[rgs9200m]

Thanks for the reply Shuttlepod (and I enjoyed your exhaustive review; thanks for all the time you must have spent on it).

 

[ecwl]

One thing I've noticed from reading forums on Head-Fi or Computer Audiophile about Chord Mojo/Hugo/DAVE is that many people like to talk about how their headphone amp or preamplifier is very transparent or has great clarity with low noise floor so they don't believe removing the headphone amp or preamplifier will make a difference or will only make a small difference. My experience with Sanders preamplifier, Krell 280p, and Krell Evolution Two is that great preamplifiers tend to sound virtually silent so even when people upgrade to Chord DACs, they are not going to notice a lowering of the noise floor most of the time. However, the removal of the preamplifier tend to improve low-level signals which seems to me to improve micro-details, timbre, naturalness of the instruments and 3-dimensionality of instruments, soundstage width and depth. Also, analog preamplifications often have subtle channel differences/non-linearity. Removing the preamplification with the perfect matching of the left-right channels of Chord DACs, the centre instruments would snap right in the middle. I almost cracked up when my friend was wondering if his centre movie channel was on when we played directly through the Mojo to his amp because there is zero-linearity error between the left and right channels. He couldn't believe the vocalist was singing smack in the middle in front of him. Anyway, these are sometimes subtle changes that on quick A/B listening tests can be missed, especially through pre-amplifications. But the longer one listens to the Chord DACs without preamplification, the more easily these qualitative improvements can be heard. I truly believe people who say they don't find Chord DACs to be a major upgrade to their existing non-Chord DAC are probably having something else further down their signal chain that is limiting the ability for the DAC to shine or they haven't quite figured out what they should be listening for or to appreciate. Of course, we all have different preferences for speakers and amplifications so who is to say one's DAC preferences are valid or invalid...

 

[ecwl]

For me, the big question is, is my power amplifier transparent enough? And if not, what to upgrade to? Benchmark AHB2? NCore amp? A 5-figure amp that I currently can't/won't afford. And how do I know they're more transparent than my current amp? Best to wait for Rob Watts digital amp for now. Or become a convert and listen to headphones exclusively...

 

[romaz]

  You mentioned that a PC or Mac maxes out at 24/192 with Roon. I may be wrong about this, but I thought I was able to play DXD (24/352) with Roon using my MacBook Pro. Initially, I noticed that when I played DXD, DAVE downsampled to 24/176. Then I went into Roon’s audio settings and checked “Disabled” under Roon’s Max PCM Sampling  (it had been set at “Up to 24/196”). Once I did this, DAVE indicated that the file was playing at full DXD (24/352).
 

 
Yes, you are correct and so I have just learned something new!  So for those who don't mind having their PC or Mac in their listening room, then you're all set and with no limitations if USB is used.
 
For those who would prefer not to have a PC or Mac running while listening to music or don't have space on their rack for a large music server, here is the dimunitive Sonicorbiter SE, a 2 inch (or 5cm) cube that can be inconspicuously hidden behind the DAVE.  It is the least expensive certified Roon Ready device commercially available (except for a Rasberry Pi).  Of course, if you choose not to use Roon, you have other options available with it.  You can pair it with a more expensive linear power supply but with the DAVE, the stock linear wall wart it comes with sounds just as good.  You would connect to your network using a CAT 5/6 cable (no wifi unless you use a wifi bridge) and then to the DAVE via USB (or optical).
 

You could spend $16,000 for an Aurender W20, $8,000 for the Aurender N10 or $300 for this device and they will sound pretty close to the same on the DAVE.  Of course, unlike the Aurenders, the Sonicorbiter doesn't come with internal storage although for an extra $1,250, you can buy these 2 things:
 
(1)  QNAP TS-251+ NAS with 6TB of storage (12TB storage max) that will run RoonServer now through virtualization (that means you won't need another PC or Mac running in the background).  This device can be left on 24/7 and consumes 10 watts when idle and less than 20 watts when in use and can be stored in a closet where you will never have to hear it. Should you choose to use it as a movie server, you can since it has an HDMI out port and that is why it comes with a remote control.  There are other NAS options but this is currently the least expensive NAS you can buy today that I am aware of that has powerful enough hardware to run Roon now - $750 with 6TB of storage ($450 with no storage)
 

 
(2)  A lifetime subscription to Roon - $500
 

 
 
Of course, you will need an iPad or Android tablet to serve as a remote control but that applies to the Aurenders also.

 

[TheAttorney]

I've now completed my second loan stint with DAVE. The jury has returned and the results are in.
 
Some of my findings don't match up with the consensus so far. There are lots of reasons already stated why some people hear things differently to others. Irrespective of personal preference, in the past I've heard my own Yggy sounding  decidedly average, but currently sounding great. Same with my BHSE. Sometimes the differences resulted from seemingly minor adjustments to ancillary equipment. Nevertheless, it still does make me wonder when I get a different result to people who's opinion I value, like romaz for example. Whatever, the bottom line for me is to repeat one of my favourite hifi quips: "I have no option but to trust my own ears… because they're the only ones I've got".
 
Anyway, the key objective for me was to decide if it's worth spending the considerable extra cash to replace my Yggy with DAVE. Using the following, unless otherwise stated: Nagra CDC -> AQ Diamond optical -> DAVE/Yggy/DSD -> TQ Black Diamond balanced i/c->  BHSE with metal base tubes -> SR-009. All fed by an Audience TSS power conditioner and a variety of audiophile power cords. Most of my listening was using female singer songwriter kind of albums - some mastered slightly "hot". I stuck with these because they are the ones I can most easily identify a component's strengths and weaknesses.
 
So, hey ho, here we go:
 
Round 1. Yggy vs PS Audio DSD
As previously reported, Yggy won this fight. Kind of a shame because I was hoping  the DSD would be  fairer opposition, at least pricewise, for the DAVE. Compared to either DSD or Nagra CDC's integrated DAC, the Yggy gave sound images a cleaner edge, great on transients and on making individual images stand out more clearly from the mix. Resulting in a bigger, more open and transparent soundstage. The Yggy doesn't mask poorer recordings, but the extra focus and clarity makes them overall more acceptable. This is not a night-and-day improvement over the other two (much more expensive) DACs, but deeply impressive in terms of VFM. 
 
