[Sonic77]

   
I have found the DAVE to be immune to bad sources but fully capable of revealing the finer qualities of exceptional sources, especially a low impedance source such as an sMS-200 or microRendu and especially when powered by a low impedance PSU such as my Paul Hynes SR7 or LPS-1.  Having listened and compared tvarious SPDIF sources such as the RedNet, my current USB setup is what sounds best in my system and the difference is notable enough that I am not looking to leave my current USB setup once my Blu Mk 2 arrives.  And so, yes, USB > DDC > SPDIF > Blu2 is the path I will choose to take unless something better comes along.
 
 
I have tried the Audiophilleo 1 and 2 with PP and it didn't sound that great with my DAVE (a step down compared to USB direct).
 
Reliable sources who have heard both suggest the following less expensive converter, the Singxer SU-1 (made in China) sounds even better than either of the Audiophilleos, the Mutec MC-3+ USB or the Berkeley Alpha USB and for considerably less money ($400 USD).  It is easily modifiable to be powered by an even better 5V PSU such as an LPS-1 or Paul Hynes.  In fact, a mod that includes the LPS-1 is already in the works and should be available for sale shortly by a U.S. company.  Furthermore, it can handle up to 24/352 PCM and up to DSD256 and has both RCA and BNC out and so this is one converter I am expecting to try.
 
https://kitsunehifi.com/product/singxersu1black/
 
https://www.shenzhenaudio.com/singxer-su-1-usb-digital-interface-with-xmos-xu208-cpld-dsd256-dop.html

​That's good to know, I plugged in my Legato and found that your right, usb direct was better also with the Dave.
I'll check out those links. Thanks!

 

[drbobbybones]

 
​That's good to know, I plugged in my Legato and found that your right, usb direct was better also with the Dave.
I'll check out those links. Thanks!

I have also recently found out that different USB cables seem to affect the sound quite a bit.  My 5 dollar Amazon basics USB cable that lights up on both ends seems to be MUCH better than the one that was provided with the DAVE unit.  It also seems to outperform a more expensive audiophile cable that I own as well (Wireworld).  Color me surprised, as I was very skeptical that these things matter at all.

 

[Christer]

   
Incredible, at this point Rob (using 1million taps)  i assume you are easily hearing details and faults the mastering engineers would not even notice.

Hmm, I think you are probably jumping  to some  not quite correct  conclusions?
For those things to be heard they must  be on the mastertape in the first place! How else could they have been copied digitally?And I also suspect that if one would have played say a  NOT bandwidth limited 24/96 direct digital transfer/copy of that mastertape some of those things could  have been even more evident than from playing a 16/44.1 digital decimated bandwidth limited copy of the analogue master tape.
The things mentioned here are also often evident on LPs  played via a good system,although in many cases underground rumble and such   was filtered away  for release on LP.
But now when  digital transfers /copies are made  directly from analogue mastertapes consumers get to hear things before only heard by mastering engineers before "setting the record straight" to quote just  one legendary engineer from Decca. 
One of the really good things with true hi res transfers from analogue is that they are closer to the mastertape than ANY rbcd ever was.
Ok if you are willing to pay 8k for BLU 2 it may well deliver basically the same to most ears. But the fact remains that it is a bandwidth limited  version, not an  exact full frequency digital copy of the analogue master with any possible hf  energy harmonics and such abruptly cut off at 22khz.
Mind you the early DECCA LPs boasted ffrr as 16-16khz if I remember correctly and yes some early 60s recordings still sound superb in many respects. But with a  not very impressive  dynamic range compared to modern digital.
I still suspect that one of the reasons  both analogue direct cut LPs and hi res digital sometimes sound more  realistic than 16/44.1 is  partly hf content above 22khz.
I also think Wigmore Hall was mainly used for chamber music not orchestral music recordings.But it is interesting  to read that they are falling back to classic 70s DECCA recordings as a kind of reference for realistic  sound.
I have MANY of those both on LPs and a growing number also as 24/96 downloads and one good thing apart from more resolution  than the rbcd transfer of those classics, the 24/96 adds to the equation is often a wider  dynamic range than was originally squeezed onto LPs.
In other words one step closer to the master.
Few LPs apart from the famous direct cuts of Sheffield Labs and some other labels have a dynamic range above 55dB.
Which was still a lot, compared to the 20/25dB range of most pop and rock.
If it really sounds as good as hyped here I'd love to have a reasonably priced DAC that includes whatever the Mscaler does in BLu 2. But I have absolutely no need whatsoever, for a  rbcd  disc only player.

