[romaz]

Good to read that you have not altogether abandoned this site romaz,
I vaguely remember you saying that HUGO 2 via Blu2 was better than Dave on its own. Or does my memory fail me?
Having heard DAVE/BLU2 and being very impressed but also a bit confused by some aspects of the combo, I had my first audition of Qutest today both on its own and via BLU2.
And what I heard impressed me even on its own, enough to buy one.
The Qutest not the Blu2.
On its own it was clearly better than both my DAC 2 and HUGO and via BLU2 it was a very strong performer indeed with rbcd discs.
Qutest looks a bit like a mini Dave and even with the relatively cheap rca cable ,Chord Clearway, I bought to be able to use it via the headphone amp section of my DAC 2 I am happy to report that there is a very noticable increase in both low level resolution and clearly more accurate rendition of acoustic instruments via my HEK V2 than either of my other two travel dacs this winter can deliver.
Up to 8 months of travel every winter makes a DAVE/Blu2 combo not very likely in my case . But maybe the Qutest and an upcoming M-scaler at a reasonable price will prove to be the ideal compromise for my personal needs.
Close enough to SOTA but still quite transportable.
Any comments on Qutest from you ?
Have you tried it via BLU2?
Cheers from Christer in Singapore currently enjoying both recorded and live music a lot.

Hi Chris,

Rob will tell you based on his own listening that DAVE is still considerably more transparent than BluHugo2, especially when it comes to depth. I have no reason to doubt him although I have not yet done this comparison in my own system to know just how big this gap is. Having said that, the combination of BluHugo2 is more enjoyable to me than DAVE by itself and so for those looking to add M-scaler to their Hugo2 or Qutest, I would say that you should definitely give this consideration. I have personally not yet heard the Qutest but purely as DACs, Rob says Hugo2 and Qutest are supposed to be equivalent.

 

[Triode User]

It's fine that you have your opinions. You certainly have the right to voice them. It's interesting, however, how you routinely denigrate and even ridicule the findings and opinions of others about things you have never heard.

We have all been guilty of fooling ourselves into thinking that if someone's observation doesn't fit our paradigm of how something is supposed to sound, then it can't be real. The irony is that this is the antithesis of science and scientific inquiry. As a good friend reminded me recently, science is about humility, first and foremost. It is about admitting that we do not have a perfect understanding of the world around us. It is with this in mind that we attempt to devise a disciplined method of inquiry involving hypothesis, observation, theory and proof. And then revisit with further observation to make sure the theory holds up over time because rarely are theories perfect.

Regarding cables, a perfect cable would "do no harm" and whatever is at the input end would appear completely unchanged at the output end. Disregarding the impact of RF for a moment, the only cable that can do this would have zero resistance, zero capacitance, and zero inductance. The only cable that could approach such characteristics would be a superconductor and as far as I am aware, none of us are using such cables in our audio systems. That would mean that all cables will cause harm to the signal -- it becomes a matter of how much. As has been suggested, the fact that you can't hear differences amongst cables would suggest your system isn't resolving enough to reveal these differences or your ears aren't or both. To suggest that you know how every cable in the world sounds based on your half day experience of listening to a certain manufacturer's line of cables is rather amusing.

Regarding Jay's (AudioBacon) assessment of the impact of cables with his Chord DAVE, I will say this. With all due respect, his standard review setup (which consists of his Chord DAVE directly driving his pair of Omega Alnicos) is much more resolving and more transparent than your setup. I have had your Pass Labs XA30.8 in my home. Further to that, I have had quite a few of their products in my home for audition recently including the XA60.8 and XA100.8 monoblocks. At the present time, I have their X350.8 in my home along with their new XP-12 and XP-22 preamps just because I was curious to hear them. As much as I love the Pass Labs sound, I have yet to hear any setup from Pass Labs that is anywhere close to being as resolving and transparent as Rob's DACs directly driving speakers and Rob himself can attest to this. When I choose to hear the full magnitude of difference amongst cables, servers, etc, almost without fail, it is my setup of one of Rob's DACs directly driving speakers that allows me to hear it best.

