[Jawed]

So other than the limited measurements from Stereophile there were none available for the DAVE afaik.

I've now done a fairly thorough set if anyone might be curious https://goldensound.audio/2022/03/14/chord-dave-measurements-with-mscaler/

If there is anything specific someone would like me to test before these go back to the owner lmk

Didn't Stereophile report clipping?

There's only a few settings in DAVE that can be varied such as output polarity and HF filter, so it might be possible to find a correlation. The other setting that could be relevant is the toggle between PCM+ and DSD+ modes.

Rob deliberately doesn't maximise SNR because other aspects of performance are hindered when doing so. You should be able to find his comments on that.

Rob deliberately targets -100dB for attenuation at 22.05kHz. Again you can search for his comments on that.

You say the filter is "somewhat ironically" compromised. You're misunderstanding the trade-off he's aiming for. A comparison of the DAVE and M Scaler filters should make that clearer. Search should lead you in the right direction. Windowing functions are all compromised here, because they're explicitly modifying the ideal of infinite-tap sinc. So Rob tunes the windowing function. That's what WTA is all about.

DSD is converted to PCM to make it compatible with all the stages of processing.

TT2 and Mojo 2 have "low gain" output ranges in their volume control for IEM users, recognition that the earlier DACs were marginal for many IEM users.

 

[GoldenSound]

Didn't Stereophile report clipping?

There's only a few settings in DAVE that can be varied such as output polarity and HF filter, so it might be possible to find a correlation. The other setting that could be relevant is the toggle between PCM+ and DSD+ modes.

The 'clipping' is so low in level and only occurs at absolute max level output so I don't think it's an issue. In real use it'd only show up when the music itself is clipping anyway.
When using it with the MScaler that reduces vol by -2.781dB anyway so it won't occur at all

You say the filter is "somewhat ironically" compromised. You're misunderstanding the trade-off he's aiming for. A comparison of the DAVE and M Scaler filters should make that clearer. Search should lead you in the right direction. Windowing functions are all compromised here, because they're explicitly modifying the ideal of infinite-tap sinc. So Rob tunes the windowing function. That's what WTA is all about.

I didn't say it was compromised. And I don't want to give the impression that I feel that the filter design choice is a bad one at all. As said in the post, I REALLY wish more DAC manufacturers followed Chord's lead and incorporated higher performance oversampling, and potentially released competitors to the MScaler as it is a fantastic product and I am a big proponent for high quality oversampling.

Technically it is true that ALL filters are a compromise, there is no perfect filter without infinite computing power which we don't have. But what you choose to compromise/tradeoff is simply preference and situational, there is no one size fits all 'perfect' filter approach else everyone would be using that.

Window functions are a compromise yes, but that applies to the WTA filter too.
Based on the testing done, it seems that the WTA windowing function has a time domain response looking like this:

A nearly rectangular window with cosine tapers. This as the WTA name would imply, focuses heavily on time domain accuracy but has more spectral leakage as a result.
In any case, the windowing function itself is less of a concern the longer your filter is. With a 1 million tap filter like in the MScaler the windowing itself almost doesn't matter and you're gonna get great performance in all areas.

My point about the filter design was more just wondering why it wasn't configured to attenuate fully by nquist. Given how ridiculously little content remains after nyquist it's not at all an 'issue' and aliasing will be probably undetectable. More just a curiosity that's all.

 

[Jawed]

The 'clipping' is so low in level and only occurs at absolute max level output so I don't think it's an issue. In real use it'd only show up when the music itself is clipping anyway.
When using it with the MScaler that reduces vol by -2.781dB anyway so it won't occur at all

Really I was just curious if it was possible to identify an operational situation for the clipping, to make it a fully repeatable test. Agreed it's inconsequential, but it is a curiosity.

My point about the filter design was more just wondering why it wasn't configured to attenuate fully by nquist. Given how ridiculously little content remains after nyquist it's not at all an 'issue' and aliasing will be probably undetectable. More just a curiosity that's all.

The explanation is to do with making the cut-off as high in frequency as possible, below Nyquist. That's why you see that M Scaler's cut-off is that little bit higher in frequency than DAVE's native cut-off.

The higher the frequency for the cut-off, the less timing uncertainty there will be in the conversion to analogue.

