CHORD ELECTRONICS DAVE

[kennyb123]

Certainly the more time one spends with the DAVE, the more one will appreciate what it brings to the table. I will say though that when comparing the DAVE to both the Hugo TT and Mojo, it took very little time to conclude that the DAVE was in a different league entirely.

 

[raypin]

Mmmm......for experienced Dave owners only: what interconnects are you using to connect with your preferred external amp for headphones? What external amps for headphone are you using? What is your favorite source for the Dave? Reason I am asking is I need feedback to help build my headphone system around the Dave. Tia.

 

[Beolab]

I agree with ecwl and Crgreen.

The DAVE has a similar tonal balance as the Mojo – so at first glance it may not sound overly different. The difference is rather in the background – and literally so. Small signal reproduction is so much improved that it opens a new dimension toward spatial depth. A side effect is a relaxing smoothness that nevertheless doesn't hide any sharpness or hardness on the recordings. The sound is organic despite the lack of analogue warmth. A combination of ultimate smoothness, absence of digital glare and surreal transparency unique in its kind. (That's my experience after owning a black DAVE since the beginning of the year.) Indeed for me DAVE is a dream come true.

I think you are spot on, and summarise the DAVE sound in a very few sentences!

Very well put!

 

[JaZZ]

Headphone amps? None. The best (in terms of high fidelity and transparency) you can do is use the DAVE's headphone output, directly connected to the DAC output stage – which you can't bypass with an external amp anyway, it's still in the signal path. Hence no analogue cable in my case.
 
Silver Dragon for the HE1000, stock cable and (since today) Black Dragon for the HD 800.

 

[EVOLVIST]

I agree with ecwl and Crgreen.

The DAVE has a similar tonal balance as the Mojo – so at first glance it may not sound overly different. The difference is rather in the background – and literally so. Small signal reproduction is so much improved that it opens a new dimension toward spatial depth. A side effect is a relaxing smoothness that nevertheless doesn't hide any sharpness or hardness on the recordings. The sound is organic despite the lack of analogue warmth. A combination of ultimate smoothness, absence of digital glare and surreal transparency unique in its kind. (That's my experience after owning a black DAVE since the beginning of the year.) Indeed for me DAVE is a dream come true.

What do you mean by lack of analogue warmth?

I'm still waffling. I don't want to regret this next DAC purchase, because now we're talking about a whole other price range.

I'm still finding it hard to decide between the Bricasti M1 SE, the DAVE, the Berkeley Alpha Reference 2. There are some others that I'm looking at, but I haven't heard them yet, like the AMR DP-777 SE, but man, what a mindfield it's turned out to be in this price bracket!

 

[Beolab]

Mmmm......for experienced Dave owners only: what interconnects are you using to connect with your preferred external amp for headphones? What external amps for headphone are you using? What is your favorite source for the Dave? Reason I am asking is I need feedback to help build my headphone system around the Dave. Tia.

The most transparency you get with DAVE alone as already stated, because it is the worlds best headphone amp.

And the DAVE can drive all headphones on the market with ease i first of all want to highlight.

I would recommend to start with Cables if you want to fine tune the sound:

Im using DHC cables Prion 4S Headphone Cable that made greater improvement than any signal cable or power cable i have yet heard to this date. It sounds as you have changed to a new dac, that big was the improvement.


I will only recommend to add a separate amp if you would like to bring a warmer tone flavour to the sound, but in the end loose some transparency then i would recommend a tube amp like Woo Audio WA5 or a Eddie Current.

Or if you want to "lift" the sound with a more extended sound stage and more fluidity with greater up lived ( fake) dynamics you can go with a SS amp like the Moon 430 or the
Moon 600i speaker amp that i use by myself.
You maybe loose like 2-3 % in transparency, but i will only recommend this if you got HE-6 , Abyss or LCD-4 200 Ohms headphones.

Then i recommend just to go single ended if you should go with a separate amp.
I have tested that also with Transparent Reference v 5 XLR and it did not improve the sound.

 

[romaz]

What do you mean by lack of analogue warmth?

