CHORD ELECTRONICS DAVE

[esimms86]

I must admit that I do care what a given product looks like. I love how DAVE looks for example! That does not mean that I think looks are more important than how it sounds - not at all! But the audio gear is going to end up in my living room when I buy it, so it might as well look decent while still sounding incredibly good! Even better is when it's well-built and can take a tank driving over it - who knows what's going to happen next
Above all I am thankful for audio engineers that make the awesome sound happen. But I thank all the people that make the products look so good too - I think it's an important part.

Now I am ready for an audiophil bashing

Well, yes, looks matter, especially when you share your living space with your significant other. Like many people, I have an attraction to McIntosh equipment with its blue lit large VU meters and, push comes to shove, I have to say their products look incredibly cool. Never owned any, however, and don't ever expect to. Most audio equipment, on the other hand, reside in your basic nondescript black boxes. Chord, of course, has their own idiosyncratic aesthetic that some love, some have a distaste for, and others consider to be "2qute." To my way of thinking, almost anything is tolerable in a listening room except for unsightly loudspeakers(again, in the eyes of the beholder).

 

[AndrewOld]

 

  Can anyone who has a DAVE tell me whether it is possible to directly select an input on the remote, or do you have to cycle through all the inputs using the arrow keys. The downloadable DAVE manual only mentions the latter.
   
  Also, can you directly control the volume on DAVE via USB - Audirvana has an option to control the volume on a DAC via USB if the DAC supports that, which could be useful.
   
  Thanks.!

 


Hmmm... I have to disagree with lovethatsound on this one. There is no direct input select as far as I can figure out off the Chord Remote for DAVE. Meaning that you can't click a button so that the DAVE is set to USB input and another button and the DAVE is set to Optical 2 input. You have to use the left-right buttons to cycle through all the inputs. I just tried it again with the Chord remote. So unless lovethatsound has a special trick, I'd love to know. This is a minor nuisance because it means I can't program the input select into my Logitech Harmony remote easily. But I don't mind cycling manually through for the correct input.

As for direct volume control via USB, I'm not aware of any. But Rob Watts may have more to say on this one. I have to admit, I just never tried in JRiver. But in my experience, for USB DACs that allow for direct volume control, like my soon-to-be-former Audioquest Dragonfly, the manual is quite explicit about this feature.

Thanks. Seems a bit annoying! Won't stop me buying one, but can't understand the problem since the remote for my TT lets you select an input directly using the numeric keys. Would have been nicer if they were labelled though.. Any chance you could try the numeric keys on your DAVE keypad? The downloadable manual says there is a manual for the DAVE remote with the product, but it isn't downloadable .. hence my questions. Also, is the DAVE remote just a plasticky multi-remote kinda thing? Or is it nice metal?

 

[Rob Watts]

Dave is unique in that there is no other control electronics apart from the FPGA powered by Dave's PSU. This meant I could reduce RF noise levels as another processor on a different clock is eliminated; but the downside is that I have to code for everything (including the display drivers too, the character generation and display interface is all done by the FPGA). I had planned to use the numbers from the remote, but I simply ran out of time.
 
Rob

 

[lovethatsound]

Can anyone who has a DAVE tell me whether it is possible to directly select an input on the remote, or do you have to cycle through all the inputs using the arrow keys. The downloadable DAVE manual only mentions the latter.


 


Also, can you directly control the volume on DAVE via USB - Audirvana has an option to control the volume on a DAC via USB if the DAC supports that, which could be useful.


 


Thanks.!

 


Hmmm... I have to disagree with lovethatsound on this one. There is no direct input select as far as I can figure out off the Chord Remote for DAVE. Meaning that you can't click a button so that the DAVE is set to USB input and another button and the DAVE is set to Optical 2 input. You have to use the left-right buttons to cycle through all the inputs. I just tried it again with the Chord remote. So unless lovethatsound has a special trick, I'd love to know. This is a minor nuisance because it means I can't program the input select into my Logitech Harmony remote easily. But I don't mind cycling manually through for the correct input.