Round 2. Yggy vs DAVE
DAVE won this fight. I felt these two shared a similar neutral sound signature, but all the things good about Yggy were better still with DAVE. Even cleaner transients, even more micro details, more ambience fine details that define a more 3D soundstage. The Yggy had at least as big an overall soundstage and a touch more bass quantity, but DAVE more precisely placed the individual images within that soundstage and more accurately delivered a cleaner bass. DAVE was also kinder to poor recordings. For example, say a hot close-up recording of a female singer results in sibilance and a general "haze" of brightness in the upper mids. With DAVE, the sibilance peak is not masked in any way, but the haze across the rest of the soundstage is reduced, resulting in a sound where the full impact is preserved, but in a more natural overall setting. Yggy can do this too, but DAVE does it better.
 
These were still not night-and-day differences and, if SQ was the only criteria, I don't think the huge price difference is worth it (unless money is no object). But SQ isn't the only criteria - there's functionality, practicality, usability, aesthetics, etc. I'm also prepared to accept that DAVE's more subtle charms may become more apparent over a longer time. So let's move on.
 
Round 3. DAVE->HD800S vs DAVE->BHSE/009
This was a key fight if I was to consider downsizing from my overkill electrostatics setup to make use of DAVE's fabled direct-to-dynamics transparency. I didn't have long to wait, because as soon as the bell rang, the BHSE/009 rushed across the ring and thumped the HD800s. Very hard. The HD800s fell to the canvas in a blubbering heap, muttering something about not wanting to play with the big boys any more.
 
Ok, so this is a bit of exaggeration for dramatic effect, but I'm not sure it's worth picking over the details when, on the one hand I'm hearing a very good recording via a good pair of headphones, and on the other hand I'm transported to the recording studio and being caressed by the singer's every vocal inflections. Maybe the HEK would be a better fit for the kind of sound signature I'm used to? That for another time. In the meantime, my downsizing aspirations have taken a back seat.
 
Round 4. Digital input cable differences on the DAVE
I could only do optical in this round, as DAVE doesn't do RCA, and Nagra doesn't do BNC or USB, and I don't have any AES cables, and I didn't want to confuse the reference baseline by bringing in a laptop via USB.
 
So I compared my loan AQ Diamond to a couple of modestly priced opticals from Monoprice and Fisual.
The outcome was that I preferred the AQ. The difference maybe wasn't as large as it had been with Yggy, but it was there nevertheless, which  was a shame, as that has put a dent in the idea that I could save lots of money on the source in the future. Maybe the results with the other interface types would have been closer to group consensus, but that's for another time. 
 
Round 5. Analogue output cable differences on the DAVE
I have previously determined that my fully balanced BHSE definitely prefers balanced cables, even when the source is fundamentally singled ended. And so it proved with the DAVE: replacing my balanced TQ Black Diamonds with the (more expensive) single ended Transparent Reference (previous generation) caused a loss in some of the transparency, openness and detail. No surprises here for me. 
 
Conclusion
I really like DAVE as an overall package. The small size, the funky "cyclops" display, etc. When all the best components above were in place with a good recording, the results had more "you are there" magical experiences than ever before.And it got the best out of poorer recordings as well. So I've put in an order for one.
 
The fact that some of the tests didn't give me the hoped for results may be partly due to sky high expectations based on the rave comments before. Based on what I've heard so far, I think suggestions that DAVE may rival DACs like the MSB Select may be a touch over enthusiastic. But in my own price range, it's a great sounding DAC that has lots of features that I've been waiting for.
I started this particular upgrade journey by looking at the Nagra HD DAC/headphone amp, but got put off because they priced it so high compared to my elderly Nagra CDC and also increased its size and complexity with the external power supply options. So I got the Yggy as a holding position becuase it was so cheap in high end terms (and remains outstanding VFM). But from a different VFM perspective, DAVE is half the price of the Nagra HD, is more compact and has more features. How it compares sound wise I don't know, but I think I'll have enough to keep me happy for years.

 

[lojay]

Great impressions, Attorney. Thank you (and others like Romaz) for taking the time to write your impressions.

I have read somewhere that the USB input of the DAVE is superior to the optical inputs, so this may account for the differences. As for the HD800S sounding underwhelming, it's impedance curve may require a dedicated amplifier to sound right, whereas the HEK should be easier to drive with the DAVE's headphone output. Then of course the SR009 is naturally superior to the HD800 so it is hard to think that a better front end would do away with your entire electrostatic system.

Speaking for myself, your impressions have further confirmed that I really need to place an order for the DAVE.

 

[lovethatsound]

I've now completed my second loan stint with DAVE. The jury has returned and the results are in.

Some of my findings don't match up with the consensus so far. There are lots of reasons already stated why some people hear things differently to others. Irrespective of personal preference, in the past I've heard my own Yggy sounding  decidedly average, but currently sounding great. Same with my BHSE. Sometimes the differences resulted from seemingly minor adjustments to ancillary equipment. Nevertheless, it still does make me wonder when I get a different result to people who's opinion I value, like romaz for example. Whatever, the bottom line for me is to repeat one of my favourite hifi quips: "I have no option but to trust my own ears… because they're the only ones I've got".

Anyway, the key objective for me was to decide if it's worth spending the considerable extra cash to replace my Yggy with DAVE. Using the following, unless otherwise stated: Nagra CDC -> AQ Diamond optical -> DAVE/Yggy/DSD -> TQ Black Diamond balanced i/c->  BHSE with metal base tubes -> SR-009. All fed by an Audience TSS power conditioner and a variety of audiophile power cords. Most of my listening was using female singer songwriter kind of albums - some mastered slightly "hot". I stuck with these because they are the ones I can most easily identify a component's strengths and weaknesses.

So, hey ho, here we go:

Round 1. Yggy vs PS Audio DSD
As previously reported, Yggy won this fight. Kind of a shame because I was hoping  the DSD would be  fairer opposition, at least pricewise, for the DAVE. Compared to either DSD or Nagra CDC's integrated DAC, the Yggy gave sound images a cleaner edge, great on transients and on making individual images stand out more clearly from the mix. Resulting in a bigger, more open and transparent soundstage. The Yggy doesn't mask poorer recordings, but the extra focus and clarity makes them overall more acceptable. This is not a night-and-day improvement over the other two (much more expensive) DACs, but deeply impressive in terms of VFM. 

