[miketlse]

  Hmm. We use 3v OP so that you can use passive pre-amps - but you are creating problems by adding a passive volume control.
 
Its probably best to use a digital volume control with Foobar 2k. If you can try, evaluate both options.
 
Rob

 
Rob,
 
When I mentioned a passive preamp, I was thinking in terms of something simple to DIY, ie basically two variable potentiometers (one per channel), just two reduce the 2Qute output voltage.
The only problems I can envisage, are shielding the wires and components from RFI, but surely a simple small metal case would be sufficient.
Maybe passive preamp was the wrong term for me to use.
 
You have made me concerned, that even a simple solution like this, still contains hidden problems.

 

[Mark UX]

   
Rob,
 
When I mentioned a passive preamp, I was thinking in terms of something simple to DIY, ie basically two variable potentiometers (one per channel), just two reduce the 2Qute output voltage.
The only problems I can envisage, are shielding the wires and components from RFI, but surely a simple small metal case would be sufficient.
Maybe passive preamp was the wrong term for me to use.
 
You have made me concerned, that even a simple solution like this, still contains hidden problems.

 
Hello @miketlse. Yes, the term "pre-amp" I used is technically wrong, since the signal is not pre-amplified in any way, I think a more proper term would be "volume attenuator": a device that takes the output voltage from 2Qute DAC, and without any electronic power, attenuates it. I was researching yesterday about this. Here is one I really like it:
 
http://www.tisburyaudio.co.uk/mini-passive-preamplifier
 
Those Volume Attenuators are wrongly called "preamp" I think (signal is not amplified/pre-amplified in any way). So this Volume Attenuator responsibility would be to take the 3V ouput of 2Qute, and reduce it before reaches my powered monitors. Remember that all of this has one single objective: keep my music player (foobar2000 or others) at full volume, in order to be bit perfect audio.
 
But @Rob Watts says above that "you are creating problems by adding a passive volume control.", and I infer from him this:
 
1. 2Qute, due to its galvanic insolation, guarantees pristine audio with very low levels of noise, etc.
2. Any device dropped after the DAC is outside 2Qute jurisdisction, then the DAC can do nothing about it before its signal reaches the powered studio monitors. Example: a Volume Attenuator (passive preamp) could somehow add RF, distortion etc and then directly trigger that into the speakers.
 
@Rob Watts, I swear you that I would have prefered to pay 60-100 USD more for the 2Qute, if it included a built-in volume attenuator: this has resulted extremelly important in my setup. (we shouldn't delegate volume control's reponsibility to any music player software, because then we would need to "trust" in the software volume control not degradding the bit depth.
 
At this very moment, I discovered something that somehow is helping me out with volume control with the 2Qute:
 
In foobar2000, go to: Preferences > Advanced > Playback: "Volume  step (db)" option. If it is set to something like 0.3 or so, I have a very precise/delicated volume control by software....... but I am sure I am not having bit perfect audio. (I really do not like this approach, since what is the point of having a USD 1,795 DAC if you will end not having perfect bit audio?)
 
So I have two options right now: Keep using the  "Volume  step (db)" option in foobar2000, or add a passive volume attenuator after the DAC and before my powered speakers (at the high risk of degrading sound quality/adding noise, etc)

 

[miketlse]

   
So I have two options right now: Keep using the  "Volume  step (db)" option in foobar2000, or add a passive volume attenuator after the DAC and before my powered speakers (at the high risk of degrading sound quality/adding noise, etc)

 
You do have a third option, of buying some speakers that can handle the 3V input signal, but i expect that this would the most expensive option.
 
I think that the Tisbury solution is a low risk option, with little chance of discolouring your sound. 

 

[theveterans]

IMO, even if the source isn't bit perfect before it goes to the DAC, I doubt you'll hear the difference on an a/b test since the WTA filter will upsample the signal before the DAC sees it

 

[henriks]

I want to know if any of you did find a solution for 2Qute with splitte/cable/box to 2 or more amps?