As for direct volume control via USB, I'm not aware of any. But Rob Watts may have more to say on this one. I have to admit, I just never tried in JRiver. But in my experience, for USB DACs that allow for direct volume control, like my soon-to-be-former Audioquest Dragonfly, the manual is quite explicit about this feature.

You are right,i read his question wrong,many apologies.You have to use the arrows on the chord remote control.

 

[AuJames]

There has been lots of talk about Dynamic Range and how one DAC is not comparable to another because of misleading Data but I think I can compare two DACs that seem to come up again and again in this thread based off data published by the manufacturer or designer. We can read between the lines and get a real apples to apples comparison of Dynamic range!

1st up the Chord DAVE, per Rob Watts output is 6.8V RMS maximum 2.6uV noise 20 KHz bandwidth.

2nd up MSB Select II, digging trough the data-sheet and measurements posted on their site maximum output is 3.5V RMS maximum but noise is elusive, not directly specced. However we can make a few assumptions that looking at the data will get us close. The output is claimed to come directly from the DACs with no buffers or gain, the output is 75 Ohms, The output of their FFT does not seem to have any excess noise and is close to what I would expect to see from a 75 Ohm thermal noise source. The thermal noise of 75 Ohms probably dominates the output. Using the thermal noise calculator from Daycounter Inc. (google search for it) plugged in 35 C (a reasonable operating temperature) 20,000 Hz bandwidth and 75 Ohms, the result is 0.168 uV.

Now for our comparison. First we need to normalize the values because the DAVE has a greater maximum output than the Select II. So 3.5 V / 6.8 V * 2.6 uV = 1.34 uV.
So the normalized noise of the DAVE is 1.34 uV and the Select II is 0.168 uV. Now for the interesting part, it is easy to decrease the noise of a signal source by paralleling multiple signal sources. To decrease the source noise by 6.02 dB (half) you must parallel 4 sources. So convert the difference to dB we have 20 log(1.34 uV / 0.168 uV) = 18 dB now 18 dB / 6.02 dB = 3, so it will take 4 ^ 3 = 64 DAVE DACs to equal one Select II.

So, it appears it will take 64 Chord DAVEs to reach the dynamic range of 1 Select II, not a small difference.

 

[smial1966]

Perhaps you'd kindly explain to a non technically inclined audiophile what exactly your post purports to prove or infer?!?

There has been lots of talk about Dynamic Range and how one DAC is not comparable to another because of misleading Data but I think I can compare two DACs that seem to come up again and again in this thread based off data published by the manufacturer or designer. We can read between the lines and get a real apples to apples comparison of Dynamic range!

1st up the Chord DAVE, per Rob Watts output is 6.8V RMS maximum 2.6uV noise 20 KHz bandwidth.

2nd up MSB Select II, digging trough the data-sheet and measurements posted on their site maximum output is 3.5V RMS maximum but noise is elusive, not directly specced. However we can make a few assumptions that looking at the data will get us close. The output is claimed to come directly from the DACs with no buffers or gain, the output is 75 Ohms, The output of their FFT does not seem to have any excess noise and is close to what I would expect to see from a 75 Ohm thermal noise source. The thermal noise of 75 Ohms probably dominates the output. Using the thermal noise calculator from Daycounter Inc. (google search for it) plugged in 35 C (a reasonable operating temperature) 20,000 Hz bandwidth and 75 Ohms, the result is 0.168 uV.

Now for our comparison. First we need to normalize the values because the DAVE has a greater maximum output than the Select II. So 3.5 V / 6.8 V * 2.6 uV = 1.34 uV.
So the normalized noise of the DAVE is 1.34 uV and the Select II is 0.168 uV. Now for the interesting part, it is easy to decrease the noise of a signal source by paralleling multiple signal sources. To decrease the source noise by 6.02 dB (half) you must parallel 4 sources. So convert the difference to dB we have 20 log(1.34 uV / 0.168 uV) = 18 dB now 18 dB / 6.02 dB = 3, so it will take 4 ^ 3 = 64 DAVE DACs to equal one Select II.