As far as how good Jay's ears are, I have this to say. I have known Jay for a few years now. We met here on Head-Fi through PMs but we have also crossed paths on a few occasions at audio shows across the country including various Can Jams, the LA Audio Show, and RMAF. I assumed that, as a reviewer, because he does a lot of disciplined comparative listening, his ears are probably well tuned to hear differences between equipment but I didn't know just how good his ears were until this weekend. Over the past few days, both Rob Watts and Jay have been at my home in California and we have been doing quite a bit of comparative listening (including blind testing). Because a few of Rob's prototypes are involved, neither Jay nor myself will be making any public comments about what we have heard although I don't think Rob will mind if I say that we have compared (and are still comparing) the impact of various USB cables, BNC cables and even line conditioners and in my system, they absolutely make a difference. Sometimes the difference has been subtle, sometimes not subtle at all, and sometimes the difference was completely unexpected meaning had we assumed that we already knew it all and had not even bothered to test, we would have missed out on some very important revelations. To paraphrase Rob, don't assume you know how something's going to sound before the needle hits the groove.

Lastly, regarding expensive cables, we all know your stand on this and that you have no respect for expensive cables and so give it a rest already. If someone wants to share their experience with a cable with their Blu2, regardless of whether it is expensive or not, then let them do so in peace. I can't tell you how many PMs I have received from Blu2 owners about cables who have been afraid of posting publicly on this thread because of fear of ridicule from you.

Thank you for your post. However, I think that you will recognise that there is a huge amount of smoke and mirrors in this game and likewise I get exasperated by posters urging people to spend money on various items based on statements that are presented as fact when they are clearly no such thing. I respect your views but I have also seen the power of suggestion at work on what we think we hear. There needs to balancing voice. If you don't like the counter view being expressed then so be it but I will continue to voice my opinions. Head-Fi is not a 'safe place' where debate or counter view is stifled. Many months ago I was reminded by the mods that if I say that a fool and his money are easily parted I should make it clear that I am not targeting that comment at any particular individual and I am happy to confirm that here and now.

Just on the matter of power cables and conditioning, I think we are all perhaps guilty of not being sufficiently aware that no two mains supplies are the same. For instance I have a high voltage step down transformer immediately outside my house which is shared by only two other houses and nothing else within half a mile. That might have some influence on why I continue not to detect any differences when using exotic mains cables or conditioners. To suggest that perhaps I cannot hear a difference because my system is not revealing enough is verging on the condescending. Equally just because you hear a difference with certain power cables or conditioning does not mean that anyone else will get that in their system, no matter how 'revealing' it is.

We are in danger of sidetracking this thread. I have noted your comments and suggest we leave it at that.

 

[analogmusic]

quite confused by Christer's post
So he liked Blu2/Dave but confused by some aspects, then heard Qutest with Blu2 and without Blu2 and then bought Qutest?

Blimey - as confusing to me as the Ferrites talk on this thread.

 

[Christer]

Hi Chris,

Rob will tell you based on his own listening that DAVE is still considerably more transparent than BluHugo2, especially when it comes to depth. I have no reason to doubt him although I have not yet done this comparison in my own system to know just how big this gap is. Having said that, the combination of BluHugo2 is more enjoyable to me than DAVE by itself and so for those looking to add M-scaler to their Hugo2 or Qutest, I would say that you should definitely give this consideration. I have personally not yet heard the Qutest but purely as DACs, Rob says Hugo2 and Qutest are supposed to be equivalent.

Thanks for your kind and honest response.
At the level of performance M-scaler adds to the equation a clear winner may indeed be difficult to decide upon.
Depth of course only being one very important aspect of SOTA SQ with acoustic music imho.

Personally I am more concerned with accurate timbres and tonality with acoustic instruments and the human voice than with depth.
I am of course planning to use my Qutest in my home system too.And I suspect that in a home system Qutest might be a better idea than HUGO2 since it has galvanic isolation.

I will also be able to use my reference cables both via my headphone amps and via speakers, which unfortunately my HUGO gave me lots of problems with.
PS: Has Rob given any hints on when a separate lower cost M-scaler might become available?
Cheers and keep us posted on your listening sessions and trials.
Christer

 

[Christer]

quite confused by Christer's post
So he liked Blu2/Dave but confused by some aspects, then heard Qutest with Blu2 and without Blu2 and then bought Qutest?

Blimey - as confusing to me as the Ferrites talk on this thread.