I'm still waffling. I don't want to regret this next DAC purchase, because now we're talking about a whole other price range.

I'm still finding it hard to decide between the Bricasti M1 SE, the DAVE, the Berkeley Alpha Reference 2. There are some others that I'm looking at, but I haven't heard them yet, like the AMR DP-777 SE, but man, what a mindfield it's turned out to be in this price bracket!

The DAVE is tonally accurate.  It there is no warmth in the recording, the DAVE won't add it.  Veritas means "truth" and so by it's very name, Rob intended for the DAVE to be truthful.  If you are married to a cool sounding headphone or speakers and amplifier and you are looking to balance them with a warm DAC, then the DAVE isn't for you but neither will the Bricasti.  I haven't heard the new Berkeley Reference 2 but the original Reference didn't sound warm to me.  None of the MSB DACs are warm.  Same goes for dCS.  TotalDacs aren't warm either unless you go for the d1-tube Mk 2.  The AMR DP-777 might be a good choice for you.  Also consider the Lampi Golden Gate.
 
I agree with Beolab.  Tuning is best done outside of the source.  Copper cables exude warmth and I find this to be the case with my DHC Nucleotide which is made of OCC copper over my Spore4.  As for amplifiers, the Moon 430HA is a warmish sounding amp.  The Eddie Current Black Widow is another very good example.  So is the EC Zana Deux depending on the tubes used.  Most Woo amps are warm. So many good options.

 

[romaz]

Mmmm......for experienced Dave owners only: what interconnects are you using to connect with your preferred external amp for headphones? What external amps for headphone are you using? What is your favorite source for the Dave? Reason I am asking is I need feedback to help build my headphone system around the Dave. Tia.

I agree with what's been said.  Unless you need more amplification than what the DAVE's headphone amp provides or unless you're looking for a different tonality, then I'm not sure what there is to be gained by adding an outboard headphone amp.  You not only lose out on the most transparent headphone amp there is but you also complicate your life by having to add an amp, interconnects, another mains cable, etc.  The beauty of the DAVE for me is its compact simplicity.
 
As for the source, all the sources I have heard with the DAVE sound good, even a basic PC or Mac but there are some sources that sound better.  Take the time to read through the last few months of this thread and you will find a myriad of opinions.

 

[JaZZ]

What do you mean by lack of analogue warmth?

 
Some DACs are passably successful with applying some forgiving warmth (in the form of harmonic distortion) for masking digital coldness, approaching the characteristic of an analogue source (early Wadia DACs come to mind, even my then Theta Pro basic II was affected by it, although less obviously), and certainly most tube-equipped DACs and CDPs belong to this category. The Price is reduced clarity and transparency, and in the long run you may even perceive this trait as fatiguing as well. The DAVE doesn't need this. Even my Bel Canto DAC2 sounds warm in comparison, but at the same time less organic and less smooth.

 

[EVOLVIST]

   
Some DACs are passably successful with applying some forgiving warmth (in the form of harmonic distortion) for masking digital coldness, approaching the characteristic of an analogue source (early Wadia DACs come to mind, even my then Theta Pro basic II was affected by it, although less obviously), and certainly most tube-equipped DACs and CDPs belong to this category. The Price is reduced clarity and transparency, and in the long run you may even perceive this trait as fatiguing as well. The DAVE doesn't need this. Even my Bel Canto DAC2 sounds warm in comparison, but at the same time less organic and less smooth.

 
@romaz, yeah, and because @JaZZ wrote "Lacking warmth," I just wondered how he defined that. I don't want a warm DAC, though. Smooth, yes, fluid, of course, but it must be because the music is smooth and/or fluid. I want as accurate of a representation of the recording that I can get, without any digital glare.
 
Actually, I thought the Bricasti M1 SE did this very well, despite sounding a little lean. However, I found out the unit that I demoed only had about 65 hours on it, so I know it wasn't well broken in. This might have had an impact on its sound.
 
