[rkt31]

hugo usb input is micro, which may cause some difficulties in using thicker and longer usb cables, other than that i found no problems in using usb input of hugo. few days back i used hugo with jitterbugs and ferrite cores on the cable and i would say it easily bettered the coaxial connection. usb sounded more fluid and open. with usb input some tweaks help a lot like using jitterbug and ferrite cores.these tweaks help to improve the usb input of any dac not just hugo. with galvanically isolated usb inputs the improvement may be less but with non galvanically isolated usb inputs, the improvement is more, to the extent that it may not matter if the input is galvanically isolated or not.

 

[Light - Man]

Prior to the Hugo, I was unimpressed with USB connections. CD usually sounded better defined. With the Hugo, and subsequently the DAVE, that changed. Chord have clearly got USB right, and it's now my preferred input. I tried both balanced and optical connections to the DAVE from my Meridain 500 CD transport, and found no discenable difference - a first, so I've stuck with optical to avoid any possible RF transmission to the DAVE. I've also found a number of ways to improve the quality of the USB feed from my hi-fi laptop, some of which might not amount to anything more than RF rejection.

 
Do tell us more? 

 

[Crgreen]

Never had a problem with the Hugo over USB, with or without a Regen in the chain.

Currently, I use a PS Audio LANRover with I metre of Ethernet cable between the send and receive units and a MCRU linear power supply to power the receive unit. Half metre USB cables at either end of the chain (Tandy Chronos - cheap but good) and jitterbugs at the laptop USB port and LANRover USB output. Black Rhodium mains cables to the power supply and DAVE. To my ears, a definite improvement in what I'm getting from the DAVE.

 

[Christer]

Never had a problem with the Hugo over USB, with or without a Regen in the chain.

Currently, I use a PS Audio LANRover with I metre of Ethernet cable between the send and receive units and a MCRU linear power supply to power the receive unit. Half metre USB cables at either end of the chain (Tandy Chronos - cheap but good) and jitterbugs at the laptop USB port and LANRover USB output. Black Rhodium mains cables to the power supply and DAVE. To my ears, a definite improvement in what I'm getting from the DAVE.

Hmm, you are using both LANROVER and jitterbugs at both ends with a DAVE?
I have been thinking of  possibly getting a LANROVER for my HUGO. But a discussion quoted here earlier at What´s best Forum, stated jitterbug add´s noise which is something I don´t want more of.
they seemed to consider jitterbug mainly as some kind of  placebo for audiophiles.
What kind of music are you  playing to hear the "definite improvement" with you DAVE?
I have only heard DAVE via headphones and no add ons whatsoever.
But on well recorded acoustic material it was  stunningly good that way without any of the problems I have had with my HUGO.

 

[Beolab]

No and no.

And Dave 2 hasn't even been dreamed about - unless major essential parts become unavailable Dave 2 is many years away.

Rob 

We wait and see how everything will turn out, no one knows for certen what the future has to offer.

 

[astrostar59]

 
Hmm, you are using both LANROVER and jitterbugs at both ends with a DAVE?
I have been thinking of  possibly getting a LANROVER for my HUGO. But a discussion quoted here earlier at What´s best Forum, stated jitterbug add´s noise which is something I don´t want more of.
they seemed to consider jitterbug mainly as some kind of  placebo for audiophiles.
What kind of music are you  playing to hear the "definite improvement" with you DAVE?
I have only heard DAVE via headphones and no add ons whatsoever.
But on well recorded acoustic material it was  stunningly good that way without any of the problems I have had with my HUGO.

I haven't tried the Landrover. But have tried many other jitter bug and noise fixers for USB. Non really made me happy about it. My point is, all these products and the fact they partly work says in my book, that there is an issue with USB audio connection. AOIP is something new, and to me removes all the audible issues I heard in USB. It is actually no more expensive if you include fancy USB cables and fixer boxes. 
 
I won't be going back to USB anytime soon.

 

[ecwl]

I have been thinking of  possibly getting a LANROVER for my HUGO. But a discussion quoted here earlier at What´s best Forum, stated jitterbug add´s noise which is something I don´t want more of.
they seemed to consider jitterbug mainly as some kind of  placebo for audiophiles.
...
But on well recorded acoustic material it was  stunningly good that way without any of the problems I have had with my HUGO.

You really should give Jitterbug a try with your Hugo first, it's cheap and effective. I use it with my noisy laptop and Chord Mojo. Works great. Yes, it's totally useless with clean USB sources. And it's not going to fix non-Chord DACs with poor jitter immunity.
I wouldn't listen to What's Best Forum, considering they've basically been trashing Chord DAVE mostly.

 

[miketlse]

We wait and see how everything will turn out, no one knows for certen what the future has to offer.

It is true that no one knows for certain what the future has to offer.
 