Round 2. Yggy vs DAVE
DAVE won this fight. I felt these two shared a similar neutral sound signature, but all the things good about Yggy were better still with DAVE. Even cleaner transients, even more micro details, more ambience fine details that define a more 3D soundstage. The Yggy had at least as big an overall soundstage and a touch more bass quantity, but DAVE more precisely placed the individual images within that soundstage and more accurately delivered a cleaner bass. DAVE was also kinder to poor recordings. For example, say a hot close-up recording of a female singer results in sibilance and a general "haze" of brightness in the upper mids. With DAVE, the sibilance peak is not masked in any way, but the haze across the rest of the soundstage is reduced, resulting in a sound where the full impact is preserved, but in a more natural overall setting. Yggy can do this too, but DAVE does it better.

These were still not night-and-day differences and, if SQ was the only criteria, I don't think the huge price difference is worth it (unless money is no object). But SQ isn't the only criteria - there's functionality, practicality, usability, aesthetics, etc. I'm also prepared to accept that DAVE's more subtle charms may become more apparent over a longer time. So let's move on.

Round 3. DAVE->HD800S vs DAVE->BHSE/009
This was a key fight if I was to consider downsizing from my overkill electrostatics setup to make use of DAVE's fabled direct-to-dynamics transparency. I didn't have long to wait, because as soon as the bell rang, the BHSE/009 rushed across the ring and thumped the HD800s. Very hard. The HD800s fell to the canvas in a blubbering heap, muttering something about not wanting to play with the big boys any more.

Ok, so this is a bit of exaggeration for dramatic effect, but I'm not sure it's worth picking over the details when, on the one hand I'm hearing a very good recording via a good pair of headphones, and on the other hand I'm transported to the recording studio and being caressed by the singer's every vocal inflections. Maybe the HEK would be a better fit for the kind of sound signature I'm used to? That for another time. In the meantime, my downsizing aspirations have taken a back seat.

Round 4. Digital input cable differences on the DAVE
I could only do optical in this round, as DAVE doesn't do RCA, and Nagra doesn't do BNC or USB, and I don't have any AES cables, and I didn't want to confuse the reference baseline by bringing in a laptop via USB.

So I compared my loan AQ Diamond to a couple of modestly priced opticals from Monoprice and Fisual.
The outcome was that I preferred the AQ. The difference maybe wasn't as large as it had been with Yggy, but it was there nevertheless, which  was a shame, as that has put a dent in the idea that I could save lots of money on the source in the future. Maybe the results with the other interface types would have been closer to group consensus, but that's for another time. 

Round 5. Analogue output cable differences on the DAVE
I have previously determined that my fully balanced BHSE definitely prefers balanced cables, even when the source is fundamentally singled ended. And so it proved with the DAVE: replacing my balanced TQ Black Diamonds with the (more expensive) single ended Transparent Reference (previous generation) caused a loss in some of the transparency, openness and detail. No surprises here for me. 

Conclusion
I really like DAVE as an overall package. The small size, the funky "cyclops" display, etc. When all the best components above were in place with a good recording, the results had more "you are there" magical experiences than ever before.And it got the best out of poorer recordings as well. So I've put in an order for one.

The fact that some of the tests didn't give me the hoped for results may be partly due to sky high expectations based on the rave comments before. Based on what I've heard so far, I think suggestions that DAVE may rival DACs like the MSB Select may be a touch over enthusiastic. But in my own price range, it's a great sounding DAC that has lots of features that I've been waiting for.
I started this particular upgrade journey by looking at the Nagra HD DAC/headphone amp, but got put off because they priced it so high compared to my elderly Nagra CDC and also increased its size and complexity with the external power supply options. So I got the Yggy as a holding position becuase it was so cheap in high end terms (and remains outstanding VFM). But from a different VFM perspective, DAVE is half the price of the Nagra HD, is more compact and has more features. How it compares sound wise I don't know, but I think I'll have enough to keep me happy for years.

I hope you really enjoy your Dave when you get it,but i really strongly disagree with you about optical cables,I've tried 4 different optical cables with the Dave at different prices and their was and is no difference in sound quality.It could be you've got some kind of faulty Dave,or it could be your ears are playing tricks on you.

 

[Beolab]

I've now completed my second loan stint with DAVE. The jury has returned and the results are in.

Some of my findings don't match up with the consensus so far. There are lots of reasons already stated why some people hear things differently to others. Irrespective of personal preference, in the past I've heard my own Yggy sounding  decidedly average, but currently sounding great. Same with my BHSE. Sometimes the differences resulted from seemingly minor adjustments to ancillary equipment. Nevertheless, it still does make me wonder when I get a different result to people who's opinion I value, like romaz for example. Whatever, the bottom line for me is to repeat one of my favourite hifi quips: "I have no option but to trust my own ears… because they're the only ones I've got".

Anyway, the key objective for me was to decide if it's worth spending the considerable extra cash to replace my Yggy with DAVE. Using the following, unless otherwise stated: Nagra CDC -> AQ Diamond optical -> DAVE/Yggy/DSD -> TQ Black Diamond balanced i/c->  BHSE with metal base tubes -> SR-009. All fed by an Audience TSS power conditioner and a variety of audiophile power cords. Most of my listening was using female singer songwriter kind of albums - some mastered slightly "hot". I stuck with these because they are the ones I can most easily identify a component's strengths and weaknesses.

So, hey ho, here we go:

Round 1. Yggy vs PS Audio DSD
As previously reported, Yggy won this fight. Kind of a shame because I was hoping  the DSD would be  fairer opposition, at least pricewise, for the DAVE. Compared to either DSD or Nagra CDC's integrated DAC, the Yggy gave sound images a cleaner edge, great on transients and on making individual images stand out more clearly from the mix. Resulting in a bigger, more open and transparent soundstage. The Yggy doesn't mask poorer recordings, but the extra focus and clarity makes them overall more acceptable. This is not a night-and-day improvement over the other two (much more expensive) DACs, but deeply impressive in terms of VFM. 

Round 2. Yggy vs DAVE
DAVE won this fight. I felt these two shared a similar neutral sound signature, but all the things good about Yggy were better still with DAVE. Even cleaner transients, even more micro details, more ambience fine details that define a more 3D soundstage. The Yggy had at least as big an overall soundstage and a touch more bass quantity, but DAVE more precisely placed the individual images within that soundstage and more accurately delivered a cleaner bass. DAVE was also kinder to poor recordings. For example, say a hot close-up recording of a female singer results in sibilance and a general "haze" of brightness in the upper mids. With DAVE, the sibilance peak is not masked in any way, but the haze across the rest of the soundstage is reduced, resulting in a sound where the full impact is preserved, but in a more natural overall setting. Yggy can do this too, but DAVE does it better.