Rob has written about a detailed comparison with a Kaiser filter, where the attenuation at Nyquist is stronger:

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/watts-up.800264/page-134#post-15968970

but there are other problems.

 

[simorag]

A few days ago I had the chance to make a home demo of the Aries Cerat Heléne DAC, which I compared to my Chord stack.

My current digital front-end is a relatively complex chain where a Sablon Evo USB cable feeds a SRC*DX, which goes 2xBNC to the M Scaler (on battery), which in turn is connected to the DAVE via the OPTO*DX optical decoupler (on batteries) and 2xAudioquest Diamond cables. To add to the madness, I also use the DC*BLOCK units at the DAVE BNC inputs. I built this chain ("mDAVE" hereafter) over the last 4+ years and I consider every complication as additive towards a better sound.

I listen 90% to acoustic music and attend live unplugged performances on a regular basis, so to me 'better means' - subjectively - more 'natural'.

I started the comparison with the Heléne by using my trusted vintage Spendor LS3/5A, then I moved to headphones, which remain my most relevant configuration in terms of head-time.

The mDAVE and Heléne are very different sounding DACs: while being very good at everything they actually excel at complementary things.

Where the mDAVE truly shines is - to my ears - at producing holographic, transparent soundscapes, with tactile localization and flawless musical images separation. The other strongest area of performance is timing and flow: the rythmic drive is precise and propulsive, engaging and effortless.

The Heléne more impressive features are - on the other hand - tonal density, weight and timbre realism. Especially in the lower midrange / upper bass region.

Imaging is more diffuse with the Aries Cerat, it fills the room with larger / deeper sonic boundaries. mDAVE, on the other hand, has superior clarity and microdetails.

Take as an example The Ballad of Bill Hubbard, from R. Waters' Amused to Death.

This is an audiophile treat, and a great track to show off your high-end 2-channel rig to your friends if you so desire.

The infamous dog bark at the beginning of the track is more apparently even behind your shoulder (LOL) with the DAVE, and the subsequent atmosphere of special effects which creates an immersive 360° 3D bubble all around you is truly magical with the Chord stack. However, when the electric guitar plucks kick in (1:07''), the wave of warmth, the amber timbre from the Heléne are moving. When the big feline roars at 2:19'', DAVE makes you think to your cat, while the Heléne displays a puma.

Piano has a richer tonal palette and a more satisfying dynamics and resonant structure via the Heléne, with a more realistic decay. The lightfooted pace from the mDAVE wins in terms of percussive attack speed, and complex passages articulation readability, but I would give piano experience to the Heléne overall.

The same goes with strings. I listened to several quartets, solo violin / cello tracks and chamber music pieces, and the Heléne gave consistently the impression of a more accurate reproduction of the timbre, the feeling of the gut strings you clearly get in the real world was more obvious, whereas the mDAVE presented a certain metallic character which felt comparatively a bit out of place.

Instrument separation and 3D layering was instead superior with the mDAVE. You can identify in space each musician in an almost spooky way.

All in all, if I had to choose based on my 2-channel listening session, in my system, the Heléne would be overall my preference, to the point that I was actually considering to buy it on the spot. The authority and boldness it provided to my LS3/5a was unheard of in my room.

Then I moved to headphones.

Here the comparison ended pretty quickly: the mDAVE crossfeed, of which I am totally fond to the point of a true addiction, was dearly missing when I tried the Heléne.

I find many albums unlistenable without crossfeed now, and the mDAVE capability to do crossfeed right (i.e. with minimal loss of transparency) is alone worth having this DAC for headphones.

The Waters album mentioned above showed some decent level of 3D magic with the mDAVE and crossfeed (although much, much less enjoyable than the 2ch experience), which was totally lost with the Heléne and no crossfeed. I tried Roon crossfeed and I was only partially successful (maybe I should experiment more with it, but it does not look so promising).

With album requiring no crossfeed, and more specifically with binaural recordings, I definitely preferred the Heléne in combination to the AB-1266, whereas with the Valkyria the Heléne provided a bit too much of a good thing, ending up to an overly thick, mid-centric tonal balance.

