CHORD ELECTRONICS DAVE

[EVOLVIST]

Is the Blu2 the first to upsample to 768kHz? Not a device that will play that sample rate, but just the upscaling part?

 

[maxh22]

Is the Blu2 the first to upsample to 768kHz? Not a device that will play that sample rate, but just the upscaling part?

I'm pretty sure Mojo, Hugo 2, and Dave already upsample to 768khz.

 

[EVOLVIST]

I'm pretty sure Mojo, Hugo 2, and Dave already upsample to 768khz.

2048x, right.

 

[GreenLeo]

...
The whole sonic experience for me now sounds like analogue on mastertape. That is how it came across to me. No digital artifacts at all. It was not like listening to a digital system, more analogue in its smoothness and delivery.One aspect I noted, I could listen at very high volume levels for long periods without any fatigue at all. Audio recordings through this system are remarkable and move the digital experience to another level.

May I infer that the SQ already surpassed that of an LP system? Given that not many headfier has the gears to play master tape(this is the holy grail, I suppose), it seems that Blu2 + DAVE must be one of the very best system to play back music.

 

[Triode User]

I'm pretty sure Mojo, Hugo 2, and Dave already upsample to 768khz.

Au contraire mon frère, they don't upsample at all.

 

[Hummer25]

May I infer that the SQ already surpassed that of an LP system? Given that not many headfier has the gears to play master tape(this is the holy grail, I suppose), it seems that Blu2 + DAVE must be one of the very best system to play back music.

I used master tape as a reference as I used to work in a recording studio and heard analogue recordings on tape frequently. What impressed me so much about blu 2 and DAVE was the smoothness of the sound, sorry this is the only way I could describe it. If you turn back the clock and go back to early digital with all the harshness and bright digital nasties it had and then listen to how it has evolved, for me it has become so much more ear friendly especially the Chord system we have today. This reminds me of analogue sound.

I would agree that SQ has probably surpassed LP system in many respects as digital can do so much more than LP in many areas. It would be very difficult for LP to play bass anywhere near as deep and controlled as DAVE does. This was one of the remarkable aspects of Blu2 and DAVE, it played bass with a depth and tunefulness I have never heard before. The very low noise floor is also very apparent when listening with recordings coming from a very dark background.

It will be interesting to hear what other folk make of the m-scaler technology as for me the stunning soundstage was simple awesome. One curious aspect was that I could also turn the volume up higher on material I had previously just listened too via DAVE and it didn't affect my hearing which is particularly sensitive? Blu2 and m-scaler technology allowed you to crank things up without you feeling your having your ears blown off.

 

[EVOLVIST]

Au contraire mon frère, they don't upsample at all.

 

[Rob Watts]

I used master tape as a reference as I used to work in a recording studio and heard analogue recordings on tape frequently. What impressed me so much about blu 2 and DAVE was the smoothness of the sound, sorry this is the only way I could describe it. If you turn back the clock and go back to early digital with all the harshness and bright digital nasties it had and then listen to how it has evolved, for me it has become so much more ear friendly especially the Chord system we have today. This reminds me of analogue sound.

I would agree that SQ has probably surpassed LP system in many respects as digital can do so much more than LP in many areas. It would be very difficult for LP to play bass anywhere near as deep and controlled as DAVE does. This was one of the remarkable aspects of Blu2 and DAVE, it played bass with a depth and tunefulness I have never heard before. The very low noise floor is also very apparent when listening with recordings coming from a very dark background.

It will be interesting to hear what other folk make of the m-scaler technology as for me the stunning soundstage was simple awesome. One curious aspect was that I could also turn the volume up higher on material I had previously just listened too via DAVE and it didn't affect my hearing which is particularly sensitive? Blu2 and m-scaler technology allowed you to crank things up without you feeling your having your ears blown off.

Note the m scaler has a 2.76 dB insertion loss, so you need to increase the volume by 3 dB to volume match. But sure, it does sound much warmer and more refined - particularly on older recordings.

The sound-stage opening out is massive; and it represents a puzzle for me. I thought initially it was down to topology improvements; but when you throw the video mode, (so its 2/3 M taps) or when I compared the initial 0.5 M taps to the 1 M taps (both with same topology) again you hear big changes in depth.

And I do not know why for sure; WTA filters have never done this before. Perhaps it is simply the action of truncation of the filter coefficients against the ideal which is now happening over time periods that are natural echo or reverb time periods and this is the reason; it's currently my only hypothesis. And it makes sense as this is the first time an interpolation filter is working well over a second of data and not the conventional milli-second time period.