However any engineering/technology firm like chord, will have a future product strategy plan, which has been created based on expected markets for products, anticipated technology changes (including obsolescence and technology prices), the available resources (staff, manhours, cashflow, supply chain, etc). This strategy would normally be reviewed/updated quarterly. A long term strategy is essential, to help plan for employing the staff with the required skills, or ensuring the appropriate training and development capability is in place. 
 
The chord product line covers multiple product types, so at any one time Rob and the rest of the chord team will be working on several product projects (just think of davina, blu2, power amp upgrades, mojo add-on module, plus all the projects that the public never hear about). I suspect that Rob is being completely honest, when he says that DAVE mk2 is not likely for several years at least. 

 

[ecwl]

Feels like this forum in the past few posts has become a USB vs RCA/BNC/AES S/PDIF (through a great source like AOIP) debate.
 
My simple take is, obviously USB is heavily dependent on the USB receiver implementation of the DAC, as well as the USB source. Whereas RCA/BNC/AES S/PDIF input is heavily dependent on the source implementation. So in many ways people are comparing apples to oranges. That's why I absolutely believe that people who are getting better results from RCA/BNC/AES S/PDIF (especially from great source like Rednet) are correct when listening to their system.
 
Getting back to Chord and more specifically DAVE vs non-Chord DACs, I think the USB vs S/PDIF debate has many factors that influences outcome. First of all, USB and S/PDIF DAC inputs can be galvanically isolated or not. That would influence how much RF noise/leakage current (upTone mRendu/LPS is big into this now) that gets injected the DAC and influence sound effect. DAVE, Hugo TT and 2Qute are galvanically isolated whereas Hugo/Mojo are not. Filters such as Audioquest Jitterbug can dramatically lower the RF noise and leakage current and significantly improve the sound. Moreover, leakage current occurs if the USB source is connected to mains (as opposed to battery powered), even if the DAC is galvanically isolated, you're still going to get some leakage current. And the other interesting thing to me is that some DACs have galvanically isolated S/PDIF input and others don't. That also matters. None of the Chord DACs have galvanically isolated S/PDIF input so if the S/PDIF source is poor, it really messes up the Chord DAC.
 
The second thing I found is that different DACs clearly have different degrees of jitter immunity. As a result, if the source/DAC USB implementation is poor, but you have an ultra-low jitter S/PDIF source, the DACs with worse jitter immunity are going to sound better with S/PDIF, rather than USB. I know everyone quotes and claims their DACs have great jitter immunity and to a large extent, they all do. But at the high-end audiophile level, to quote Casino Royale the movie, there's jitter immunity and then there's jitter immunity. I truly believe Chord DACs have superior jitter immunity due to DPLL and Pulse Array DAC and the overall design that it doesn't matter as much whether we use USB vs S/PDIF which I definitely cannot say for other DACs. I think that's why people have such different experiences with this.

 

[Crgreen]

As regards the Jitterbug introducing noise, my experience has been otherwise. Then again, there's practically no proposition in audio for which you' won't find both supporters and objectors. Indeed, the Internet generally. Best use your own ears, and given the cost, it's worth the risk.

 

[DaveRedRef-III]

Sorry O/T guys but I thought some of you, like me, would find this a fascinating insight into the world of the producer/mastering engineer. Albeit 2 years old.
http://productionadvice.co.uk/its-not-the-format/

 

[DaveRedRef-III]

An interesting comparison

As one would expect, given my board name, I play my music from the Chord Red Reference III. I have mentioned in the past that I have found the 44.1 kHz output to be superior when fed to Dave. To my ears it is so pure and natural. It is so relaxed. The 88.2 is undoubtably tighter but to my ears not as natural. Anyway I made that assessment a while ago and stuck to a 44.1 feed from there. I didn't revisit that decision when I changed speakers either, so the last couple of days I thought I would revisit it.

Having gotten fully acclimatised to 44.1 feed over the last 11 months, the difference was pretty stark when I switched to 88.2 in that the tightness of focus was there but also much superior timbre, resolution, deeper bass with more focused punch. Some of the timbre benefit may be down to the ribbon tweeter and mid I am now using but there was a clear benefit regardless. I was surprised, I suspect that I must have made the originally comparison predominantly via things like choral music where a natural pure presentation was top of the agenda. ABing 44.1 and 88.2 and I quickly realised that my speaker alignment was microscopically out along the front baffle vertical plane. 88.2 is very focussed indeed via the RRT whilst the 44.1 was softer, though purer and simply more relaxed and natural (as I had previously noticed) which some people might prefer. On contemporary music (drums, bass, guitar and even piano) the benefits of 88.2 are clearly desirable but When I played say Sir Neville Mariner's Faurer Requiem where long smooth clean voices and reverberations are a prerequisite then 88.2 just doesnt sound as natural, real or even present as 44.1. After continued ABing, to my ears 44.1 had more natural reflections from the Chapel walls. 88.2 sounded more dry by comparison as if you had two takes laid 'almost' exactly over each other. It sounds not unlike a studio affect to me, much tighter than automated double tracking. Perhaps more like the most mild flanging you could ever produce. It sounds very complimentary to stringed instruments like acoustic guitar and mandolin sounds incredible via 88.2 upsampling. Classy presentation but not as true as 44.1 which has a natural bloom similar to tube. This gives a greater impression of being actually in the presence of the performance.