These were still not night-and-day differences and, if SQ was the only criteria, I don't think the huge price difference is worth it (unless money is no object). But SQ isn't the only criteria - there's functionality, practicality, usability, aesthetics, etc. I'm also prepared to accept that DAVE's more subtle charms may become more apparent over a longer time. So let's move on.

Round 3. DAVE->HD800S vs DAVE->BHSE/009
This was a key fight if I was to consider downsizing from my overkill electrostatics setup to make use of DAVE's fabled direct-to-dynamics transparency. I didn't have long to wait, because as soon as the bell rang, the BHSE/009 rushed across the ring and thumped the HD800s. Very hard. The HD800s fell to the canvas in a blubbering heap, muttering something about not wanting to play with the big boys any more.

Ok, so this is a bit of exaggeration for dramatic effect, but I'm not sure it's worth picking over the details when, on the one hand I'm hearing a very good recording via a good pair of headphones, and on the other hand I'm transported to the recording studio and being caressed by the singer's every vocal inflections. Maybe the HEK would be a better fit for the kind of sound signature I'm used to? That for another time. In the meantime, my downsizing aspirations have taken a back seat.

Round 4. Digital input cable differences on the DAVE
I could only do optical in this round, as DAVE doesn't do RCA, and Nagra doesn't do BNC or USB, and I don't have any AES cables, and I didn't want to confuse the reference baseline by bringing in a laptop via USB.

So I compared my loan AQ Diamond to a couple of modestly priced opticals from Monoprice and Fisual.
The outcome was that I preferred the AQ. The difference maybe wasn't as large as it had been with Yggy, but it was there nevertheless, which  was a shame, as that has put a dent in the idea that I could save lots of money on the source in the future. Maybe the results with the other interface types would have been closer to group consensus, but that's for another time. 

Round 5. Analogue output cable differences on the DAVE
I have previously determined that my fully balanced BHSE definitely prefers balanced cables, even when the source is fundamentally singled ended. And so it proved with the DAVE: replacing my balanced TQ Black Diamonds with the (more expensive) single ended Transparent Reference (previous generation) caused a loss in some of the transparency, openness and detail. No surprises here for me. 

Conclusion
I really like DAVE as an overall package. The small size, the funky "cyclops" display, etc. When all the best components above were in place with a good recording, the results had more "you are there" magical experiences than ever before.And it got the best out of poorer recordings as well. So I've put in an order for one.

The fact that some of the tests didn't give me the hoped for results may be partly due to sky high expectations based on the rave comments before. Based on what I've heard so far, I think suggestions that DAVE may rival DACs like the MSB Select may be a touch over enthusiastic. But in my own price range, it's a great sounding DAC that has lots of features that I've been waiting for.
I started this particular upgrade journey by looking at the Nagra HD DAC/headphone amp, but got put off because they priced it so high compared to my elderly Nagra CDC and also increased its size and complexity with the external power supply options. So I got the Yggy as a holding position becuase it was so cheap in high end terms (and remains outstanding VFM). But from a different VFM perspective, DAVE is half the price of the Nagra HD, is more compact and has more features. How it compares sound wise I don't know, but I think I'll have enough to keep me happy for years.

Yes DAVE vs MSB Select II comparison is what we are waiting for.

I got the DAVE and have heard the MSB Select II on a speaker setup, so it is hard to do a judgement.

 

[britneedadvice]

This thread is becoming compelling reading for any Head-fier whether they are considering the purchase of a DAVE or just 'looking in' with interest. !!
When many of the threads on this site are too concerned with back-slapping or back-stabbing , the contributors to this thread are clearly 'hard-nosed' reviewers of a new product which is questioning the 'standard' in Headphone use!
 
Thanks must go to Roy(romaz) who has 'driven' this thread for some time and provided us all with his clear insight into this new product and his impressions of it and how best he considers it to be 'configured', Excellent reviews from Jon and now Richard with many constructive inputs by many.
 
So, just where does these reviews leave me? Totally bloody confused , that's where !!!
 
However, if reviews have the purpose of making you get off your backside and try something new,then these impressions have made me realise that's what I need to do !!....and that's coming from someone who's both reluctant to bother and satisfied,with what I've already got!! The DAVE appears to be that kind of 'thought provoking, bar -setting' product.
 
I said I was "confused". Well, only because there seems to be some mis-matched comparisons to make the reviews totally worthwhile,( for me that is.) .However, I appreciate comparisons can only be made with products at ones own disposal.
 
I intend to audition the DAVE soon and if initial impressions are good will move to a direct comparison with what I have....and by God I hope I don't like it as it's going to cost me !!

 

[Priaptor]

Great impressions, Attorney. Thank you (and others like Romaz) for taking the time to write your impressions.

I have read somewhere that the USB input of the DAVE is superior to the optical inputs, so this may account for the differences. As for the HD800S sounding underwhelming, it's impedance curve may require a dedicated amplifier to sound right, whereas the HEK should be easier to drive with the DAVE's headphone output. Then of course the SR009 is naturally superior to the HD800 so it is hard to think that a better front end would do away with your entire electrostatic system.

Speaking for myself, your impressions have further confirmed that I really need to place an order for the DAVE.

Where in the States can you "test drive" a Dave and/or purchase one

 

[Christer]

Spoiler: Mod Edit: Please put long quotes in spoiler tags or edit them to be shorter.

 
 
 
I just spent two weeks listening to the DAVE in a generous in-home audition here in Seattle. When the local rep dropped it off, the DAVE was still in the box, fresh from the factory. This was apparently the first DAVE to make it to the American Pacific Northwest. I mostly ran it 24/7 so that by the end of the audition, it had about 300 hours.
 
How I Got to this Point
 
Before getting to my impressions, a little background and context. I discovered the DAVE (and this head-fi thread) because I decided, after ten years as an audiophile, to take the plunge into serious head-fi. I initially dismissed the DAVE as too expensive. Then I read a few posts claiming that DAVE was immune to the quality of everything in the audio chain that precedes it – assuming, of course, that it is being fed bit perfect information. It seemed like an outlandish claim, but it got my attention.
 