Back to sheer technicalities, the bass control of the Abyss from the mDAVE was immaculate, with a clean, extended, tight presentation, whereas the Heléne was more on the voluptuous side.

Very crowded orchestral passages were easier to follow with the mDAVE, more like a wall-of-sound with the Helene.

Vocals are way more incarnated with the Heléne , but the very minute details about breathing, lips / mouth movements are best rendered by the mDAVE.

The spacious, holographic character of the mDAVE, its ability to present details in a natural manner, and the peerless implementation of the crossfeed make it very hard to beat as an holistic headphones listening machine indeed.

So for now I let the Heléne go back to the dealer, not without a touch of sadness.

 

[adrianm]

A few days ago I had the chance to make a home demo of the Aries Cerat Heléne DAC, which I compared to my Chord stack.

​

My current digital front-end is a relatively complex chain where a Sablon Evo USB cable feeds a SRC*DX, which goes 2xBNC to the M Scaler (on battery), which in turn is connected to the DAVE via the OPTO*DX optical decoupler (on batteries) and 2xAudioquest Diamond cables. To add to the madness, I also use the DC*BLOCK units at the DAVE BNC inputs. I built this chain ("mDAVE" hereafter) over the last 4+ years and I consider every complication as additive towards a better sound.

I listen 90% to acoustic music and attend live unplugged performances on a regular basis, so to me 'better means' - subjectively - more 'natural'.

I started the comparison with the Heléne by using my trusted vintage Spendor LS3/5A, then I moved to headphones, which remain my most relevant configuration in terms of head-time.

The mDAVE and Heléne are very different sounding DACs: while being very good at everything they actually excel at complementary things.

Where the mDAVE truly shines is - to my ears - at producing holographic, transparent soundscapes, with tactile localization and flawless musical images separation. The other strongest area of performance is timing and flow: the rythmic drive is precise and propulsive, engaging and effortless.

The Heléne more impressive features are - on the other hand - tonal density, weight and timbre realism. Especially in the lower midrange / upper bass region.

Imaging is more diffuse with the Aries Cerat, it fills the room with larger / deeper sonic boundaries. mDAVE, on the other hand, has superior clarity and microdetails.

Take as an example The Ballad of Bill Hubbard, from R. Waters' Amused to Death.

This is an audiophile treat, and a great track to show off your high-end 2-channel rig to your friends if you so desire.

The infamous dog bark at the beginning of the track is more apparently even behind your shoulder (LOL) with the DAVE, and the subsequent atmosphere of special effects which creates an immersive 360° 3D bubble all around you is truly magical with the Chord stack. However, when the electric guitar plucks kick in (1:07''), the wave of warmth, the amber timbre from the Heléne are moving. When the big feline roars at 2:19'', DAVE makes you think to your cat, while the Heléne displays a puma.

​

Piano has a richer tonal palette and a more satisfying dynamics and resonant structure via the Heléne, with a more realistic decay. The lightfooted pace from the mDAVE wins in terms of percussive attack speed, and complex passages articulation readability, but I would give piano experience to the Heléne overall.

​

The same goes with strings. I listened to several quartets, solo violin / cello tracks and chamber music pieces, and the Heléne gave consistently the impression of a more accurate reproduction of the timbre, the feeling of the gut strings you clearly get in the real world was more obvious, whereas the mDAVE presented a certain metallic character which felt comparatively a bit out of place.

​

Instrument separation and 3D layering was instead superior with the mDAVE. You can identify in space each musician in an almost spooky way.

All in all, if I had to choose based on my 2-channel listening session, in my system, the Heléne would be overall my preference, to the point that I was actually considering to buy it on the spot. The authority and boldness it provided to my LS3/5a was unheard of in my room.

Then I moved to headphones.

Here the comparison ended pretty quickly: the mDAVE crossfeed, of which I am totally fond to the point of a true addiction, was dearly missing when I tried the Heléne.

I find many albums unlistenable without crossfeed now, and the mDAVE capability to do crossfeed right (i.e. with minimal loss of transparency) is alone worth having this DAC for headphones.

The Waters album mentioned above showed some decent level of 3D magic with the mDAVE and crossfeed (although much, much less enjoyable than the 2ch experience), which was totally lost with the Heléne and no crossfeed. I tried Roon crossfeed and I was only partially successful (maybe I should experiment more with it, but it does not look so promising).