 

[miketlse]

  I want to know if any of you did find a solution for 2Qute with splitte/cable/box to 2 or more amps?

 
Have a look at this post (and the following few related posts).
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/717314/rca-y-splitter-box-1-in-2-out#post_10522672

 

[martyn73]

Is the 2Qute's lower dynamic range compared to the Mojo (119dB compared with 125dB) and DACs using the TI PCM1795 chip (dB123) noticeable in practice? I guess Mojo's warmer sound may hide some differences, but this difference in specification and price may be off-putting for those thinking of upgrading from Mojo to 2Qute for use solely as a desktop DAC.

 

[Beolab]

Regardless of spec, the 2Qute sounds like the TT if you are using a transparent pre amp with USB input on the 2Qute in my opinion, it does sound dam good.

 

[martyn73]

Regardless of spec, the 2Qute sounds like the TT if you are using a transparent pre amp with USB input on the 2Qute in my opinion, it does sound dam good.

Hi, I would use the 2Qute connected to my PC via USB with a Stax SRM-727II and SR-007A headphones.

 

[Beolab]

That sounds as a perfect synergi combo in my ears.

 

[martyn73]

Thanks, that may be so. I thought you didn't like the Hugo?

 

[Beolab]

The funny thing is that the 2Qute doesn't sound like the Hugo, it sounds much more organic and vivid with greater precision than the Hugo in my opinion through A-B testing.
It sounding darn close to the TT in my opinion, and got the similar sound as the DAVE, on certen tracks, but on more advanced / complex music there is not even a competition.

 

[Starcruncher]

 
 
Received my 2Qute a few days ago. For various reasons, the only amp - besides my M-Audio AV40 monitors - that I can connect at the moment is this little Fiio. It totally works for my Savants. But it is just silly.
 
In regards to the Chord sound, I have read, mostly on the Mojo thread, that Mojo is about 90% of the Hugo. I have never heard Hugo, but since 2Qute is essentially the same DAC (right??), I would, so far, not say there is just a 10% difference between the two devices. In these early stages, with admittedly subpar amp and speaker pairings, the 2Qute sound is more refined and leans more to my current detail-oriented tastes. Like at least 12% more

 
Once I am done moving, I believe the better gear I will set up will truly highlight 2Qute's character. Can't wait. 
 
P.S. Mojo is still awesome in every respect. It goes above and beyond for portable use. I could have been happy with it at home, but a weak £ is enticing for an American expat

 

[Beolab]

Received my 2Qute a few days ago. For various reasons, the only amp - besides my M-Audio AV40 monitors - that I can connect at the moment is this little Fiio. It totally works for my Savants. But it is just silly.

In regards to the Chord sound, I have read, mostly on the Mojo thread, that Mojo is about 90% of the Hugo. I have never heard Hugo, but since 2Qute is essentially the same DAC (right??), I would, so far, not say there is just a 10% difference between the two devices. In these early stages, with admittedly subpar amp and speaker pairings, the 2Qute sound is more refined and leans more to my current detail-oriented tastes. Like at least 12% more

Once I am done moving, I believe the better gear I will set up will truly highlight 2Qute's character. Can't wait. 

P.S. Mojo is still awesome in every respect. It goes above and beyond for portable use. I could have been happy with it at home, but a weak £ is enticing for an American expat

Read my above post of what i think about the 2Qute vs Hugo

 

[Starcruncher]

Read my above post of what i think about the 2Qute vs Hugo

 
I certainly did and really appreciate the comparisons to all three of Chord's high end DACs, especially the DAVE because there are far fewer of them in the wild than the others. The way you describe 2Qute, "organic" and "vivid", is exactly what I want in my sound. And that it's closer to the TT is nice to hear as well if we're talking about cost and performance value. I take comfort in your assessment. 
 
Plus, I just really like Chord gear. Noob fanboy here.