CHORD ELECTRONICS DAVE
Jan 5, 2024 at 2:24 PM Post #25,306 of 25,821
What is the difference between 1 and 4? I suggest to blend them together, then I think it makes sense.
I interpret 4 to mean that albums that aren't recorded at a "concert" have a "live" feel to them, sort of regardless of how much studio processing was performed.

Naturally, some albums are recorded live in a studio, all the musicians playing together simultaneously. So then you might say that people who want 4 tend to want all studio albums to have that kind of sound and feeling.

Part of the trick here, I feel, is that people who have a preference also have a way of defining why. So, erm, people who don't want 4 aren't necessarily very good at defining it. But at least those people can tell that it's not their thing.
 
Jan 5, 2024 at 5:06 PM Post #25,307 of 25,821
What is the difference between 1 and 4? I suggest to blend them together, then I think it makes sense.
I think for some audiophiles, the difference can be between standing in front of a live performance and hearing the stereo image, and standing in the same position but hearing the surround sound image (so including the sound reflections that are specific to the event/venue). Can be a subtle difference, but still relevant for some audiophiles.
 
Jan 5, 2024 at 6:48 PM Post #25,308 of 25,821
The starting point is that there are basically four types of "audiophile" goals:
  1. recreation of the musical event
  2. transparency and minimal loss in reproduction: warts and all as it were
  3. tuned to make music sound good
  4. making the music sound like it's being played live
I like to think I’m a pure #2 kind of guy. But not the type who likes the engineer’s recording studio DAC with noise floor modulation that I found harsh and bright.

Because I believe that #2 naturally leads to #1&4 for well recorded music. That’s why I like my Chord DACs.

The problem when you have poorly recorded music is that you’re never really going to get to #1&4 anyway so you’re now just adding euphoric distortions to get to #1&4 which then really makes us #3

That’s why I didn’t comment on the post when it was put up in the first place at WBF. As I’m not so sure about the classification.
 
Jan 6, 2024 at 2:23 AM Post #25,310 of 25,821
The problem when you have poorly recorded music is that you’re never really going to get to #1&4
Its why i like Rob's statement by saying hes recreating the analog signal that went into the ADC. I since listen with a different mindset to my music and just know if theres few dynamics and specially energy in a recording theres nothing any DAC can do but colour it.

The difference in brain fooling reality between decent and over mastered/mixed recordings is ever getting bigger as he comes closer to that signal that went into the ADC.

It makes my mind at ease and i actually can accept the music as it was digitalized or search for a rewarding (original non remastered) version of the same play.
 
Jan 6, 2024 at 4:32 AM Post #25,311 of 25,821
This is all very interesting and it challenges one to think about objectives and perceptions. As a kid, we used to talk at school on Friday mornings about the great new songs we heard from our favourite bands on Top of the Pops - a UK charts show on Thursday evenings. As an early teenager, we used to gather at each others houses and listen to albums on various levels of record decks, music centres and cassette tape machines. As later teenagers, we’d go to live concerts together. Never once did the actual gear and equipment come into the equation, it was solely about the music.

Designers like Rob are surely working hard at getting as close as they possibly can to recreating the original music and our own desires to get as close as we can to that with our own systems is a decent objective to hold but, as we all climb our own particular musical ladders, we should remember where we started out and not look down on others further down the ladder. If someone is happy with an iPhone and a pair of earbuds, then there is nothing wrong with that either and good luck to them. They will at least have a lot more disposable income. 😊
 
Jan 7, 2024 at 12:02 AM Post #25,314 of 25,821
Is there conjecture/knowledge of what the DAVE Scaler and Ultima DAC cost is projected at?
$10k for the Choral m-scaler, and like $20k to $100k for the Ultima dac (it's still up in the air, from what I've read)
 
Jan 7, 2024 at 8:06 AM Post #25,319 of 25,821
Good comparison btw mu1 + MMT vs mu2. For all the Dave mu1 owners. Seeming compelling.

https://www.hifi-advice.com/blog/review/digital-reviews/network-player-reviews/grimm-mu2/
I never give much credence to professional reviews.
These guys are all friends with manufacturers and have a common interest in hyping up products.
If you listen to them, there no inferior products in hi-fi.

As for the MU1/MU2.
I spent some time with both, not really impressed.
I have to admit their DIY-like design turned me off right away.
They slapped inside a NUC-i3 for god sake, and even brought out its tiny power button (yes, button, not a switch) to the back panel to serve as a system power on-off switch.

As for the sound of both MU1 and MU2, its is coloured, with midtones exaggerated, the overall presentation is brought forward and heavily weighted towards the center of the soundstage.
There is no 3D imaging like you get with HMS/DAVE.
Yes, they do sound less harsh than the DAVE on its own, but so probably most DACs out there.

The web interface is primitive which is probably an indication that the products where rushed to the market.

All that said, their coloured sound might appeal to a sizeable population who like this kind of presentation and do not care about engineering aspects of design as I do.
 
Jan 7, 2024 at 9:10 AM Post #25,320 of 25,821
I never give much credence to professional reviews.
These guys are all friends with manufacturers and have a common interest in hyping up products.
If you listen to them, there no inferior products in hi-fi.

As for the MU1/MU2.
I spent some time with both, not really impressed.
I have to admit their DIY-like design turned me off right away.
They slapped inside a NUC-i3 for god sake, and even brought out its tiny power button (yes, button, not a switch) to the back panel to serve as a system power on-off switch.

As for the sound of both MU1 and MU2, its is coloured, with midtones exaggerated, the overall presentation is brought forward and heavily weighted towards the center of the soundstage.
There is no 3D imaging like you get with HMS/DAVE.
Yes, they do sound less harsh than the DAVE on its own, but so probably most DACs out there.

The web interface is primitive which is probably an indication that the products where rushed to the market.

All that said, their coloured sound might appeal to a sizeable population who like this kind of presentation and do not care about engineering aspects of design as I do.
That is exactly what I heard, me and my friend heard it twice and we were not impressed at all. The press is of course raving over it, I guess they gotta keep the gravy train going. As for me, I couldn't care less about those units, overpriced uninspiring and dead-sounding, flat nonsense.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

  • Back
    Top