So, it appears it will take 64 Chord DAVEs to reach the dynamic range of 1 Select II, not a small difference.

 

[ecwl]

I see AuJames is new to Head-Fi. Since he started opening the can of worms, I'm going to do a deep dive and speak my opinion as a hobbyist. I think it's safe to say that most of us do not know what measurement parameters affect sonic qualities of high-end DACs. Even if we assume AuJames's theoretical computations of dynamic range is correct for MSB Select II and is better than Chord DAVE, there are other factors. Stereophile has published measurements of MSB Analog DAC, DAC IV and Chord Mojo & Hugo TT. Does the fact that MSB DACs do not have flat frequency responses up to the Nyquist frequency for 44kHz music matter? Does the fact that the left-right channels for the MSB DACs on undithered 1kHz sine wave has a voltage difference of 15-50uV matter? Do the MSB DACs second/third and higher harmonics for 50Hz sine wave being higher at -90dB compared to -110dB matter?  Does the MSB DACs HF intermodulation noise (19kHz+20kHz) matter?
 
Unfortunately, for most hobbyist like us, we cannot have a DAC where we just turn these distortions (including dynamic range) on and off and listen to compare which parameters matter and which don't. Implied by Rob Watts in his previous comments in this forum, some of the distortion measurements that I described about MSB DACs on the Stereophile measurements are basically inherent in all ladder DAC designs because the limitations is because of ladder DACs themselves, not because of what MSB is or is not doing.
 
I've listened to Analog DAC which I didn't like but I thought the MSB DAC IV sounds great. But I definitely like the Chord DAVE better. Is it a matter of preference? Or are there some measurement parameters I prefer and others I don't care about?
 
Ultimately, since Rob Watts is pretty much one of the few people who can actually manipulate some of these measurement parameters and compare their impacts. So I think people on this forum who likes Chord DAVE trusts his comments that the measurement parameters he optimizes for are the ones that improves sound quality the most. Whether others agree is really up to themselves. Ultimately, we put our money where our mouth is. If we like the sound of a DAC, we should buy it.

 

[romaz]

There has been lots of talk about Dynamic Range and how one DAC is not comparable to another because of misleading Data but I think I can compare two DACs that seem to come up again and again in this thread based off data published by the manufacturer or designer. We can read between the lines and get a real apples to apples comparison of Dynamic range!

1st up the Chord DAVE, per Rob Watts output is 6.8V RMS maximum 2.6uV noise 20 KHz bandwidth.

2nd up MSB Select II, digging trough the data-sheet and measurements posted on their site maximum output is 3.5V RMS maximum but noise is elusive, not directly specced. However we can make a few assumptions that looking at the data will get us close. The output is claimed to come directly from the DACs with no buffers or gain, the output is 75 Ohms, The output of their FFT does not seem to have any excess noise and is close to what I would expect to see from a 75 Ohm thermal noise source. The thermal noise of 75 Ohms probably dominates the output. Using the thermal noise calculator from Daycounter Inc. (google search for it) plugged in 35 C (a reasonable operating temperature) 20,000 Hz bandwidth and 75 Ohms, the result is 0.168 uV.

Now for our comparison. First we need to normalize the values because the DAVE has a greater maximum output than the Select II. So 3.5 V / 6.8 V * 2.6 uV = 1.34 uV.
So the normalized noise of the DAVE is 1.34 uV and the Select II is 0.168 uV. Now for the interesting part, it is easy to decrease the noise of a signal source by paralleling multiple signal sources. To decrease the source noise by 6.02 dB (half) you must parallel 4 sources. So convert the difference to dB we have 20 log(1.34 uV / 0.168 uV) = 18 dB now 18 dB / 6.02 dB = 3, so it will take 4 ^ 3 = 64 DAVE DACs to equal one Select II.

So, it appears it will take 64 Chord DAVEs to reach the dynamic range of 1 Select II, not a small difference.

Interesting points, but even if the assumptions are accurate and the calculations are true, to what sonic relevance? What happens to all of this DR performance once you connect this DAC to even the finest amplifier?

