CHORD ELECTRONICS DAVE

[manisandher]

I have a question about the DAVE and HDCD playback. I've managed to buy after many years of searching a NOS Vincent HDCD player as I have a collection of HDCD's. The Vincent has the usual XLR and phono outputs and at the moment the XLR's plug into my Pathos Inpol ear. The Vincent has a digital coax output and I'm wondering if the HDCD output would be cancelled out if I use the digital out and send it into the DAVE.

The DAVE cannot decode HDCD. Actually, no DACs can, unless they have a PMD100 (the majority of HDCD-capable DACs) or PMD200 (many Naim players/DACs). (Berkeley Audio and Spectal DACs may be exceptions.)

I used to own a Pacific Microsonics Model Two - the only way to encode HDCD (along with the Model One). It's a phenomenal piece of kit, and still venerated by many mastering engineers - my old machine does duties in a mastering studio in Paris.

My advice - enjoy HDCD-encoded CDs natively. Forget using HDCD.exe when ripping - it sounds awful to my ears. There's clearly something that the PMD filters do that HDCD.exe can't match. So, just rip to 16/44.1. If you have an HDCD-capable DAC, then it will decode this file. Otherwise, just play it back natively. The value of HDCD CDs is not in their having HDCD encoding per se, but in the quality of the Model One/Two used to master them.

HTH.

Mani.

 

[DJW50]

The DAVE cannot decode HDCD. Actually, no DACs can, unless they have a PMD100 (the majority of HDCD-capable DACs) or PMD200 (many Naim players/DACs). (Berkeley Audio and Spectal DACs may be exceptions.)

I used to own a Pacific Microsonics Model Two - the only way to encode HDCD (along with the Model One). It's a phenomenal piece of kit, and still venerated by many mastering engineers - my old machine does duties in a mastering studio in Paris.

My advice - enjoy HDCD-encoded CDs natively. Forget using HDCD.exe when ripping - it sounds awful to my ears. There's clearly something that the PMD filters do that HDCD.exe can't match. So, just rip to 16/44.1. If you have an HDCD-capable DAC, then it will decode this file. Otherwise, just play it back natively. The value of HDCD CDs is not in their having HDCD encoding per se, but in the quality of the Model One/Two used to master them.

HTH.

Mani.

Thank you, I really enjoy the sound of HDCD's since the days of my Krell system. My latest purchase the Vincent has a very nice sound. So with your reply to my question I will keep the Vincent plugged into the Pathos Inpol Ear via the XLR's
I also have a Cyrus CDtXR transport for the Music Fidelity and Japanese cd's which is sent through the DAVE.

 

[manisandher]

Thank you, I really enjoy the sound of HDCD's since the days of my Krell system. My latest purchase the Vincent has a very nice sound. So with your reply to my question I will keep the Vincent plugged into the Pathos Inpol Ear via the XLR's
I also have a Cyrus CDtXR transport for the Music Fidelity and Japanese cd's which is sent through the DAVE.

Correction to my previous post: Actually, it looks like your Vincent uses the BB PCM1732 chip, which has an integrated HDCD decoder. I wasn't aware that such a chip existed.

Incidentally, I play ripped 16/44.1 files, originally HDCD-encoded, through my DAVE all the time. They sound fantastic. I personally wouldn't worry whether or not my DAC had HDCD-decoding functionality.

I bet your HDCD CDs sound great through the DAVE too.

Mani.

 

[DJW50]

Correction to my previous post: Actually, it looks like your Vincent uses the BB PCM1732 chip, which has an integrated HDCD decoder. I wasn't aware that such a chip existed.

Incidentally, I play ripped 16/44.1 files, originally HDCD-encoded, through my DAVE all the time. They sound fantastic. I personally wouldn't worry whether or not my DAC had HDCD-decoding functionality.

I bet your HDCD CDs sound great through the DAVE too.

Mani.

At the moment I don't plug into the DAVE from the Vincent I plug it into the Pathos. I was concerned that if I connected the coax digital out from the Vincent I'd loose the HDCD processing if connected to the DAVE. Would it be worth trying other connections like the AES out on the Vincent into the DAVE.

 

[manisandher]

At the moment I don't plug into the DAVE from the Vincent I plug it into the Pathos. I was concerned that if I connected the coax digital out from the Vincent I'd loose the HDCD processing if connected to the DAVE. Would it be worth trying other connections like the AES out on the Vincent into the DAVE.

Yes, you'll lose HDCD decoding, as the DAVE (like the majority of DACs) does not have this functionality. But my point was that your HDCD-encoded CDs will likely sound superb through the DAVE (fed via any of the Vincent's digital outputs). Better than the Vincent's own analogue outputs? Well, that's for you to decide.

A great-sounding DAC that happens to have HDCD decoding is great. But a great-sounding DAC without HDCD decoding will likely still sound superb with HDCD-encoded discs/files too.

HDCD functionality in itself is not a guarantee of great sound.

 

[DJW50]

Yes, you'll lose HDCD decoding, as the DAVE (like the majority of DACs) does not have this functionality. But my point was that your HDCD-encoded CDs will likely sound superb through the DAVE (fed via any of the Vincent's digital outputs). Better than the Vincent's own analogue outputs? Well, that's for you to decide.