I heard several examples of clipping with non limited full dynamic range large scale symphonic masters via DAVE/BLU2.
The reason I bought Qutest is because it is a very clear upgrade from what I have even on its own, and I don't need a cd player only an M-scaler.
I hope my posts above explains my stand and reasons a bit too.
Cheers Christer

 

[romaz]

Thank you for your post. However, I think that you will recognise that there is a huge amount of smoke and mirrors in this game and likewise I get exasperated by posters urging people to spend money on various items based on statements that are presented as fact when they are clearly no such thing. I respect your views but I have also seen the power of suggestion at work on what we think we hear. There needs to balancing voice. If you don't like the counter view being expressed then so be it but I will continue to voice my opinions. Head-Fi is not a 'safe place' where debate or counter view is stifled. Many months ago I was reminded by the mods that if I say that a fool and his money are easily parted I should make it clear that I am not targeting that comment at any particular individual and I am happy to confirm that here and now.

Just on the matter of power cables and conditioning, I think we are all perhaps guilty of not being sufficiently aware that no two mains supplies are the same. For instance I have a high voltage step down transformer immediately outside my house which is shared by only two other houses and nothing else within half a mile. That might have some influence on why I continue not to detect any differences when using exotic mains cables or conditioners. To suggest that perhaps I cannot hear a difference because my system is not revealing enough is verging on the condescending. Equally just because you hear a difference with certain power cables or conditioning does not mean that anyone else will get that in their system, no matter how 'revealing' it is.

We are in danger of sidetracking this thread. I have noted your comments and suggest we leave it at that.

You've completely missed my point. It's not smoke and mirrors when someone is expressing their genuine experience about a product and how it relates to Blu2. I think we are all smart enough to realize that opinions expressed on this thread are opinions and nothing more and so, yes, YMMV and buyer beware. The issue of contention here is that you seem to routinely bully those who express their opinions about cables and their Blu2 purely because of the cost of these cables. Performance is one thing but value is in the eye of the beholder and so leave us to decide what has value and what does not. Unless you've actually heard the product that is being discussed, how do you have the right to dismiss it as smoke and mirrors?

As far as "verging on condescending," my comment was no less condescending than your pointed barb against Jay at AudioBacon and others who express favorable opinions about expensive cables. It's not my style at all to make such derogatory comments and so I'll leave it there as I believe this point has been made. I'll end by saying that in general, I enjoy your posts and I think you have much to offer that is informative and helpful. Your condescending comments about products you have not heard, however, are not helpful at all.

 

[Triode User]

You've completely missed my point. It's not smoke and mirrors when someone is expressing their genuine experience about a product and how it relates to Blu2. I think we are all smart enough to realize that opinions expressed on this thread are opinions and nothing more and so, yes, YMMV and buyer beware. The issue of contention here is that you seem to routinely bully those who express their opinions about cables and their Blu2 purely because of the cost of these cables. Performance is one thing but value is in the eye of the beholder and so leave us to decide what has value and what does not. Unless you've actually heard the product that is being discussed, how do you have the right to dismiss it as smoke and mirrors?

As far as "verging on condescending," my comment was no less condescending than your pointed barb against Jay at AudioBacon and others who express favorable opinions about expensive cables. It's not my style at all to make such derogatory comments and so I'll leave it there as I believe this point has been made. I'll end by saying that in general, I enjoy your posts and I think you have much to offer that is informative and helpful. Your condescending comments about products you have not heard, however, are not helpful at all.

Roy, my dig (condescending if you like) at expensive cables is where people simply equate cost with quality. All I ask is that they evaluate what works for them rather than assuming that more expensive always equals better. I will however never back down on my criticism of pseudo scientific justifications for many cables.

On reflection my post that started this off was not fair on Jay and I apologise for that. Please pass that on to him. I have edited the post accordingly.

Enough said, lets move on.

 

[romaz]

Roy, my dig (condescending if you like) at expensive cables is where people simply equate cost with quality. All I ask is that they evaluate what works for them rather than assuming that more expensive always equals better. I will however never back down on my criticism of pseudo scientific justifications for many cables.

On reflection my post that started this off was not fair on Jay and I apologise for that. Please pass that on to him. I have edited the post accordingly.

Enough said, lets move on.

Fair enough, Nick.

 

[romaz]

Thanks for your kind and honest response.
At the level of performance M-scaler adds to the equation a clear winner may indeed be difficult to decide upon.
Depth of course only being one very important aspect of SOTA SQ with acoustic music imho.

Personally I am more concerned with accurate timbres and tonality with acoustic instruments and the human voice than with depth.
I am of course planning to use my Qutest in my home system too.And I suspect that in a home system Qutest might be a better idea than HUGO2 since it has galvanic isolation.