My conclusion is to use 44.1 for most classical and 88.2 for contemporary music until the upgrade. The detail and timbre from 88.2 are not false in any way. They are extraordinary.

Why would this interest any of you?
Well if you are waiting for Blu 2 or the eventual Red Ref upgrade then I am betting Red Book will come with timbre, detail and focus like no streamer can produce at any price. I would expect Timbre in particular to be truly exceptional. The difference between 44.1 to 88.2 in this area is already significant. Goodness knows the difference between 44.1 and 705.6 upsampling. I would expect it (red book) to seriously rival most high res streamed music out there. I just hope Rob can match the benefits with that pure, natural, relaxed flow which can be had right now from 44.1.

Edit: there is also more 'kick' in 88.2 kHz mode. Presumably due to more accurate transients.

 

[DaveRedRef-III]

its interesting reading Ian Shepherds link again above and my last post too as it highlights that we all have our preferences for how we like to hear our music and what form of presentation has the most effect on us. I grew up hearing musical instruments within a close proximity to the sound. Whether it was at home, band practice in the garage, performance at clubs or practicing again at school in the sound booths. I guess that's why bass dynamics have such an important roll to play in my emotional assessment of performance as presented by hifi. I performed mostly in small venues but still preferred 'recording' to 'performing live' simply because there was more control of the sound and performance when recording. It's probably why, if offered free tickets for my favourite artist playing at Wembley stadium, I wouldn't bother going but if they were booked to play at Ronnie Scott's I would pay up to £1,000 for the privilege.

When it comes to hifi also there is no right solution to every component imo. Only what's right for our preferences. For instance, many audiophiles like tubes and I get that. Music can be very vibrant through tubes which reflects the shimmer of the glass on the sound in a similar way in which you may also hit a certain volume with your speakers where they begin to react/engage with the room. It has a positive affect on our bodies for some reason. I guess it has a stronger resonance within us. Some audiophiles may say that is not pure sound we are hearing but it is certainly pure music. Who are we to say it is the wrong way to listen to hifi, after all go to any live event and that is exactly what is happening. Equally no two venues sound the same so our favourite performance may be down partly to the venue.

As I said, I like intimate performance because that was my first experience of live performance. If I pick up an acoustic or classical guitar and play, it sounds nothing like a recording because the bass hasn't been rolled off for a start. An engineer hasn't placed a mic at the optimum position to highlight a particular frequency band to enhance the delivery of the particular piece being played or to avoid certain noises on the sound box which are idiosyncratic to the performers technique. When we are choosing speakers again this is a factor. In terms of authenticity I would challenge any speaker manufacturer for instance to produce a better take on the sound of a classical guitar than Sonus Faber. Why? Because the speaker is in many ways like the instrument. It has a wooden sound box. It has a silk dome tweeter and silk sounds very close to nylon strings. Guitar strings shimmer and so do silk dome tweeters and lastly the Sonus Faber has a stringed grill for the sound to emit through and a classical guitar has a sound box with a hole for sound to emit through the strings. Is it any wonder the Sonus Faber sounds like the instrument? My point being here that we are all listening to different combinations of equipment with different synergies, it affects us based upon our experiences and preferences. We make breakthroughs in synergies which are worth sharing but preferences on musical genres will also have a meaningful say on how we wish to listen to our sound. Working on getting the best presentation on that preference is what is fun about being the obsessional audiophile.

 

[raypin]

Mm..advice needed: is it okay to use a power bank (outputs 110 volts, up to 85 watt support) to off-grid the Chord Dave? The specs for Dave is 110 to 240 volts, 20 watts. Just making sure I am doing the right thing here. Tia.

 

[brightonjel]

It's probably why, if offered free tickets for my favourite artist playing at Wembley stadium, I wouldn't bother going but if they were booked to play at Ronnie Scott's I would pay up to £1,000 for the privilege.

 

 
I think that's very well said, and I agree with the other points you made, especially about recorded sound.  Last Friday, a few of us went to see John Mayall - yes, that John Mayall and yes, he is still touring! - at a venue in Santa Cruz, CA.  I haven't been to a live amplified concert like that in a decade or so, and I was shocked how poor the sound quality generally was.  It was a was a small theatre (an old cinema, in fact) and so the drums worked well, and the electric piano wasn't bad.  However, the guitar was too far back in the mix and the harmonica sometimes too far forward, but the bass guitar was the worst.  Little evident definition of the notes, with some long runs being either inaudible or impossible to follow, which was a great shame because, as always, Mayall had collected a couple of excellent musicians to work with.