 

[x RELIC x]

I have also recently found out that different USB cables seem to affect the sound quite a bit.  My 5 dollar Amazon basics USB cable that lights up on both ends seems to be MUCH better than the one that was provided with the DAVE unit.  It also seems to outperform a more expensive audiophile cable that I own as well (Wireworld).  Color me surprised, as I was very skeptical that these things matter at all.

"Better" means absolutely nothing without a description. Better for you perhaps, but please expand on what "better" is for others to get an idea of what you hear if making such a statement.

 

[drbobbybones]

"Better" means absolutely nothing without a description. Better for you perhaps, but please expand on what "better" is for others to get an idea of what you hear if making such a statement.

I disagree that it means absolutely nothing, but I see your point.
 
For me, the Amazon USB cable has better bass impact and definition than the other two cables.  The Wireworld cable has the loudest treble response which was was detrimental for me as I am using a HD 800 through this setup.  The included cable is the reference.  Your mileage obviously will vary based on a lot of factors in your particular setup. 
 
My point is that I was surprised that USB cables made a difference at all.  I've always been skeptical that anything transmitted over digital cable would change anything, especially something like a USB cable which has error checking on both ends.  

 

[Rob Watts]

 

  ..........
 
Next came up was @jude and I used a 1972 Decca recording of Vaughn Williams Fantasia on a theme by Tomas Tallis. Now this is recorded in London's Wigmore Hall, which has the underground nearby, so you often get to hear the rumble of subway trains.
 
............
 
Rob        

O.T. If it was the Neville Marriner recording you are referring to, I think you'll find it was the Kingsway Hall, not the Wigmore Hall. Kingsway Hall was a favourite venue for Decca recordings because of its fine acoustics for orchestral and choral music but it was unfortunately plagued by rumbling noise from two branches of the Piccadilly line that ran almost directly underneath. Sometimes recording sessions were interrupted to allow the trains to pass before continuing but this was not always practicable. Alas, Kingsway Hall no longer exists. The site is now home to a luxury hotel and only the name lingers on.

Thank-you for the correction, you are right.

 

[x RELIC x]

I disagree that it means absolutely nothing, but I see your point.

For me, the Amazon USB cable has better bass impact and definition than the other two cables.  The Wireworld cable has the loudest treble response which was was detrimental for me as I am using a HD 800 through this setup.  The included cable is the reference.  Your mileage obviously will vary based on a lot of factors in your particular setup. 

My point is that, I was surprised that USB cables made a difference at all.  I've always been skeptical that anything transmitted over digital cable would change anything, especially something like a USB cable which has error checking on both ends.  

Thanks for expanding.

 

[izzard1982]

  Both of Chords previous TOTL desktop dacs the DAC64 & QBD76 had upgraded versions so DAVE probably will as well.

Thanks for the info, looking forward to DAVE's

 

[ThatPhil]

Could be a while, the QBD76 and the QBD76HDSD were released 5 years apart.

 

[rkt31]

there are some not very expensive universal players and dap which read flac high resolution files  and red book content via usb or sd card and output via coaxial which imho can be fed to blu mk2.

 

[jelt2359]

Here are 2 computer audio options for Blu mk2:

1)audiphilleo 1 special edition with uptone Audio ultra cap lps-1 power supply for 1494 usd; lps-1 is more expensive than the audiophilleo pure power which is another power option; either combo gives you pcm to 384 and dsd128(Blu mk2 maxes out at dsd128); additional music player/streamer software required
2)auralic aries with coax out doesn't require usb-spdif conversion but maxes out at 192 for pcm and dsd64; Tidal ready music player/streamer software included; auralic aries with power supply upgrade costs 1599 usd

Either way you're looking at 1500 plus dollars (not counting BNC cables)to add to your £7,995 Blu mk2

Don't forget the Mutec 3+ USB.