My original plan was to buy a top headphone amp and headphones, something like the ALO Studio Six or Cavalli Liquid Gold or a GS-X, and pair it with headphones in the $1500-$3000 range. Then I would tackle my next project:  finding a top-notch source that would feed my Ayre QB-9 DSD dac. I was prepared to spend between $3000 and $8000 on said source, an Aurender or Antipodes or something similar. I was getting tired of applying sonic band aids like Jitterbugs, Regen, etc. Eventually, in a year or two, I figured I would replace the Ayre with something better.
 
[An aside on the subject of music servers and their ilk:  the upcoming Sonore microRendu may be poised to disrupt the server market. It promises many of the benefits of a dedicated high-end music server in an incredibly small package for $640, plus it can serve as a Roon endpoint (and works with other software). Even the microRendu, however, appears to need a really good linear power supply to perform at its best. A good USB cable will likely still be a necessity. So we are still looking at a $1000 to $3000 expenditure, in addition to the computer and Ethernet cabling you will still need to make it work.]
 
The DAVE upended my thinking. Specifically, DAVE’s alleged immunity to source components and its inclusion of a reportedly excellent headphone out created the tantalizing possibility that I could forget about the quality of the source, stop my search for a standalone headphone amp, and buy a dac now, all in one compact, attractive, space-saving package. Yes, the DAVE is very expensive. But when I subtracted what I would spend on a very good source and cabling and standalone headphone amp, DAVE looked like it might be a real value proposition—but only if it made music at a very, very high level. Frankly, I was skeptical of the claims made on this thread by those who belong to the “cult of DAVE” (no disrespect, only humor, intended).
 
Musical Priorities
 
Like most folks here, I don’t pretend to understand the technical explanations provided by Rob Watts, but I love the fact that he’s so active on this site and he occasionally provides valuable insight to non-technical people like me. For me, it’s all about musicality. I’m a music lover first, a French horn player in a previous life, and a regular patron of symphony, chamber music, and jazz concerts. I’m a musical omnivore and my collection of about 4500+ albums spans the gamut of musical taste. During the two-week audition, I was able to hear a Seattle Symphony concert and a recital by pianist Jeremy Denk. (A word to classical music lovers:  if you get a chance to hear Denk, go. This was one of the best concerts I’ve ever attended, period.)
 
My musical/sonic priorities are these:
 

1.        I want/need to understand the musical intent of the performers
2.        Listening should be an emotional experience; if I find that I’m thinking too much about the “sound,” then that’s an indication something is off
3.        Tone is critical, in terms of color or timbre, but especially in terms of density and substance; digital tends to shortchange tone
4.        Immediacy and presence are close cousins to tone; I want to hear performers in the room in terms of immediacy, but the stereo system should recover all the air and ambience of the venue when appropriate
5.        Resolution is important, but not at the expense of a natural, fatigue-free listening experience

 
Through the years, my analog system has bettered my digital system in each of the above areas, though of course it all depends on the quality of the recording, source file, and/or vinyl pressing.
 
One further point: When I’m auditioning any new component, especially a major purchase like a dac, turntable, speaker, etc., my ears had better tell me within the first few minutes or first few tracks whether this is a change for the better. If I have to spend hours debating the merits of a change, well, it’s probably not worth it.
 
First (and Lasting) Impressions
 
Ok, so is DAVE all its cracked up to be? First, the usual disclaimers:  I don’t claim to have wide experience with the world’s best dacs, I’m a relative headphone newbie (though I listened mostly through my two-channel system), this is my ears and my system, etc., etc.
 
I let DAVE warm up for half and hour before sitting down and listening (yep, I’m impatient). For the first twenty minutes, I was unimpressed. Then I discovered I had not readjusted the audio settings in Roon for my new device. After adjusting, it took me about 30 seconds to decide that this was a completely new and, in my experience, unprecedented level of digital playback. This occurred about an hour after opening the box from the factory. That impression has not wavered once during the two-week audition.
 
Don’t get me wrong – DAVE is not a miracle worker in the sense that it will transform a bad recording into something different. DAVE’s degree of improvement varies quite widely with the quality of the recording, and if your interest in music means you don’t often play really well-recorded music, or if you don’t have a very resolving system, you are not going to experience the best DAVE can offer. DAVE really shines on well-recorded material, whether that’s Redbook or DXD.
 
DAVE’s Alleged Immunity to Noise
 
To test DAVE’s immunity to noise, I had to settle on some experiments with USB cables and USB band aids, as I did not have access to multiple music servers. My basic source is a 2013 MacBook Pro laptop running Roon/Tidal (via wifi), with a standard external hard disk drive holding 2.5 TB of music. The laptop and hard disk are noisy, both physically and electrically. I own a very nice Audience USB cable ($900) that outperformed a Light Harmonic Lightspeed cable in my system. With the Ayre, both of these cables were big upgrades over an older Transparent USB cable. Further improvements were made when I added an Uptone Audio Regen and two Audioquest Jitterbugs.
 
I listened to DAVE in four different USB cable scenarios:  1) with the cheap “Made in China” USB cable that Chord supplies with the DAVE; 2) with my older, $90 ten-foot Transparent cable I bought in 2009; 3) with the Audience cable; and 4) with the Audience cable plus Regen plus Jitterbugs. After spending about three hours swapping cables and listening to the same five or six familiar selections, I had to conclude:  I could detect no difference. For the remaining duration of the audition, I listened with my old 10-foot Transparent cable, which allowed me to move my computer that much further away from the other components.
 
It’s funny – you see the el cheapo cable that comes with DAVE and you think – it’s a throwaway, why did they do that? It turns out it’s brilliant proof-of-concept marketing.
 
The caveat to my immunity experiment is that I did not have a variety of music servers to play around with, so I can’t personally comment on whether these might make a difference. But based on the reports of most others here (especially Roy (Romaz)), my thought is that the DAVE is either immune or largely immune to sources. If there is some sonic benefit to an $8k Aurender N10 or $16k W20, or for that matter a much less expensive Sonore microRendu with LPS, it had better be clearly audible and a significant upgrade. By the way, Romaz deserves a special shout-out for his intelligent and insightful posts and his generosity in responding to a few PMs from me.
 
