[Music Alchemist]

Whoa. Didn't realize until now that the Hugo TT has the same output power specs (from the headphone output) as the Hugo and Mojo. So only the DAVE has more power.

 

[Mython]

  Whoa. Didn't realize until now that the Hugo TT has the same output power specs (from the headphone output) as the Hugo and Mojo. So only the DAVE has more power.

 
 
Remember that TT has a super-capacitor, so it may yield more dynamic clout.

 

[Mediahound]

   
 
Remember that TT has a super-capacitor, so it may yield more dynamic clout.

Yeah, I've read one of Rob's or John's posts stating that about the TT. 

 

[Jawed]

To Rob and John,and everyone else at chord,Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you all.

Merry Chistmas one and all

Merry Chordmas! It'll be my second with my Hugo TT, which has been wonderful this past year or so. Seems I didn't write to Santa soon enough, so my DAVE won't be here in time. Anyway, my music is sounding so unbelievably good it's hard to remember that DAVE is better.

now playing: Cowboy Junkies - Misguided Angel (live)

 

[miketlse]

Merry Chordmas! It'll be my second with my Hugo TT, which has been wonderful this past year or so. Seems I didn't write to Santa soon enough, so my DAVE won't be here in time. Anyway, my music is sounding so unbelievably good it's hard to remember that DAVE is better.

now playing: Cowboy Junkies - Misguided Angel (live)

Merry Chordmas as well.
 
You will have to remember to write to Santa earlier next year, but what will you ask for to better the DAVE? 

 

[rgs9200m]

Merry Christmas Rob and the Chord family and thanks for the brilliant Hugo TT (I love it with my Hifiman HE1000V2.)

 

[Shini44]

 
here is my DAVE's Review: http://www.head-fi.org/products/chord-dave/reviews/17624
 
Glad i bought it best thing ever ^^

 

[phonyx]

Wow, what a room!! Do you just run the BHSE or is there a non-electrostatic setup in amongst that as well? You look like you're running the BHSE from a Hugo?

 

[smial1966]

That fabulous room and equipment belongs to @bmichels
 
Quote:

Wow, what a room!! Do you just run the BHSE or is there a non-electrostatic setup in amongst that as well? You look like you're running the BHSE from a Hugo?

 

[lovethatsound]

here is my DAVE's Review: http://www.head-fi.org/products/chord-dave/reviews/17624

Glad i bought it best thing ever ^^

lovely review,enjoyed reading it . merry Christmas

 

[Shini44]

lovely review,enjoyed reading it . merry Christmas

not the best review out there, but glad that you enjoyed

 

[Music Alchemist]

Is anyone willing to fight alongside me against "objectivist" trolls who insist all DACs sound the same?
 
They seriously get on my nerves, not only because they spread misinformation, but more importantly because they've never even used the products they trash. (Which is supposed to be against the rules, but they get around it somehow.)
 
I'm asking this here because the DAVE is widely regarded as the best DAC available and is generally thought to sound wildly better than affordable DACs.
 
Explaining the technical advantages doesn't work because they can simply say it's below the threshold of audibility, ie humans can't hear it. Explaining that practically everyone who has heard it insists it sounds much better doesn't work because they can simply say it's the placebo effect, ie everyone is imagining the difference. And suggesting that they actually listen to the product doesn't work because they can simply refuse and say there's no point. (See why these people tick me off?)
 
Merely ignoring them isn't good enough for me. I want to prove them wrong.
 
The only two things I can think of to do that are controlled listening tests and measurements.
 
The technical superiority of the DAVE has already been documented via measurements. So if someone were to prove that they could reliably tell it apart from, say, a Schiit Modi 2 with statistical significance, the skeptics could not claim that it is merely because the DAVE is coloring the sound, since it has better measurements, not worse ones.
 
The problem is actually pulling that off. I'd imagine you would need very specific equipment to rapidly switch between the two DACs and record the results.
 
One easier set of measurements that may not have been done yet is with Audio DiffMaker. (Signal difference extraction software.) This would involve playing music with the two DACs and recording the difference between them.
 
If anyone wants to help me out with this little project, please quote, tag, or PM me!
 