 

[analogmusic]

 
Hmm, I think you are probably jumping  to some  not quite correct  conclusions?
For those things to be heard they must  be on the mastertape in the first place! How else could they have been copied digtally?And I also suspect that if one would have played say a  NOT bandwidth limited 24/96 direct digital transfer/copy of that mastertape some of those things could  have been even more evident than from playing a 16/44.1 digital decimated bandwidth limited copy of the analogue master tape.
The things mentioned here are also often evident on LPs  played via a good system,although in many cases underground rumble and such   was filtered away  for release on LP.
But now when  digital transfers /copies are made  directly from analogue mastertapes consumers get to hear things before only heard by mastering engineers before "setting the record straight" to quote just  one legendary engineer from Decca. 
One of the really good things with true hi res transfers from analogue is that they are closer to the mastertape than ANY rbcd ever was.
Ok if you are willing to pay 8k for BLU 2 it may well deliver basically the same to most ears. But the fact remains that it is a bandwidth limited  version, not an  exact full frequency digital copy of the analogue master with any possible hf  energy harmonics and such abruptly cut off at 22khz.
Mind you the early DECCA LPs boasted ffrr as 16-16khz if I remember correctly and yes some early 60s recordings still sound superb in many respects. But with a  not very impressive  dynamic range compared to modern digital.
I still suspect that one of the reasons  both analogue direct cut LPs and hi res digital sometimes sound more  realistic than 16/44.1 is  partly hf content above 22khz.
I also think Wigmore Hall was mainly used for chamber music not orchestral music recordings.But it is interesting  to read that they are falling back to classic 70s DECCA recordings as a kind of reference for realistic  sound.
I have MANY of those both on LPs and a growing number also as 24/96 downloads and one good thing apart from more resolution  than the rbcd transfer of those classics, the 24/96 adds to the equation is often a wider  dynamic range than was originally squeezed onto LPs.
In other words one step closer to the master.
Few LPs apart from the famous direct cuts of Sheffield Labs and some other labels have a dynamic range above 55dB.
Which was still a lot, compared to the 20/25dB range of most pop and rock.
If it really sounds as good as hyped here I'd love to have a reasonably priced DAC that includes whatever the Mscaler does in BLu 2. But I have absolutely no need whatsoever, for a  rbcd  disc only player.

 
Me too, I have no use for a RBCD player.
 
Also modern digital recordings are maybe mastered for Itunes/Iphones/Android phones anyway (we are talking about 2016 Pop/Rock) so I am not sure I would be needing Mscaler to play the latest Album from Bon Jovi. I have the Vinyl of his latest Album (this house is not for sale), and Dave is quite a bit better than the Vinyl already. There is no detail on the Vinyl that I cannot already hear on Dave and for that matter even on Mojo !
 
For instance listen to "you know you like it" by DJ Snake and Aluna George, and this song plays with good clarity on almost all 2016 DAC's (of course MUCH better on Dave), but there is no background rumble of trains that I need an Mscaler for on this song. What Dave brings to the table is the musicality from timing of transients and of course the massive soundstage from the -350 DB noise shaper. So not having heard Mscaler, I am curious how it performs on this particular song.
 
I am still very interested to hear Mscaler, and very happy that Rob has managed to achieve a million taps, but like others, I too wish for an Mscaler that costs much less than 8000 GBP.  I do not need any kind of expensive casework for the Mscaler, so if any money can be saved there, I hope Chord will consider this.
 
In the meantime, Dave plays music very nice to my ears.
 
Also the logic that some Rich audiophiles won't consider Dave because of the price is just Flawed.
 
I remember the 100 Inch Panasonic Plasma at 100,000 dollars. It was completely over priced, and maybe some people bought a few of those (I do wonder what they think now in 2017 of that purchase), but nowadays a middle class family can afford a 85 inch LED TV. 
 
I hope my post will be taken in a positive spirit by Chord, I have spent quite a bit of money with Chord (Mojo, Hugo and Dave), so it's just sincere customer feedback.
 
regardless of the Mscaler (whether I will buy/afford or not), I am very happy with what I have purchased from Chord.