The question that keeps coming back to me, is the off the shelf DAC chip dead? Is Delta-Sigma dead, now that we have more cutting edge technology like the DAVE? R2R, will the technology used in DAVE render that obsolete, as well?
 
What I cannot find is what makes the Berkeley Alpha Reference 2 DAC work. I'm very curious. And also, I didn't spend enough time with the DAVE.
 
Anyway, I digress (sort of). This is all about the DAVE and whether I will come to that decision. I'm totally enamored with what Chord is doing over there. It's this thinking outside of the box that I enjoy. 

 

[theveterans]

 The question that keeps coming back to me, is the off the shelf DAC chip dead? Is Delta-Sigma dead, now that we have more cutting edge technology like the DAVE? R2R, will the technology used in DAVE render that obsolete, as well?

 
DAVE is a delta-sigma design in the core and not R2R, but the implementation is custom and tailored by Chord: DAC chips, FPGA, etc. Off the shelf DAC chips will most likely be used in portable areas.
 
R2R can be custom implemented too like Metrum Adiago's FPGA and NOS filter or Schiit's Yggdrasil's custom oversampling filter.

 

[EVOLVIST]

   
DAVE is a delta-sigma design in the core and not R2R, but the implementation is custom and tailored by Chord: DAC chips, FPGA, etc. Off the shelf DAC chips will most likely be used in portable areas.
 
R2R can be custom implemented too like Metrum Adiago's FPGA and NOS filter or Schiit's Yggdrasil's custom oversampling filter.

 
Have you heard the Metrum Adagio?

 

[romaz]

   
@romaz, yeah, and because @JaZZ wrote "Lacking warmth," I just wondered how he defined that. I don't want a warm DAC, though. Smooth, yes, fluid, of course, but it must be because the music is smooth and/or fluid. I want as accurate of a representation of the recording that I can get, without any digital glare.
 
Actually, I thought the Bricasti M1 SE did this very well, despite sounding a little lean. However, I found out the unit that I demoed only had about 65 hours on it, so I know it wasn't well broken in. This might have had an impact on its sound.
 
The question that keeps coming back to me, is the off the shelf DAC chip dead? Is Delta-Sigma dead, now that we have more cutting edge technology like the DAVE? R2R, will the technology used in DAVE render that obsolete, as well?
 
What I cannot find is what makes the Berkeley Alpha Reference 2 DAC work. I'm very curious. And also, I didn't spend enough time with the DAVE.
 
Anyway, I digress (sort of). This is all about the DAVE and whether I will come to that decision. I'm totally enamored with what Chord is doing over there. It's this thinking outside of the box that I enjoy. 

My observation is that in years past, audiophiles craved warmth and a certain pleasant albeit artificial harmonic because it was necessary.   Necessary to compensate for poor recordings, jitter, glare, harshness, shallowness or just general lifelessness.  Because many of these problems couldn't be overcome, it became easier to cover them up.  It would be like spraying on cologne to mask body odor when what was really needed was a good bath.  
 
As transducers, amplifiers, and cables have improved, it is the digital front end that many continue to blame as the culprit.  Ask any vinyl lover why they continue to cling to their turntables and many will tell you it's because they don't believe digital is as good because of the glare and harshness that many equate with digital.  They call it "digititis." Many of these folks will also tell you that when they compare analog to digital, something seems "missing" with digital.   Is it the digital file, the music server or the DAC that's the problem?  It's probably a combination of all of these things but those of us who have spent quality time with the DAVE understand just how much more information is present in a Redbook file or even a 320k file than our previous DACs led us to believe.  You don't appreciate these previously hidden details right away but as you get used to the information that the DAVE provides, you begin to very easily notice just how much is missing when you listen to other systems.
 