I will also be able to use my reference cables both via my headphone amps and via speakers, which unfortunately my HUGO gave me lots of problems with.
PS: Has Rob given any hints on when a separate lower cost M-scaler might become available?
Cheers and keep us posted on your listening sessions and trials.
Christer

Both depth and timbre are impacted by timing accuracy and so if timing accuracy is not there, then both properties suffer. Of course, these qualities can be impacted/degraded by the components that follow the DAC including the preamp, amp, transducers and cables, but if it's not properly reproduced by the DAC first, then it becomes difficult (if not impossible) to retrieve it upstream, especially depth.

I don't know when a lower cost M-scaler will actually be available. Probably only Chord knows that.

 

[maxh22]

Roy, have you built your custom server yet? Or are you still using the modded Mac Mini?

 

[learpot]

Using the BluDave's CD Player as a reference, I have tested most of these combinations:

To clarify: ur is Sonore ultraRendu; ir is ISO Regen from Uptone Audio; switch is TP-Link TL-SG108E

1. ur only, no iso regen or switch->sounds the closest to BluDave CD player, I would say this is the perfect match.

2. ur + ir, no switch->lose micro dynamics, but better than option 3.

3. ur + switch, no ir->lose micro dynamics further, but better than option 4.

4. ur + ir + switch->worst comparing to 1,2,3.

5. ir and uspcb x 2 only, no switch or ur->sounds excellent, possibly the best usb sound you could get from mac mini, however, this sound is different from the BluDave CD player's sound in terms of soundstage, micro/macro dynamics, appears to be very transparent, more punchier and a little narrower but deeper soundstage. Again, not as authoritative as option 1.

6. wireworld USB to ir-> still sounds excellent but not as transparent as 5.

7. wireworld USB only and USPCB only->not as good compared to 6.

8. software: amarra, hqplayer, audirvana, jriver->hqplayer and audirvana sounds about the same for bitperfect playback, but hqplayer remote control system is non-existent on IOS. Audirvana has an awesome app to for remote control on Iphone and ipad. Also the apple tv controller works well with Aurdirvana. For the above reasons, I will stick to Audirvana permanently. May test others or may not.

9. high voltage LPS 1.2 vs low voltage LPS 1.2 output mode->pending

10. Mac mini wifi on off change->cannot perform ATM because ur will not work without internet connection. A+ remote will not work without WIFI bridge, ordered a thunderbolt to ethernet adapter to test option 12.

11. different Ethernet cables->tried a generic $5 cable and $45 Supra CAT 8 cable when using option 1, the difference is huge, the Supra CAT 8 cable match extremely close to BluDave's CD player performance, generic Ethernet cable generates a narrower soundstage, overall lower resolution and an unfocused sound signature.

12. bridged Ethernet mode from Romaz->see 10.

13. deep cycle battery powered mac mini->May not need.

14. stealth standard power cable-> ultrarendu->No change.

15. stealth standard power cable-> Teradak ->Mac mini->No change.

16. diy 10 gauge Ethernet cable with some soldering->Pending.

17. MacBook on battery vs Mac mini on LPS-> macbook sounds a little lean and lack of energy, mac mini more favorable but only by a very small margin.

18. different hqplayer filter changes->no need to do this really.


Findings:

For testing condition, both ir and ur are powered by LPS 1.2 with OEM DC cable.The DSD music does not have good synergy with Chord Blu MK II. When DSD files are fed through the Blu2, the soundstage and micro/macro dynamics seems to be compressed. The best DSD playback route for me is Mac mini->Wireworld Platinum USB->ir->Dave. Ir does improve the USB input of DAVE significantly. PCM files sound best when fed through Blu 2 with ur. DSD files sound best when fed through Dave with ir. Switch and ir do not appear to have a positive impact on ur if at all.


It took me 5-6 hours to complete the above test, I picked songs with good dynamics and details that I had listened more than hundreds of times. I selected those minute details that I could only hear clearly from the BluDave CD playback, which I was never able to perceive in past few years. There might be some additional benefits of changing those DC cable of the LPS 1.2s, obtaining a sotm dcbl-cat7 cable, upgrading BNC cables. But I would say that, Macmini directly connected to ur with Supra CAT 8 sounds at least 95% similar to BluDave CD player performance. Even if you compare songs from seconds to seconds, it's still extremely hard to tell them apart(soundstage, instrumental separation, micro/macro dynamics, low/mid/high resolution).


Option 1 is the closest one. The connection does not look very pretty but sounds perfectly. Now I need to focus on listening to music only.