Rob has already indicated he could have targeted a higher DR but that there was no point to do so. Obviously, his targets with the DAVE were different and it is interesting to see how certain parameters are valued so highly by one DAC manufacturer and much less so by another.

 

[Beolab]

Dave is unique in that there is no other control electronics apart from the FPGA powered by Dave's PSU. This meant I could reduce RF noise levels as another processor on a different clock is eliminated; but the downside is that I have to code for everything (including the display drivers too, the character generation and display interface is all done by the FPGA). I had planned to use the numbers from the remote, but I simply ran out of time.

Rob

When we are at the subject i have just one convenient question if there is a way to switch of headphone sense, or switch between 6,3mm outlet and RCA/XLR outlets insted of pull out the headphone adapter ?

 

[isquirrel]

I know MSB had to construct their own measuring tools as the commercial ones were not able to measure to the levels required. A lot of talk on here re the DAVE vs the Select, at the end of the day manufacturers can argue all they want about measurements, me (and I own a Select) I couldn't care less how it measures, only thing I am interested in is how the damn thing sounds. I have noticed that I am listening to a LOT more music nowadays than I have been over the past 12 months. Oh and I think it looks sexy too, so does the DAVE in Black with its stand, very nice 

 

 

[isquirrel]

Interesting points, but even if the assumptions are accurate and the calculations are true, to what sonic relevance? What happens to all of this DR performance once you connect this DAC to even the finest amplifier?

Rob has already indicated he could have targeted a higher DR but that there was no point to do so. Obviously, his targets with the DAVE were different and it is interesting to see how certain parameters are valued so highly by one DAC manufacturer and much less so by another.
 

Makes me feel so much better, I mean I (shock horror) listen to my Select through my beloved valve amp, probably cutting the DR in half at least, who cares. I love the sound of valves !

 

[romaz]

 
Makes me feel so much better, I mean I (shock horror) listen to my Select through my beloved valve amp, probably cutting the DR in half at least, who cares. I love the sound of valves !

Point well taken and it supports Rob's assertion that DR beyond a certain number is pointless because ultimately, if you're going to connect an amp, you will be limited by the amp's DR and somehow, because of how it's advertised, the DR or ENOB of a DAC is made to seem more relevant than it is.
 
Rob's recent comments:
 
The DR of the DAVE "is actually a bit better than 127, but who cares? It does not matter. Moreover, I could have gone for a better number, but decided the compromises involved were not worth the risk of actually making the sound worse just to play a meaningless numbers game."
 
"...dynamic range, once you get to a certain value, is meaningless...If you connect a power amp, the noise will be swamped by the amp's noise anyway."

 

[romaz]

  I know MSB had to construct their own measuring tools as the commercial ones were not able to measure to the levels required. A lot of talk on here re the DAVE vs the Select, at the end of the day manufacturers can argue all they want about measurements, me (and I own a Select) I couldn't care less how it measures, only thing I am interested in is how the damn thing sounds. I have noticed that I am listening to a LOT more music nowadays than I have been over the past 12 months. Oh and I think it looks sexy too, so does the DAVE in Black with its stand, very nice 

 

They explained their reasons and they seem plausible enough but the problem with reporting values derived through non-standard methodology is that those of us who aren't technical believe it's an apples to apples comparison (when it's not) and those of us who are technical, because there was a lack of transparency of what their methodology actually was and how a 3rd party might reproduce it, they open themselves to doubt and criticism, which is a shame because having heard the Select II, this is truly an amazing sounding DAC.

 

[lovethatsound]

Surely all you have to do is measure the select ll the same way,and with the same measuring equipment that the Dave was measure with,including all the tests that the Dave has had.

 

[romaz]

Surely all you have to do is measure the select ll the same way,and with the same measuring equipment that the Dave was measure with,including all the tests that the Dave has had.

Yes, I think we're all waiting for someone to do that and then the speculation will go away.
 
The bigger problem is Rob seems to report on measurements that he believes are more telling of a DAC's SQ that no one else seems to measure like noise floor modulation or small signal linearity so some consensus needs to be established on what parameters are important and there will probably be disagreements.