There are those of us who enjoy going to live events and given the choice, some of us would prefer to sit on the stage amidst the performers so that we're engulfed with the music.  Then there are those of us who prefer to sit in the stalls where we can better glean the soundstage and the acoustics of the venue.  Of course, there are those who are content sitting in the balcony to save a few dollars just so long as we get to experience the performance live.  Regardless of one's preference, those of us who attend live events understand that there's nothing quite like "being there."  While high-end audio will never be a true substitute for "being there", the only way to approach this ideal is to have access to as much of the details of the performance as possible.  In my view, you can never have too much detail.  This is what a good DAC is responsible for.  The goal of an amplifier is to amplify these details that are presented to it and the goal of the transducer is to convincingly present this analog waveform to your ears.  If the details aren't there, then what good is the best amplifier or transducer?  Garbage in, garbage out.  If the details aren't there, then what good is the DAC even if it does a nice job of covering up its inadequacies with softness and harmonics? This is where I believe people miss the boat with what a DAC is supposed to do.  A good DAC isn't supposed to sound good, it is supposed to be a faithful translator.  The onus of sounding good needs to belong to the performance and to the recording of that performance.  If the performance is good and the translation has been done faithfully, then the rest of the chain merely has to get out of the way.  
 
Of course, no component is perfect or truly transparent.  We all know about the issues with ADCs.  Short of a million TAPS, even the DAVE falls short.  Transducers have their quirks and so speakers and headphones need to be properly paired with an amplifier that highlights their strengths and minimizes their weaknesses.  Since nothing is truly transparent, the best systems, IMO, are about balance which is why system integration is such an artform and can take months or even years to perfect.  I think life is soooo much easier, however, if you're starting from a neutral, resolving, clean and faithful source than one that keeps secrets or tells lies.  Those of you who have photography backgrounds will understand this final analogy very well.  Most photographers prefer to shoot in RAW format rather than JPEGs even though JPEGs can look better upon first presentation.  Why?  Because the RAW file has all of the information present whereas the JPEG has been manipulated where data has been truncated to achieve a certain pre-determined degree of sharpening and white balance.  What if a certain portrait requires more or less sharpening than has been performed or the white balance has to be further adjusted?  Well, too bad.  You can make adjustments in post but it will result in even further degradation of the file.  With a RAW file, if you were lucky enough to photograph a beautiful model that requires no retouching, then you'll be glad that automatic retouching wasn't performed.  With photographs that definitely benefit from beautification, then do it in post and not at the compromise of resolution.  DACs should be looked at the same way.  Let it faithfully present to you all that a recording has to offer, warts and all, and figure out how to make adjustments downstream.

 

[iDesign]

  I agree with ecwl and Crgreen.
 
The DAVE has a similar tonal balance as the Mojo – so at first glance it may not sound overly different. The difference is rather in the background – and literally so. Small signal reproduction is so much improved that it opens a new dimension toward spatial depth. A side effect is a relaxing smoothness that nevertheless doesn't hide any sharpness or hardness on the recordings. The sound is organic despite the lack of analogue warmth. A combination of ultimate smoothness, absence of digital glare and surreal transparency unique in its kind. (That's my experience after owning a black DAVE since the beginning of the year.) Indeed for me DAVE is a dream come true.

Interesting. Between the Hugo, Hugo TT, and Mojo, which product is most similar to DAVE? I have my own thoughts but it would be interesting to have others weigh in as well. 

 

[analogmusic]

  I agree with ecwl and Crgreen.
 
The DAVE has a similar tonal balance as the Mojo – so at first glance it may not sound overly different. The difference is rather in the background – and literally so. Small signal reproduction is so much improved that it opens a new dimension toward spatial depth. A side effect is a relaxing smoothness that nevertheless doesn't hide any sharpness or hardness on the recordings. The sound is organic despite the lack of analogue warmth. A combination of ultimate smoothness, absence of digital glare and surreal transparency unique in its kind. (That's my experience after owning a black DAVE since the beginning of the year.) Indeed for me DAVE is a dream come true.

After hearing Dave and Hugo TT, I completely agree with how Jazz described it spot on.
 
The Dave is so much better than Hugo TT, my jaw dropped  when I compared both. Dave is a dream come true, I remember absolutely being disgusted with the earliest CD players 30 years ago, finally this is digital music reproduced properly !
 
Hugo does give huge taste of that, but Dave is the dream come true.