With album requiring no crossfeed, and more specifically with binaural recordings, I definitely preferred the Heléne in combination to the AB-1266, whereas with the Valkyria the Heléne provided a bit too much of a good thing, ending up to an overly thick, mid-centric tonal balance.

​

Back to sheer technicalities, the bass control of the Abyss from the mDAVE was immaculate, with a clean, extended, tight, whereas the Heléne was more on the voluptuous side.

Very crowded orchestral passages were easier to follow with the mDAVE, more like a wall-of-sound with the Helene.

Vocals are way more incarnated with the Heléne , but the very minute details about breathing, lips / mouth movements are best rendered by the mDAVE.

The spacious, holographic character of the mDAVE, its ability to present details in a natural manner, and the peerless implementation of the crossfeed make it very hard to beat as an holistic headphones listening machine indeed.

So for now I let the Heléne go back to the dealer, not without a touch of sadness.

Nice write-up, looks like you might be another "victim" of Sean Jacobs/Farad soon

 

[Cortazar]

->Simorag

I just saw that you have Taico extreme!! I am at the moment searching for a good streamer for my chord Dave. But I would not want to spend more then 10 max 15 mE. Could you say something about your story/way to taico extreme? Have you tried antipodes k50?

 

[MvRBE10]

->Simorag

I just saw that you have Taico extreme!! I am at the moment searching for a good streamer for my chord Dave. But I would not want to spend more then 10 max 15 mE. Could you say something about your story/way to taico extreme? Have you tried antipodes k50?

Inuse n10 now sounds amazing but the n20 seems another notch better and around your budget of 12k maybe audition one and listen.

 

[Sampajanna]

A few days ago I had the chance to make a home demo of the Aries Cerat Heléne DAC, which I compared to my Chord stack.

​

My current digital front-end is a relatively complex chain where a Sablon Evo USB cable feeds a SRC*DX, which goes 2xBNC to the M Scaler (on battery), which in turn is connected to the DAVE via the OPTO*DX optical decoupler (on batteries) and 2xAudioquest Diamond cables. To add to the madness, I also use the DC*BLOCK units at the DAVE BNC inputs. I built this chain ("mDAVE" hereafter) over the last 4+ years and I consider every complication as additive towards a better sound.

I listen 90% to acoustic music and attend live unplugged performances on a regular basis, so to me 'better means' - subjectively - more 'natural'.

I started the comparison with the Heléne by using my trusted vintage Spendor LS3/5A, then I moved to headphones, which remain my most relevant configuration in terms of head-time.

The mDAVE and Heléne are very different sounding DACs: while being very good at everything they actually excel at complementary things.

Where the mDAVE truly shines is - to my ears - at producing holographic, transparent soundscapes, with tactile localization and flawless musical images separation. The other strongest area of performance is timing and flow: the rythmic drive is precise and propulsive, engaging and effortless.

The Heléne more impressive features are - on the other hand - tonal density, weight and timbre realism. Especially in the lower midrange / upper bass region.

Imaging is more diffuse with the Aries Cerat, it fills the room with larger / deeper sonic boundaries. mDAVE, on the other hand, has superior clarity and microdetails.

Take as an example The Ballad of Bill Hubbard, from R. Waters' Amused to Death.

This is an audiophile treat, and a great track to show off your high-end 2-channel rig to your friends if you so desire.

The infamous dog bark at the beginning of the track is more apparently even behind your shoulder (LOL) with the DAVE, and the subsequent atmosphere of special effects which creates an immersive 360° 3D bubble all around you is truly magical with the Chord stack. However, when the electric guitar plucks kick in (1:07''), the wave of warmth, the amber timbre from the Heléne are moving. When the big feline roars at 2:19'', DAVE makes you think to your cat, while the Heléne displays a puma.

​

Piano has a richer tonal palette and a more satisfying dynamics and resonant structure via the Heléne, with a more realistic decay. The lightfooted pace from the mDAVE wins in terms of percussive attack speed, and complex passages articulation readability, but I would give piano experience to the Heléne overall.