The ultimate goal would be to have objective proof that people really can hear a genuine improvement with high-end DACs, so then anyone can link the "objectivists" to it and proudly proclaim, "See, look. It really does sound different, and it is higher fidelity because the measurements already showed this."

 

[Mython]

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

  Is anyone willing to fight alongside me against "objectivist" trolls who insist all DACs sound the same?
 
They seriously get on my nerves, not only because they spread misinformation, but more importantly because they've never even used the products they trash. (Which is supposed to be against the rules, but they get around it somehow.)
 
I'm asking this here because the DAVE is widely regarded as the best DAC available and is generally thought to sound wildly better than affordable DACs.
 
Explaining the technical advantages doesn't work because they can simply say it's below the threshold of audibility, ie humans can't hear it. Explaining that practically everyone who has heard it insists it sounds much better doesn't work because they can simply say it's the placebo effect, ie everyone is imagining the difference. And suggesting that they actually listen to the product doesn't work because they can simply refuse and say there's no point. (See why these people tick me off?)
 
Merely ignoring them isn't good enough for me. I want to prove them wrong.
 
The only two things I can think of to do that are controlled listening tests and measurements.
 
The technical superiority of the DAVE has already been documented via measurements. So if someone were to prove that they could reliably tell it apart from, say, a Schiit Modi 2 with statistical significance, the skeptics could not claim that it is merely because the DAVE is coloring the sound, since it has better measurements, not worse ones.
 
The problem is actually pulling that off. I'd imagine you would need very specific equipment to rapidly switch between the two DACs and record the results.
 
One easier set of measurements that may not have been done yet is with Audio DiffMaker. (Signal difference extraction software.) This would involve playing music with the two DACs and recording the difference between them.
 
If anyone wants to help me out with this little project, please quote, tag, or PM me!
 
The ultimate goal would be to have objective proof that people really can hear a genuine improvement with high-end DACs, so then anyone can link the "objectivists" to it and proudly proclaim, "See, look. It really does sound different, and it is higher fidelity because the measurements already showed this."

 
 

 
I understand your irritation, but why worry about what others think about DACs? Just live and enjoy whatever you consider to be true
 
The same thing happens in relation to whether or not cables make this difference, that difference, all the difference in the world, or no difference at all.
 
 
 
1) the only person in this world whom you get to choose the thinking of is yourself.
 
2) whatever you give your attention to, grows stronger in your experience.
 
 
You don't have to consider the above to be true, but I'm only saying it to encourage you to pause a moment and (hopefully) raise a grin & lighten-up a little

 
 
 
...Besides, Rob's DACs will hold their own, on the basis of their real & legitimate merits, regardless of a few naysayers & disbelievers.
 
Let's face it:  you're living proof of that - in spite of not being 'able' to understand the disbelievers, you still figured out that DAVE sounds superb, didn't you?

 

[Music Alchemist]

  I understand your irritation, but why worry about what others think about DACs?

 
The reason I want to prove them wrong is because they are spreading this misinformation everywhere. Every day, more people believe them. What's worse, that builds an army of skeptics who are fully willing to attack audiophiles (I do not consider the "objectivists" to be audiophiles at all) and insult us when we talk about the better sound we hear. And without the proof they demand, we are in no position to refute them. Sure, most of us understand that "listen with your own ears" is a reasonable suggestion, but they won't hear any of it. (In both senses of the phrase.) As someone active in the audiophile community, I talk to other audiophiles daily and feel that we should be able to defend higher fidelity products in a way that conclusively demonstrates they are audibly higher fidelity, not just measurably. (Instead of being defenseless against this type of challenge, which in turn makes us lose credibility in the eyes of those who listen to the naysayers.) Basically, all this bothers me because it's something I have to deal with on a frequent basis. I don't think collecting sufficient proof would be too difficult either.

 

[Mython]

FWIW, I don't actually disagree with you, but differences in viewpoint have existed since time immemorial, and will continue to, long after you and I become dust.
 
 
Rob has diligently sought to educate the community on factors in digital design affecting sound quality, and been generous in describing many aspects of his own design approach, as well as relating some interesting discoveries he's made along the way, some of which surprised even his depth of theoretical understanding.
 
 
I'm not really convinced that you will ever find enough theoretical data or measurement data to change the minds of those who are certain of the validity of their skepticism, but I wish you good luck in your quest