While I had the DAVE, I also had the Hugo TT in house from the local Chord rep. I’d never heard the TT before (or any Chord dac, for that matter). The TT was already burned in. On the question of source immunity, I already knew that my Ayre QB-9 DSD dac’s performance varied significantly with different USB cables and USB band aids. I did some quick A/B tests switching out the various cables on the Hugo TT. I found that the cheaper USB cables resulted in a harder, glassier sound.
 
Comparisons
 
Ok, how about overall sonic comparisons between the three dacs I had on hand (you know, the missing part of so many reviews we read in publications)?
 
First, a few words about the Hugo TT and Ayre. I like the Ayre and I still think it’s an excellent dac for its current $3450 asking price. Compared to the Ayre, the Hugo TT was, in my opinion, a better dac. The difference was not night and day, but the TT was more resolving, had a lighter and brighter tonality (without etch), had more precise transients, and was just more emotionally involving. The Ayre had a more rounded sound, with a warmer midrange. On piano, the TT resolved fast passages better than the Ayre, which slightly blurred runs of notes. I think some people would find the Ayre more to their taste because the tonal character is different and it might be more synergistic in a given system, but in my system the TT was the better dac. A friend who will soon be in the market for a dac and thus was keen to hear the Ayre vs. the TT reached the same conclusion, finding the TT to be both more detailed and smoother. Of course, it is also the more expensive dac (currently $4795).
 
How about the TT and the DAVE? I was particularly interested in this comparison as at least a few folks have stated that they think the TT is the sweet spot in Chord’s lineup and that differences between the DAVE and TT may not be all that great.
 
My ears tell me differently. There is a very wide chasm between the DAVE and TT. The delta is much greater than the difference between the TT and the Ayre. Night and day difference. This difference is more apparent with higher quality recordings, but it is unmistakable with just about any recording, at least in a resolving system or with high-quality headphones.
 
What Sets DAVE Apart
 
Here is what makes the DAVE so special to my ears:
 

1.        First and foremost, it generates tone that is dense, colorful, and true to life; there is a solidity and materiality to the tone that distinguishes it from any dac I have heard. Some on this thread have referred to DAVE’s “purity” and I think we are probably hearing the same thing. I do not hear the tone as either warm or cool, dark or light. Rather, it is vibrant, vivid, and realistic.

 

1.        There is immediacy and presence in spades; the musical intent of the performers is readily, obviously apparent. Barriers to emotional involvement are broken down.

 

1.        Clarity and resolution is stratospheric on well-recorded music, especially of the recording venue. This is very apparent on well-recorded, hi-rez orchestral music. For example, percussion is extremely tactile and vivid, and you have a very precise sense that the instruments are located in the back of the hall. You do not pay a sonic price for all of this resolution in terms of an analytical, “microphone-centric” presentation. Rather, the feeling of vibrant, smoothly flowing music is pervasive.

 

1.        All instruments sound wonderful and realistic, but well-recorded grand piano is sublime. Dynamic contrasts (especially micro dynamics) are where so much of the emotional power of music lives and DAVE delivers big-time.

 

1.        Voices are “right there.” One surefire hallmark of a dac’s resolution is when you find that you are hearing certain lyrics for the first time because they were previously obscured.

 

1.        Bass is vastly improved. I am not a basshead, and my speakers are not truly full range, but I consistently heard bass lines that had been lost in the muck before. I am fairly certain that DAVE is not actually producing more bass, although subjectively that seemed to be the case with certain recordings. Rather, my theory is that DAVE cleans up all the frequencies, and the improvement in the power zone of 100 hz to 400 hz allows the mid-bass and bass to come through with more clarity and impact.

 

1.        DAVE eliminates or reduces a harshness that previously accompanied treble response or very loud passages in certain recordings. We’ve probably all experienced those recordings where you turn down the volume or cringe for 10 seconds until a shrill or highly dynamic passage is over. Two examples:  1) American mezzo-soprano Susan Graham has a lovely recording of French songs (La Belle Epoque – The Songs of Reynaldo Hahn) that is generally well-recorded but contains louder passages in Graham’s upper vocal register that were previously unpleasant in their digital harshness and glare. With DAVE, I actually turn up the volume on this album and revel in the increased dynamic range without shrillness.  2) With DAVE, I am able to experience the full dynamic range of certain hi-rez, mostly live recordings of big symphonic pieces. For example, the dynamic range of something like Mahler 5 with MTT and the San Francisco Symphony is gigantic. DAVE lets you listen to the fff passages without cringing. At the same time, it is so quiet and resolving that the nuances of ppp passages are clearly discernible. Sometimes this is more apparent on headphones (my listening room has an ambient db level that typically ranges from the low 30s to the low 40s depending on time of day). The same ability to deal with recordings of very wide dynamics is a revelation with some big band jazz recordings, e.g., the Maria Schneider Orchestra. To hear so deeply into complex music is a pleasure.

 
I had three audiophile friends over a few nights ago, all of whom were familiar with my system. After hearing the DAVE for 10-15 minutes, they firmly instructed me: “Buy that dac.” To say that they were marveling at the DAVE’s contribution to sound quality is putting it mildly.
 
A Digression on Analog and Digital
 
One of these friends asked me if, in the event I purchased the DAVE, I might listen a lot less to my vinyl record collection. I told him I thought not, but after two weeks of listening to really good digital, you wonder what analog will sound like when you fire up the turntable. Not to worry. I’ve had a few analog listening sessions since the DAVE departed, and I’m happy to report that analog retains its magic. Sonically, my analog system does certain things better than even DAVE. First, there is a texture, tactility, and dimensionality that just sounds different, and I would say, better, than digital. Flesh and blood tone. Second, there is a continuousness or natural flow to the music that just kind of washes over you and that I find puts me in a more accepting, open frame of mind when listening. Finally, there is a kind of natural bloom to analog that sounds real and pleasing. Having grown up with vinyl, I also find that it tends to trigger more memories, which for me and a lot of other audiophiles is a big part of the experience.
 
Of course analog has all sorts of technical problems and I’m not going to get into a digital/analog argument, as all of these points are subject to debate and personal taste. Keep in mind that, even assuming a purchase of the DAVE, I will have spent at least $10k more on the analog side of the equation, so my analog setup had better sound really good. I have a fantastic turntable/cartridge setup guy, which is essential unless you are really good at doing that yourself. For many people, vinyl is just a pain in the butt. I kind of like the rituals.
 