​

The same goes with strings. I listened to several quartets, solo violin / cello tracks and chamber music pieces, and the Heléne gave consistently the impression of a more accurate reproduction of the timbre, the feeling of the gut strings you clearly get in the real world was more obvious, whereas the mDAVE presented a certain metallic character which felt comparatively a bit out of place.

​

Instrument separation and 3D layering was instead superior with the mDAVE. You can identify in space each musician in an almost spooky way.

All in all, if I had to choose based on my 2-channel listening session, in my system, the Heléne would be overall my preference, to the point that I was actually considering to buy it on the spot. The authority and boldness it provided to my LS3/5a was unheard of in my room.

Then I moved to headphones.

Here the comparison ended pretty quickly: the mDAVE crossfeed, of which I am totally fond to the point of a true addiction, was dearly missing when I tried the Heléne.

I find many albums unlistenable without crossfeed now, and the mDAVE capability to do crossfeed right (i.e. with minimal loss of transparency) is alone worth having this DAC for headphones.

The Waters album mentioned above showed some decent level of 3D magic with the mDAVE and crossfeed (although much, much less enjoyable than the 2ch experience), which was totally lost with the Heléne and no crossfeed. I tried Roon crossfeed and I was only partially successful (maybe I should experiment more with it, but it does not look so promising).

With album requiring no crossfeed, and more specifically with binaural recordings, I definitely preferred the Heléne in combination to the AB-1266, whereas with the Valkyria the Heléne provided a bit too much of a good thing, ending up to an overly thick, mid-centric tonal balance.

​

Back to sheer technicalities, the bass control of the Abyss from the mDAVE was immaculate, with a clean, extended, tight presentation, whereas the Heléne was more on the voluptuous side.

Very crowded orchestral passages were easier to follow with the mDAVE, more like a wall-of-sound with the Helene.

Vocals are way more incarnated with the Heléne , but the very minute details about breathing, lips / mouth movements are best rendered by the mDAVE.

The spacious, holographic character of the mDAVE, its ability to present details in a natural manner, and the peerless implementation of the crossfeed make it very hard to beat as an holistic headphones listening machine indeed.

So for now I let the Heléne go back to the dealer, not without a touch of sadness.

Very nice write up! Good work. I do feel the DC4 fills in some of what you loved in the Helene, not all, but some, as it does add weight and body--meat to the bones if you will. A second one for the Mscaler and Bob's your uncle and Maria your aunt....

 

[Christer]

A few days ago I had the chance to make a home demo of the Aries Cerat Heléne DAC, which I compared to my Chord stack.

​

My current digital front-end is a relatively complex chain where a Sablon Evo USB cable feeds a SRC*DX, which goes 2xBNC to the M Scaler (on battery), which in turn is connected to the DAVE via the OPTO*DX optical decoupler (on batteries) and 2xAudioquest Diamond cables. To add to the madness, I also use the DC*BLOCK units at the DAVE BNC inputs. I built this chain ("mDAVE" hereafter) over the last 4+ years and I consider every complication as additive towards a better sound.

I listen 90% to acoustic music and attend live unplugged performances on a regular basis, so to me 'better means' - subjectively - more 'natural'.

I started the comparison with the Heléne by using my trusted vintage Spendor LS3/5A, then I moved to headphones, which remain my most relevant configuration in terms of head-time.

The mDAVE and Heléne are very different sounding DACs: while being very good at everything they actually excel at complementary things.

Where the mDAVE truly shines is - to my ears - at producing holographic, transparent soundscapes, with tactile localization and flawless musical images separation. The other strongest area of performance is timing and flow: the rythmic drive is precise and propulsive, engaging and effortless.

The Heléne more impressive features are - on the other hand - tonal density, weight and timbre realism. Especially in the lower midrange / upper bass region.

Imaging is more diffuse with the Aries Cerat, it fills the room with larger / deeper sonic boundaries. mDAVE, on the other hand, has superior clarity and microdetails.

Take as an example The Ballad of Bill Hubbard, from R. Waters' Amused to Death.

This is an audiophile treat, and a great track to show off your high-end 2-channel rig to your friends if you so desire.