 

[jelt2359]

The ironic thing is that it was the Chord Dave purchase that first got me down the road fully exploring computer audio since its USB was its best input. Now I am fully hooked on the experience of Roon, have different upstream gear (Rednet3, Sms200), and even if I wanted to play the occasional CD now and then, I can't imagine stopping my Roon queue, playing CD, then getting back to my Roon queue. That's just not how I function any more. Another guy brought up the fact that not all music is online, which is true, and is why previously I asked if the Blu2 would be a better CD Ripper. Sadly no. So I can't think of a suitable way to integrate this into my workflow.

Pre-Dave, that wouldn't have been the case. Now, I'm 100% down this road.

Which is to say... I'll be patiently waiting for the standalone M scaler, like many others in this thread! fingers crossed that when Rob says he'll do everything he can to get this into people's hands, that this would be on the cards!

PS. I like that most people giving feedback on this thread are actual Chord Dave owners, most of whom are giving feedback because they *want* to give Chord more money. Now that's a good problem to have, and is frequently not the case in other threads when new, expensive products are released.

 

[AndrewOld]

You know what i want? I want a Ferrari, that i can afford, but dang them they keep making those expensive cars aaahhhh!

Happy to buy a Ferrari. Just not buying one with a steam engine in the trunk!

 

[DaveRedRef-III]

Hmm, I think you are probably jumping  to some  not quite correct  conclusions?
For those things to be heard they must  be on the mastertape in the first place! How else could they have been copied digtally?And I also suspect that if one would have played say a  NOT bandwidth limited 24/96 direct digital transfer/copy of that mastertape some of those things could  have been even more evident than from playing a 16/44.1 digital decimated bandwidth limited copy of the analogue master tape.
The things mentioned here are also often evident on LPs  played via a good system,although in many cases underground rumble and such   was filtered away  for release on LP.
But now when  digital transfers /copies are made  directly from analogue mastertapes consumers get to hear things before only heard by mastering engineers before "setting the record straight" to quote just  one legendary engineer from Decca. 
One of the really good things with true hi res transfers from analogue is that they are closer to the mastertape than ANY rbcd ever was.
Ok if you are willing to pay 8k for BLU 2 it may well deliver basically the same to most ears. But the fact remains that it is a bandwidth limited  version, not an  exact full frequency digital copy of the analogue master with any possible hf  energy harmonics and such abruptly cut off at 22khz.
Mind you the early DECCA LPs boasted ffrr as 16-16khz if I remember correctly and yes some early 60s recordings still sound superb in many respects. But with a  not very impressive  dynamic range compared to modern digital.
I still suspect that one of the reasons  both analogue direct cut LPs and hi res digital sometimes sound more  realistic than 16/44.1 is  partly hf content above 22khz.
I also think Wigmore Hall was mainly used for chamber music not orchestral music recordings.But it is interesting  to read that they are falling back to classic 70s DECCA recordings as a kind of reference for realistic  sound.
I have MANY of those both on LPs and a growing number also as 24/96 downloads and one good thing apart from more resolution  than the rbcd transfer of those classics, the 24/96 adds to the equation is often a wider  dynamic range than was originally squeezed onto LPs.
In other words one step closer to the master.
Few LPs apart from the famous direct cuts of Sheffield Labs and some other labels have a dynamic range above 55dB.
Which was still a lot, compared to the 20/25dB range of most pop and rock.
If it really sounds as good as hyped here I'd love to have a reasonably priced DAC that includes whatever the Mscaler does in BLu 2. But I have absolutely no need whatsoever, for a  rbcd  disc only player.

Many things have been missed by producers and engineers on very many recordings over the years regardless of the fact they were originally recorded to tape. Most of them in my opinion were probably obscured by a combination of noisy and slow amplifiers, noisy mixing desks and bad electrics. Plosives and distortion are the most common I have come across and they can be heard via an average CD setup. Will Blu2 uncover more such errors, I think it more likely that Blu2 will 'clarify' them more than uncover them. I suspect we will notice them more and if we went back to Dave we will realise they were present all along. Fwiw I have never had a problem with it. I quite like hearing the telephone ringing on the outro of Life on Mars, though less so the distortion on some vocals.