Anyway, exciting times, as the magnitude of the improvement has been completely unexpected. And I love it when unexpected things happen.

Rob

 

[onsionsi]

For Dave plus Blu2 owners, I would like to know how much the Dave+Blu2 effects (enhancing) in the new records and other records like youtube etc.

As @Rob Watts mentioned that the biggest enhancement goes particularly to older records.

 

[Crgreen]

For Dave plus Blu2 owners, I would like to know how much the Dave+Blu2 effects (enhancing) in the new records and other records like youtube etc.

As @Rob Watts mentioned that the biggest enhancement goes particularly to older records.

I think by "older recordings" I think Rob might mean well-recorded analogue. There are of course, plently of well recorded digital albums too and it will be interesting to see how they compare in terms of improvements rendered by the m-scaler. In principle, I'm not sure why there would be a difference, since in digital form, both have been subject to analogue to digital conversion at some point. Is where that takes place significant?

 

[EVOLVIST]

I think by "older recordings" I think Rob might mean well-recorded analogue. There are of course, plently of well recorded digital albums too and it will be interesting to see how they compare in terms of improvements rendered by the m-scaler. In principle, I'm not sure why there would be a difference, since in digital form, both have been subject to analogue to digital conversion at some point. Is where that takes place significant?

We're likely talking about older recordings of certain genres where mic placement during the recording lent itself more to a greater sense of depth, which translates to a more 3D image today.

 

[Crgreen]

We're likely talking about older recordings of certain genres where mic placement during the recording lent itself more to a greater sense of depth, which translates to a more 3D image today.

True, but such mic placement didn't end with older recordings. For example: try the digital recordings of Dutoit/Montreal from St Eustache or Pinnock/English Concert from the Henry Wood Hall, though those might be regarded as "older" now. If what's being said is that we'll-recorded albums with a proper sense of dynamics and acoustic will sound much better, irrespective of when they were recorded, I can understand that. By the same token, I can see that heavily compressed, acoustically "flat" recordings might not have much more to offer, other than that they might not sound so edgy and are more tolerable. Can't wait to put it to the test.

 

[rkt31]

digital whether recorded from analog or directly from mic , involves adc . adcs already suffer from issues which are being addressed in Davina project. then SRC algorithms which convert the high resolution to 44.1khz which deteriorate the transients further . so if m scalar is so good with 44.1khz , then imagine how good it will be with native dxd files converted to 44.1khz using Davina or even a directly recorded file through Davina ! imho Rob is also waiting for this test. right now I am waiting for some upscaled clip of m scalar / Davina .

 

[GreenLeo]

I used master tape as a reference as I used to work in a recording studio and heard analogue recordings on tape frequently. What impressed me so much about blu 2 and DAVE was the smoothness of the sound, sorry this is the only way I could describe it. If you turn back the clock and go back to early digital with all the harshness and bright digital nasties it had and then listen to how it has evolved, for me it has become so much more ear friendly especially the Chord system we have today. This reminds me of analogue sound.

I would agree that SQ has probably surpassed LP system in many respects as digital can do so much more than LP in many areas. It would be very difficult for LP to play bass anywhere near as deep and controlled as DAVE does. This was one of the remarkable aspects of Blu2 and DAVE, it played bass with a depth and tunefulness I have never heard before. The very low noise floor is also very apparent when listening with recordings coming from a very dark background.

It will be interesting to hear what other folk make of the m-scaler technology as for me the stunning soundstage was simple awesome. One curious aspect was that I could also turn the volume up higher on material I had previously just listened too via DAVE and it didn't affect my hearing which is particularly sensitive? Blu2 and m-scaler technology allowed you to crank things up without you feeling your having your ears blown off.

Thank you, Hummer.

You've shown a very strong reference and I truly believe that the era of digital has come.

Now I wonder the effect of Blu 2 + DAVE for high red music. The higher the sampling rate, the higher the accuracy in the time domain of the sample. Has any Headfier check if Blue 2 + DAVE is also magical for say 24/192 m7sic files?

 

[EVOLVIST]

So really, all joking aside (unlike before), I've looked, but I can see only one "DAC" that had upsampled 16x RBCD before the DAVE+ Blu2 combo.

Anybody know of any others? It's one thing to play a large sample rate; it's quite another to upsample in a box like Blu2 does.