The infamous dog bark at the beginning of the track is more apparently even behind your shoulder (LOL) with the DAVE, and the subsequent atmosphere of special effects which creates an immersive 360° 3D bubble all around you is truly magical with the Chord stack. However, when the electric guitar plucks kick in (1:07''), the wave of warmth, the amber timbre from the Heléne are moving. When the big feline roars at 2:19'', DAVE makes you think to your cat, while the Heléne displays a puma.

​

Piano has a richer tonal palette and a more satisfying dynamics and resonant structure via the Heléne, with a more realistic decay. The lightfooted pace from the mDAVE wins in terms of percussive attack speed, and complex passages articulation readability, but I would give piano experience to the Heléne overall.

​

The same goes with strings. I listened to several quartets, solo violin / cello tracks and chamber music pieces, and the Heléne gave consistently the impression of a more accurate reproduction of the timbre, the feeling of the gut strings you clearly get in the real world was more obvious, whereas the mDAVE presented a certain metallic character which felt comparatively a bit out of place.

​

Instrument separation and 3D layering was instead superior with the mDAVE. You can identify in space each musician in an almost spooky way.

All in all, if I had to choose based on my 2-channel listening session, in my system, the Heléne would be overall my preference, to the point that I was actually considering to buy it on the spot. The authority and boldness it provided to my LS3/5a was unheard of in my room.

Then I moved to headphones.

Here the comparison ended pretty quickly: the mDAVE crossfeed, of which I am totally fond to the point of a true addiction, was dearly missing when I tried the Heléne.

I find many albums unlistenable without crossfeed now, and the mDAVE capability to do crossfeed right (i.e. with minimal loss of transparency) is alone worth having this DAC for headphones.

The Waters album mentioned above showed some decent level of 3D magic with the mDAVE and crossfeed (although much, much less enjoyable than the 2ch experience), which was totally lost with the Heléne and no crossfeed. I tried Roon crossfeed and I was only partially successful (maybe I should experiment more with it, but it does not look so promising).

With album requiring no crossfeed, and more specifically with binaural recordings, I definitely preferred the Heléne in combination to the AB-1266, whereas with the Valkyria the Heléne provided a bit too much of a good thing, ending up to an overly thick, mid-centric tonal balance.

​

Back to sheer technicalities, the bass control of the Abyss from the mDAVE was immaculate, with a clean, extended, tight presentation, whereas the Heléne was more on the voluptuous side.

Very crowded orchestral passages were easier to follow with the mDAVE, more like a wall-of-sound with the Helene.

Vocals are way more incarnated with the Heléne , but the very minute details about breathing, lips / mouth movements are best rendered by the mDAVE.

The spacious, holographic character of the mDAVE, its ability to present details in a natural manner, and the peerless implementation of the crossfeed make it very hard to beat as an holistic headphones listening machine indeed.

So for now I let the Heléne go back to the dealer, not without a touch of sadness.

Hmm, interesting comparison.I also have an old pair of LS35A speakers and I strongly suspect that what made you prefer the Heléne via those over Dave may have been that it added a bit of artifical body to what imho was a good but still compromised bookshelf speaker made for smallish rooms in its "hayday" and often used by the BBC in their vans outside the Royal Albert Hall at the Proms in those days.
Since getting my big electrostatic speakers long ago , I do not even bother to connect my LS35A speakers again. Too coloured and with limited bass. Better than some more recent bookshelf speakers but still way too too coloured for me. Like most of my LPs mine still collect dust on a bookshelf but can not really compare to the uncoloured open sound of big electrostatic speakers.
But imho,even Dave needs an Mscaler to really shine.
Oops, just back after another hard working day day helping some neighbours loading loads of haybales in their stable/barn all afternoon it struck me. What did I write in my post? "Hayday" I meant heyday.
Cheers CC

 

[simorag]

Nice write-up, looks like you might be another "victim" of Sean Jacobs/Farad soon

I do feel the DC4 fills in some of what you loved in the Helene, not all, but some, as it does add weight and body--meat to the bones if you will. A second one for the Mscaler and Bob's your uncle and Maria your aunt....

I want to resist but the flesh is weak

Seriously guys, my system is already on the ridiculous side of complex for my tastes, keep adding boxes is not an option at this point, especially big and expensive ones (although I am confident about a sonic advantage).
On the other hand, replacing the M Scaler (plus all the clutter I have deployed around it) with the upcoming Choral range Scaler would appeal me much more.