Operational Modes and a Few Minor Complaints
 
Ok, sorry for the detour – back to the DAVE. I played with DAVE’s signal phase mode late in my audition. I was surprised to hear some familiar cuts sounding a little better when switching phase from positive to negative or vice versa, and so I think this is a useful feature worth further exploration. With regard to the high frequency filter, my observations here are with it turned off. When I toggled back and forth with this mode late in the audition, I heard no difference on a handful of tracks.
 
Do I have any nits? I don’t like the fact you have to manually switch between PCM and DSD, and wait the 20 seconds or so until DAVE resets itself. I have playlists that contain tunes from both formats and switching is an inconvenience. You absolutely must do this, however, to get the most out of your DSD recordings – it sounds markedly better in DSD mode. Sometimes when I was in one or the other mode, I would forget to switch back to the correct mode. I didn’t find the remote particularly useful. And I don’t like the fact that I won’t be able to listen to vinyl on headphones, but that would of course mean we are back to a standalone headphone amp and a presumptive loss of transparency. None of these are deal killers.
 
What about Head-Fi?
 
Bear in mind that maybe 75% of my listening was with my loudspeaker system. That’s what I’m most familiar with and, despite inevitable room interactions, it was quite easy to discern the differences between the DAVE and the other dacs (or any dac I’ve had in my system). It’s early in my high-end head-fi days, but I suspect headphones will likely remain secondary in my listening hierarchy. That said, I did spend some quality time with 1) a well-burned in HE1000 with a copper Purity Audio Impresa cable and 2) a brand new HD800 with stock cable. Most of my listening to the HD800 was done after it had been played for 150 hours or so.
 
Although I’ve listened to headphones for years, I am new to both of these headphones and super high-end head-fi in general. Both phones were very enjoyable and mighty impressive with the DAVE. I expect personal preference would drive a given listener’s choice. Physically, the Sennheiser was more comfortable on my head, and that’s always an important consideration. Putting aside comfort, I personally preferred the sound of the HE1000; it is a great pairing with the DAVE. Tonality differed between the two phones, with the HE1000 leaning slightly to the warm side and the HD800 slightly to the cool. The HiFiMan sounded a little more relaxed, a little softer on the transients, and overall perhaps a little more natural than the Senn. The Senn gave an impression of intoxicating clarity on some music and I can hear its appeal. I have read that some consider the HE1000 too soft, but I found it plenty incisive with the DAVE, and perhaps a closer approximation to how acoustic music sounds in a real space. Then again, maybe some of these differences can be chalked up to the fact that the HD800 was unmodified, with stock cable, and had relatively low hours. Or maybe it’s my subjective taste. In any event, I'm buying the HE1000.
 
I did not do a lot of headphone listening with the Hugo TT, but for the most part I thought it was very, very good. Not as refined or precise or pure or detailed as the DAVE, but something I could easily live with given a little hedonic adaptation. With certain music, I did not like the synergy between the HD800 and the TT – there was a shrillness to some brass, a thinness to the sound.
 
Power and Isolation
 
With respect to power, I used an Audience Au24 SE LP power cord ($1080) on the DAVE, connected to an Audience aR6 TSSOX power conditioner ($6450), which is itself on a dedicated circuit. I didn’t experiment with other power cables. I have been very happy with Audience power products through the years.
 
With respect to isolation, I used three Stillpoints Ultra Minis ($375) under the DAVE on an IKEA bamboo cutting board ($15). Stillpoints have made a big difference with most components in my system and I use the Ultra SS (combined with the IKEA boards) under my speakers, power conditioner, and amplifier.
 
One More Audition
 
After this rave review, you have probably assumed I already have my new DAVE on order. Not yet. When I spend this kind of cash, I feel like I need to do my due diligence, and so I have a Schiit Yggdrasil on order. Schiit has a 15-day audition and return policy (minus a 5% restocking fee, which I find reasonable). Schiit makes the audition process easy, and that cannot be said for some of DAVE’s other competitors. I was hoping the Yggy would arrive during the DAVE audition, but Schiit appears to be running a little behind on their orders and I probably won’t have the Yggy until early to mid-April or so.
 
If you are thinking that this will not be a fair fight, you are right. I understand the Yggy is sensitive to what comes before it, and I won’t be able to pair the Yggy with a top notch source. Moreover, I will be using the USB input of Yggy, which I understand is not its best input. And my audio memories of the DAVE won’t exactly be fresh.
 
Realistically, I don’t expect the Yggy to compete all that closely with the DAVE. But I am open to the possibility that it could happen – my expectations have been wrong before – and I find it hard to ignore the opinions of so many others who have found the Yggy to punch way above its weight. Plus, I’m just curious. I suppose I could try to audition something like the TotalDac or Rockna or MSB or a dozen other summit-fi dacs. But I have little interest in spending more than $13k on a dac, or even half that, unless it (a) has a killer headphone out; and/or (b) eliminates the quality of the source from the equation.
 
So in another month or so, I will follow up this post with another (shorter!) post about my impressions of the Yggy. If the Yggy turns out to be a true giant-killer (DAVE-killer?), more power to the Schiit boys.
 
Final Thoughts
 
Only a crazy audiophile could say this, but DAVE appears to be an outstanding value. When you realize that you are buying a world class dac/headphone amp/digital preamp without the need for a fancy and expensive music server, an audiophile grade USB cable, separate linear power supplies, various USB tweaks, a transparency-robbing standalone headphone amp and associated cables, isolation tweaks on the non-dac boxes, grounding boxes and cables, rack space, and all the headaches that accompany these extras, the DAVE value proposition is evident.
 
You can run Roon/Tidal on a stock computer and ultra cheap USB cable. Or, if you have Ethernet in your listening room, you can get the computer and hard disk or NAS out of the room and invest $355 in a Sonore SonicOrbiter SE and run Roon/Tidal through a tiny component with no sonic penalty and, most likely, a sonic benefit. (For an inexpensive way to even further isolate your system from noise carried on the Ethernet signal, see Romaz’s post #281 on the “Comparison of 5 High End Digital Music Servers” thread.)
 
With the DAVE, Rob Watts has created something really special, something that advances our understanding and appreciation of music. Bravo!
 

