.

I am curious to hear about what other DAVE user's experience is with this, so please speak out!

 

[adrianm]

Completely agree, I'm addicted to it as well. One of the reasons I got the Elite over the LCD-5 is how well they responded to the CF on Dave. That + much better synergy.
If it was not for the CF feature i might have considered an MSB or DCS dac as an upgrade. I don't think of the Bartok as an upgrade, but if the Rossini had that DCS expanse feature, I would be interested to try it out.

Edit: CF3 on all the time

 

[alxw0w]

On classical good recordings I'm using it like 99% of the time (cf3).
On other types of music only occasionally.

 

[stemiki]

Crossfeed 3 forever!

With the Abyss he especially improves the medium-low range where he gives him more body and weight.

It has this loudness effect ...

 

[nagi8404]

When I still had the DAVE I experimented with crossfeed. One day I was comparing different DACs and forgot that my DAVE still had crossfeed turned on. Obviously the DAVE sounded the most different until I realized it.

To me crossfeed made soundstage width smaller but with better depth. Crossfeed 1 was enough as I feel 2,3 is a bit too much. But at the end I just preferred no crossfeed with most recordings.

 

[TheAttorney]

I've previously stated on the DAVE thread that crossfeed is essential for me - especially with headphones that have a wide sound stage, such as my HEKse. When I connect these same headphones to a lesser amp (iFi MicroDSD) this inherently results in a smaller sound stage and there seems to be less need to provide CF, so there are a number or variables involved.

I think CF=3 gives the most accurate sound stage, particularly obvious when listening to classical orchestral recordings. But although DAVE's CF is the best that I've heard (from a small sample), it's not perfect, and I do notice an increasing loss in transparency (slight dulling of the sound) as CF increases. So I stick with CF2=2 as the best compromise. But CF=1 or 3 is fine too.

I've previously attributed this apparent loss in transparency to 3 possible causes:
1. A more realistic (but narrower) soundstage can appear less airy and "exciting"
2. The bass boost (from memory 1.1 to 1.9dB for CF1 to 3) results in a relative drop in HF
3. Loss of information inherent in any DSP - this is the only "negative" possible cause.
IMO, it's most likely to be a combination of all three. But the benefits outweigh the slight downside for me.

Not everyone gets on with CF, and some actually prefer the extra airiness and spaciousness of an overblown soundstage, but I maintain that, if they become accustomed to CF over a longer period, they would eventually realise how broken the sound is with no CF. This is of course dependent of the recording - some sound ok with no CF, some are borderline and some are dreadful.

In the next month or so, I'll be trying out some external amps and TOTL headphones. One of the amps on the list is an SPL Phonitor XE, which has a very flexible CF function that comes from a studio/professional background. I'm very interested to compare this analogue CF to DAVE's DSP CF.

 

[simorag]

I've previously stated on the DAVE thread that crossfeed is essential for me - especially with headphones that have a wide sound stage, such as my HEKse. When I connect these same headphones to a lesser amp (iFi MicroDSD) this inherently results in a smaller sound stage and there seems to be less need to provide CF, so there are a number or variables involved.

I think CF=3 gives the most accurate sound stage, particularly obvious when listening to classical orchestral recordings. But although DAVE's CF is the best that I've heard (from a small sample), it's not perfect, and I do notice an increasing loss in transparency (slight dulling of the sound) as CF increases. So I stick with CF2=2 as the best compromise. But CF=1 or 3 is fine too.

I've previously attributed this apparent loss in transparency to 3 possible causes:
1. A more realistic (but narrower) soundstage can appear less airy and "exciting"
2. The bass boost (from memory 1.1 to 1.9dB for CF1 to 3) results in a relative drop in HF
3. Loss of information inherent in any DSP - this is the only "negative" possible cause.
IMO, it's most likely to be a combination of all three. But the benefits outweigh the slight downside for me.

Not everyone gets on with CF, and some actually prefer the extra airiness and spaciousness of an overblown soundstage, but I maintain that, if they become accustomed to CF over a longer period, they would eventually realise how broken the sound is with no CF. This is of course dependent of the recording - some sound ok with no CF, some are borderline and some are dreadful.

In the next month or so, I'll be trying out some external amps and TOTL headphones. One of the amps on the list is an SPL Phonitor XE, which has a very flexible CF function that comes from a studio/professional background. I'm very interested to compare this analogue CF to DAVE's DSP CF.

Very beautifully written, and totally reflecting my feelings as well, except that I settled on CF 3 in most cases.
I believe I belong to that type of audiophile who is especially sensitive to spatial localization cues (and this is my main regret about not being able to set-up a proper 2 channel system in my house).

Below are a few examples where the CF is an obvious game changer - to me.
I simply could not enjoy the tracks below without CF, how transparent would be the sound and how accurate was the timbre, as I find the directionality of the sound and / or its diffused, lateralized imaging distracting if not downright annoying.

 

[adrianm]

I think CF=3 gives the most accurate sound stage, particularly obvious when listening to classical orchestral recordings. But although DAVE's CF is the best that I've heard (from a small sample), it's not perfect, and I do notice an increasing loss in transparency (slight dulling of the sound) as CF increases. So I stick with CF2=2 as the best compromise. But CF=1 or 3 is fine too.

I just checked today, while with my Z1R it was not apparent, with the Elites it is. I agree with this 100%. CF2 does sound a lot more focused, even if the soundstage is better with CF3. I now find myself switching between them all the time.

 

[Somatic]

Crossfeed 1 is very nice on the Dave. I used to crossfeed 2 sometimes on TT2.

 

[F208Frank]

Love that cross feed, and love tim hardaways or iversons cross over! Why did I even mention that, unsure! Just a happy mood today!

 

[Somatic]

Love that cross feed, and love tim hardaways or iversons cross over! Why did I even mention that, unsure! Just a happy mood today!

AI is legend. Love watching him play.