A great-sounding DAC that happens to have HDCD decoding is great. But a great-sounding DAC without HDCD decoding will likely still sound superb with HDCD-encoded discs/files too.

HDCD functionality in itself is not a guarantee of great sound.

I agree but back in the 90's when I had my Krell HDCD player they sounded so good even compared to the very expensive Music Fidelity discs.
I heard the Vincent many years ago and there was just something about the sound not sure if the valves are part of that, I've been searching for one for longer than I can remember and by luck a new old stock example came on the market a few weeks ago and I snapped it up.

 

[Godbluffer]

Should the hifi filter on Dave be left off when using the mscaler ? I wonder if anyone knows.

As a new DAVE owner, I feel the filter should be left off, with or without the mscaler, since already without it, it’s pretty clear to me that with the HF filter on, easily noticeable amounts of spatial cues and micro details go missing

 

[GuiltyRocker]

As a new DAVE owner, I feel the filter should be left off, with or without the mscaler, since already without it, it’s pretty clear to me that with the HF filter on, easily noticeable amounts of spatial cues and micro details go missing

That's interesting, as the HF filter operates at 22khz and higher, how can details go missing as that is outside the audible range? This hobby sure is a mystery.

 

[Godbluffer]

That's interesting, as the HF filter operates at 22khz and higher, how can details go missing as that is outside the audible range? This hobby sure is a mystery.

I wasn’t even aware that it operates at 22khz and higher, so I’m now actually as puzzled as you are, because my nearly 54 year old ears sure as heck aren’t capable of hearing anything near that frequency (and likely never were!), yet the difference is very much audible. On another note, I’m very much looking forward to checking the M-scaler this weekend, when I’ll be having Headphone Auditions Amsterdam’s demo unit on loan. Especially curious how it’s going to render the higher frequencies.

 

[manisandher]

My null tests show that the DAVE's HF filter has a massively detrimental effect on the sound. I don't have the results with me right now, but from what I recall, the nulls are 10-20dB worse... throughout the audioband. Subjectively, it's clear to hear, just as described earlier.

I'm convinced the null testing, with dynamically changing real music signals (and not static test tones), is the only way to really measure what's going on. But... null testing is a right PITA to optimise. The DeltaWave software has helped massively, but the physical setup is still key.

Mani.

 

[Reactcore]

I wasn’t even aware that it operates at 22khz and higher, so I’m now actually as puzzled as you are, because my nearly 54 year old ears sure as heck aren’t capable of hearing anything near that frequency (and likely never were!), yet the difference is very much audible. On another note, I’m very much looking forward to checking the M-scaler this weekend, when I’ll be having Headphone Auditions Amsterdam’s demo unit on loan. Especially curious how it’s going to render the higher frequencies.

The HF filter operates at 60Khz:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-dave.766517/post-12172918

I think it has to do with the higher resolution of timing and ofc RF that makes it still audible with HMS, not so much the human hearing frequency range.

Are you in the Netherlands? Send Stefan my regards when visiting HA Amsterdam

 

[ObjectiveSubjectivist]

That's interesting, as the HF filter operates at 22khz and higher, how can details go missing as that is outside the audible range? This hobby sure is a mystery.

Actually it was measured that HF filter affects audible range, it's tiny yes but still.

 

[Godbluffer]

The HF filter operates at 60Khz:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/chord-electronics-dave.766517/post-12172918

I think it has to do with the higher resolution of timing and ofc RF that makes it still audible with HMS, not so much the human hearing frequency range.

Are you in the Netherlands? Sent Stefan my regards when visiting HA Amsterdam

Interesting to read Rob Watts’ description of what the filter does, turning things darker. With a lot of things I think it sounds quite pleasant, but in recordings where acoustics of a hall or church play a crucial part, spatial cues are diminished too much for full enjoyment. And yeah, I will send Stefan your greetings on Friday! I’m a lucky guy. I live about 12 miles away from his shop, so I can almost hop over there whenever I feel like it.

Actually it was measured that HF filter affects audible range, it's tiny yes but still.

I wouldn’t call that tiny, actually! And yeah, clearly in the audible range, so not surprising at all that I picked it up.

 

[ObjectiveSubjectivist]

I wouldn’t call that tiny, actually!

I would .9db @20khz is not that much especially when you consider music usually contains nothing that high.
But as you said it's definitely audible (but not always, it depends on spectrum of the music that you listen to) as it's broad "roll off".

When I owned Dave, I generally listened with HF filter off, but occasionally I would use it with brighter recordings.

 

[GuiltyRocker]

Actually it was measured that HF filter affects audible range, it's tiny yes but still.

Very tiny, to me that's nothing, I guess the brain can pick it up, but how? What musical content is there at 20khz?

I wasn’t even aware that it operates at 22khz and higher, so I’m now actually as puzzled as you are, because my nearly 54 year old ears sure as heck aren’t capable of hearing anything near that frequency (and likely never were!), yet the difference is very much audible. On another note, I’m very much looking forward to checking the M-scaler this weekend, when I’ll be having Headphone Auditions Amsterdam’s demo unit on loan. Especially curious how it’s going to render the higher frequencies.

I recently listened without my M Scaler, I could barely listen to one song before I had to add it back in, I will never listen without my M Scaler, it is that good.