 

Thanks for a very interesting review of  DAVE.
Together with what romaz and some others have said it actually says more and is more relevant to me than the pro review by Andrew Everard in HIFI NEWS. Yes I was tempted to make an exception and buy my first HIFI Magazine in many years.
 I was foolishly tempted both by the Dave review and also the promised "EXCLUSIVE" vinyl versus digital special. The magazine was sealed here in KL so I had to buy it, otherwise I would just have browsed it in the shop.
Both the review and the exclusive vinyl/digital are nothing special to read as usual from HIFI mags these days imo!
The exlusive amounts to basically nothing more than mentioning in a couple of lines that both analogue and digital are capable of delivering  music!
As if no one knew that before!
Typical of british Hi Fi mags, saying nothing much at all, which is why I normally don't buy them since many years.
And as mentioned  here measurements are  more  confusing  than elucidating.
Unlike your very specific  and detailed preferences and musical examples the HI FI News  review  is  really lacking in many respects.
A bit surprising knowing that Everard used to be at Gramophone and one would expect him to have better examples of dynamics than a CBS recording from the early 60s!
Yes Wagner's music especially Siegfrid's death ,which he mentions, is very dynamic indeed.From  a light whisper to full blast fff with very loud percussion. But the recording he chose is not!
Rather  loud yes. But  not particularly dynamic.
There are modern near full dynamic range  recordings of Wagner's music from several labels that offer a much more realistic dynamic range than the I would guess at the most 50-55 dB CBS could record on tape and without dolby in the early 60s.As THE  example of a really exceptionally realistic recording of the same music from the analogue age, nothing beats the direct cut Sheffield Labs LP. Some of the most realistic string sounds ever recorded,yes ever imho, plus very loud percusssion rendered without bandwidth limiting and other compromises of  most digital, and a dynamic range around 70-80 dB.
As so often there seems to be a lot of misunderstanding as to what a big dynamic range is even among reviewers like Andrew  Everard.
It has to be said though that even CBS made some  balance-wise pretty good recordings like  basically everyone else in the late 50s and early 60s before they f....  everything up completely when they started their all dead acoustically ,multimiking era which was when I stopped buying  their recordings.
Now Mahler's 5th from MTT/SFO  that you mention or for that matter Fischer's and the BFO's or actually the technically  best modern recording of that work in its 24/192  masterfiles version from Acousense here we are talking real dynamic range !
I prefer Karajan's BPO mid 70s Mahler 5 on DGG as being the best musically tightly followed by MTT and Fischer . But no other recording of the work  I have heard,is as realistically recorded as the German  Acousense especially via Dave and HE1000 directly.
Back on topic of Dave again, a couple of hours with reference material and both HD800 and HE1000 convinced me that it is very special indeed.
But alas very  very expensive,for me at least.
I am kind of hoping that the predictions of someone here of a portable battery powered Dave with 50000-60000 taps at a more digestible price is just  around the corner.
Finally what happened to Rob Watts' post where he trashed the  Yggy a couple of hours ago?
Cheers Chris  enjoying live symphonic music  at rehearsals and concerts on an almost daily basis these days.

 

[TheAttorney]

I hope you really enjoy your Dave when you get it,but i really strongly disagree with you about optical cables,I've tried 4 different optical cables with the Dave at different prices and their was and is no difference in sound quality.It could be you've got some kind of faulty Dave,or it could be your ears are playing tricks on you.

I doubt if DAVE's optical input ia faulty because I heard the same (maybe magnified) differences with Yggy. Of course I'm suseptible to mind tricks when subjectively comparing anything. We ALL are.
When I get my own DAVE in a few weeks time, I'll redo this comparison (the dealer is very patient for loaning me the AQ for so long). Whichever way it goes, I'll report back as I hear it. In the meantime, I stand by my review.
Believe me, I reallly wanted to hear no difference because it would save me lots of money.

 

[Christer]

  I doubt if DAVE's optical input ia faulty because I heard the same (maybe magnified) differences with Yggy. Of course I'm suseptible to mind tricks when subjectively comparing anything. We ALL are.
When I get my own DAVE in a few weeks time, I'll redo this comparison (the dealer is very patient for loaning me the AQ for so long). Whichever way it goes, I'll report back as I hear it. In the meantime, I stand by my review.
Believe me, I reallly wanted to hear no difference because it would save me lots of money.

Hello I may have missed some of your earlier posts, but in your review you fail to mention even once, what music and what  recordings and  what resolutions you listened to.
All your review  tells me is that you obviously like both Dave and the Yggy. But it gives me no musical  references to go by at all.
By most other acounts plus Rob himself, it also seems that  usb will deliver the ulimate SQ of Dave which you haven't used at all if I understand things correctly?

 

[lovethatsound]

I doubt if DAVE's optical input ia faulty because I heard the same (maybe magnified) differences with Yggy.Of course I'm suseptible to mind tricks when subjectively comparing anything. We ALL are.
When I get my own DAVE in a few weeks time, I'll redo this comparison (the dealer is very patient for loaning me the AQ for so long). Whichever way it goes, I'll report back as I hear it. In the meantime, I stand by my review.
Believe me, I reallly wanted to hear no difference because it would save me lots of money.

Hi TheAttorney
I'VE done tests with digital cables optical and usb and so have many other people on here and no one has heard any difference,that is because there is no difference,Rob watts says there's no difference,so what you have heard i don't know.I do know that alot people won't be happy with a piece of equipment that don't need expensive cables and sources.

 

[TheAttorney]

@Christer, there's me thinking I was very clear in spelling these things out, exaclty what components I used and why.
Yes my earlier posts would have helped you, but anyway my source is a Nagra CDC, which is a CD player (with integrated preamp and headphone amp), which means that all my listening done was using CDs.
 
I listened to a wide variety of rock/pop music (and occasionally classical) over time in this comparison, but in the last period I did state that I focused on female vocals, particularly slighlty hot masterings.Some examples:
 
Temptation - Holly Cole (example of a more natural than most style of recording)
Girl in the other room - Diana Krall (good recording, but slightly hot)
London Grammer (typical modern sound)
Songbird - Eva Cassidy (natural instruments, often hot vocals)
 
By hot I mean closely miked, hyped up, often with losts of reverb. An unbalanced system can cause trouble with this kind of sound, but a well balanced system can take it in its stride.
 
I hasten to add that I do listen to all type of music, but these are some of the ones I often use for comparisons.