->Simorag

I just saw that you have Taico extreme!! I am at the moment searching for a good streamer for my chord Dave. But I would not want to spend more then 10 max 15 mE. Could you say something about your story/way to taico extreme? Have you tried antipodes k50?

I had the chance of a home demo of the Taiko Extreme about three months ago, and I was deeply impressed by the increase of naturalness and color density compared to my Zenith SE, especially with acoustic music. I had no way to do a home trial of the K50 or similar equipment (I was considering Aurender W20SE / N30, and MU1) so I decided to take the plunge on the Taiko, also reassured by the continuous development this machine is being granted (both hardware and software).

Unfortunately I do not have comparative listening experience to offer against the usual top contenders.

 

[MvRBE10]

I want to resist but the flesh is weak

Seriously guys, my system is already on the ridiculous side of complex for my tastes, keep adding boxes is not an option at this point, especially big and expensive ones (although I am confident about a sonic advantage).
On the other hand, replacing the M Scaler (plus all the clutter I have deployed around it) with the upcoming Choral range Scaler would appeal me much more.



I had the chance of a home demo of the Taiko Extreme about three months ago, and I was deeply impressed by the increase of naturalness and color density compared to my Zenith SE, especially with acoustic music. I had no way to do a home trial of the K50 or similar equipment (I was considering Aurender W20SE / N30, and MU1) so I decided to take the plunge on the Taiko, also reassured by the continuous development this machine is being granted (both hardware and software).

Unfortunately I do not have comparative listening experience to offer against the usual top contenders.

Complete farad lps set you can add for 3k thats not ridicouless money and near or the same result. And resellable when changing to something else…. Within few weeks it can be ordered. Makes the dave so much musical to put it in one word.

And i ment the n30

 

[Crashem]

I want to resist but the flesh is weak

Seriously guys, my system is already on the ridiculous side of complex for my tastes, keep adding boxes is not an option at this point, especially big and expensive ones (although I am confident about a sonic advantage).
On the other hand, replacing the M Scaler (plus all the clutter I have deployed around it) with the upcoming Choral range Scaler would appeal me much more.



I had the chance of a home demo of the Taiko Extreme about three months ago, and I was deeply impressed by the increase of naturalness and color density compared to my Zenith SE, especially with acoustic music. I had no way to do a home trial of the K50 or similar equipment (I was considering Aurender W20SE / N30, and MU1) so I decided to take the plunge on the Taiko, also reassured by the continuous development this machine is being granted (both hardware and software).

Unfortunately I do not have comparative listening experience to offer against the usual top contenders.

Taiko Extreme is probably the best or top 3 music server. I use Auralic Aries G2.1 to stream and satisfied with it. But I did at home testing with a few systems last year. If I was to move to different solution, I would put Taiko at the top of my list as a direct to server solution. I would point out that you do need a good system for the investment on a Taiko to be "worth its while."

 

[Crashem]

Has anyone tried the Plixir Elite or Ferrum Hypsos on the Dave especially in comparison to the Sean Jacobs?

 

[MvRBE10]

Has anyone tried the Plixir Elite or Ferrum Hypsos on the Dave especially in comparison to the Sean Jacobs?

You need neg voltage or flouting rail else wont work

 

[TheAttorney]

->Simorag

I just saw that you have Taico extreme!! I am at the moment searching for a good streamer for my chord Dave. But I would not want to spend more then 10 max 15 mE. Could you say something about your story/way to taico extreme? Have you tried antipodes k50?

I recommend you try the Grimm MU1 server at around £10k, particularly if you like the idea of a simple, fit-and-forget, roon-based, fairly compact, low powered solution.
This and just a single AES cable replaced my tweaked-NUC, Mscaler and a small mountain of power supply and cable spaghetti.

Within the next year there is planned a DAC module to go inside the MU1, which I'll be comparing against DAVE. If the MU1 DAC wins, it will be byebye to DAVE, but hello to the challengee of finding a headphone amp that has as good, or better, cross-feed function as DAVE's. If DAVE wins, I'll be considering one of the DC4/Farad external power supplies just to complete my end-game solution.