Cheers!

 

[dac64]

IMHO, I am 100% sure that the P10 improves the sound quality of my BluDave system at least by 20-30%. Maybe electricity in UK is better than US...

Another option you may want to try out is to rewire some 230V outlets for those universal equipment, e.g. BluDave, Mac, etc, that would be interesting.

 

[dac64]

ur - USB Regen?
ir - ISO Regen?
Or ???

 

[musickid]

UR ultrarendu big brother to MR microrendu

 

[Triode User]

Using the BluDave's CD Player as a reference, I have tested most of these combinations:

To clarify: ur is Sonore ultraRendu; ir is ISO Regen from Uptone Audio; switch is TP-Link TL-SG108E

1. ur only, no iso regen or switch->sounds the closest to BluDave CD player, I would say this is the perfect match.

2. ur + ir, no switch->lose micro dynamics, but better than option 3.

3. ur + switch, no ir->lose micro dynamics further, but better than option 4.

4. ur + ir + switch->worst comparing to 1,2,3.

5. ir and uspcb x 2 only, no switch or ur->sounds excellent, possibly the best usb sound you could get from mac mini, however, this sound is different from the BluDave CD player's sound in terms of soundstage, micro/macro dynamics, appears to be very transparent, more punchier and a little narrower but deeper soundstage. Again, not as authoritative as option 1.

6. wireworld USB to ir-> still sounds excellent but not as transparent as 5.

7. wireworld USB only and USPCB only->not as good compared to 6.

8. software: amarra, hqplayer, audirvana, jriver->hqplayer and audirvana sounds about the same for bitperfect playback, but hqplayer remote control system is non-existent on IOS. Audirvana has an awesome app to for remote control on Iphone and ipad. Also the apple tv controller works well with Aurdirvana. For the above reasons, I will stick to Audirvana permanently. May test others or may not.

9. high voltage LPS 1.2 vs low voltage LPS 1.2 output mode->pending

10. Mac mini wifi on off change->cannot perform ATM because ur will not work without internet connection. A+ remote will not work without WIFI bridge, ordered a thunderbolt to ethernet adapter to test option 12.

11. different Ethernet cables->tried a generic $5 cable and $45 Supra CAT 8 cable when using option 1, the difference is huge, the Supra CAT 8 cable match extremely close to BluDave's CD player performance, generic Ethernet cable generates a narrower soundstage, overall lower resolution and an unfocused sound signature.

12. bridged Ethernet mode from Romaz->see 10.

13. deep cycle battery powered mac mini->May not need.

14. stealth standard power cable-> ultrarendu->No change.

15. stealth standard power cable-> Teradak ->Mac mini->No change.

16. diy 10 gauge Ethernet cable with some soldering->Pending.

17. MacBook on battery vs Mac mini on LPS-> macbook sounds a little lean and lack of energy, mac mini more favorable but only by a very small margin.

18. different hqplayer filter changes->no need to do this really.


Findings:

For testing condition, both ir and ur are powered by LPS 1.2 with OEM DC cable.The DSD music does not have good synergy with Chord Blu MK II. When DSD files are fed through the Blu2, the soundstage and micro/macro dynamics seems to be compressed. The best DSD playback route for me is Mac mini->Wireworld Platinum USB->ir->Dave. Ir does improve the USB input of DAVE significantly. PCM files sound best when fed through Blu 2 with ur. DSD files sound best when fed through Dave with ir. Switch and ir do not appear to have a positive impact on ur if at all.


It took me 5-6 hours to complete the above test, I picked songs with good dynamics and details that I had listened more than hundreds of times. I selected those minute details that I could only hear clearly from the BluDave CD playback, which I was never able to perceive in past few years. There might be some additional benefits of changing those DC cable of the LPS 1.2s, obtaining a sotm dcbl-cat7 cable, upgrading BNC cables. But I would say that, Macmini directly connected to ur with Supra CAT 8 sounds at least 95% similar to BluDave CD player performance. Even if you compare songs from seconds to seconds, it's still extremely hard to tell them apart(soundstage, instrumental separation, micro/macro dynamics, low/mid/high resolution).


Option 1 is the closest one. The connection does not look very pretty but sounds perfectly. Now I need to focus on listening to music only.


Cheers!

Well done for having the stamina to do that. I know from personal experience that sessions like that can quickly lessen the will to live.

Can I just ask what cable you used from ur to Blu2? Sorry if you say it but I can’t see.