[jwbrent]

I don't see a way to auto-adjust the sample rate in Mac. I guess I'll have to select something that works in Midi and live with it for the moment.



Thanks again, I'm thinking about setting up Roon sometime within a year. This will probably come in handy.

I use Audirvana+ as my playback software. Not only does it have exclusive mode, but the software has other options to minimize any noise from your Mac getting into the data stream. Very reasonably priced (about $70).

 

[Scrum92]

I use Audirvana+ as my playback software. Not only does it have exclusive mode, but the software has other options to minimize any noise from your Mac getting into the data stream. Very reasonably priced (about $70).

Me too. Windows 10 is now also supported, however, much to my annoyance, they are separate licenses. Worth the money nevertheless.

 

[jwbrent]

Me too. Windows 10 is now also supported, however, much to my annoyance, they are separate licenses. Worth the money nevertheless.

I always thought Audirvana was Mac exclusive, good to know there is a Windows version. I don’t know if it is possible, but I wonder if they will release an iOS version to use with an iPad Pro.

The idea of using an iPad as my bridge is appealing. I have looked at stand alone components like the Lumin and other such devices, but I question whether they are worth the high price when they act as a transport only. I know a transport can make a big difference back from by CD days, but a CD transport is a mechanical device, a streamer isn’t. It’s just a pass thru to the DAC. Anyway, my system sounds great using my MacBook Air, and it’s convenient as well, but there’s always this nagging doubt that I’m missing out on better performance.

 

[HumanMedia]

I always thought Audirvana was Mac exclusive, good to know there is a Windows version. I don’t know if it is possible, but I wonder if they will release an iOS version to use with an iPad Pro.

The idea of using an iPad as my bridge is appealing. I have looked at stand alone components like the Lumin and other such devices, but I question whether they are worth the high price when they act as a transport only. I know a transport can make a big difference back from by CD days, but a CD transport is a mechanical device, a streamer isn’t. It’s just a pass thru to the DAC. Anyway, my system sounds great using my MacBook Air, and it’s convenient as well, but there’s always this nagging doubt that I’m missing out on better performance.

If you are using the default ‘resample all output to a single sampling rate’ then you are definitely missing out on better performance. This may be convenient for low quality destination devices, but it adds a step of really low quality sampling rate conversion before it hits the Qutest which then goes and applies another couple of resampling stages, but by then the damage is done.

Use a proper audio playback app that avoids the low quality rendering and handling of the data, like the above mentioned Audirvana. You should not be allowing low quality resampling at the source and instead having all data going to the DAC at its native sampling rate, then let the DAC do a proper resample. Even then the RFI hotbed of a laptop will add noise either way, so consider some sort of USB decrappifier as well.

 

[jwbrent]

If you are using the default ‘resample all output to a single sampling rate’ then you are definitely missing out on better performance. This may be convenient for low quality destination devices, but it adds a step of really low quality sampling rate conversion before it hits the Qutest which then goes and applies another couple of resampling stages, but by then the damage is done.

Use a proper audio playback app that avoids the low quality rendering and handling of the data, like the above mentioned Audirvana. You should not be allowing low quality resampling at the source and instead having all data going to the DAC at its native sampling rate, then let the DAC do a proper resample. Even then the RFI hotbed of a laptop will add noise either way, so consider some sort of USB decrappifier as well.

I do use Audirvana+. Regarding RFI, isn’t the galvanized USB input on the Qutest meant to clean up any noise from the laptop?

 

[Ross]

I have just bought a Qutest to use as a stopgap, having just sold my DAVE/Blu 2, and while I look for my next DAC. I really liked the DAVE/Blu 2, but it wasn't quite perfect for my tastes, so I am looking for something a bit different. Nevertheless, once I sold it, I immediately missed the Chord sound - there is something quite addictive about it - and decided to buy the Qutest just to see how close it came to the DAVE.

Surprisingly, the Qutest does retain a lot of the character of the DAVE. No, it does not have the depth, transparency or detail of the DAVE (and you wouldn't expect it to), but it does have a strong family resemblance, particularly in the sense of naturalness and lack of listening fatigue. I wouldn't be surprised if I ended up buying an M Scaler just to see just how close it can get to the more expensive Chord DACs.

However, the real reason for my post has to do with input selection. I was using the USB input on the Qutest from my Ultrarendu, just as I had done with the DAVE/Blu 2. I noted that the sound was just a touch dry and lacking the last degree of tonal saturation. This wasn't entirely unexpected, since Chord DACs do tend towards the drier end of the spectrum in my experience. This was one of the reasons why I sold the DAVE and Blu 2 (and also why I had sold its predecessor, the QBD76HD).

However, today I tried switching to the SPDIF input, running my Ultrarendu through a Singxer XU-1, with a Black Cat Silverstar BNC cable. I wasn't expecting to hear a difference, but the sound was vastly improved. Suddenly it was more focussed, tonally richer and more saturated, with a quieter background. This was a big surprise since I had always understood the USB input to be preferred. I wonder if this is unique to the Singxer SU-1 or if the coax input is in fact better generally.

 

[Jon L]

However, today I tried switching to the SPDIF input, running my Ultrarendu through a Singxer XU-1, with a Black Cat Silverstar BNC cable. I wasn't expecting to hear a difference, but the sound was vastly improved. Suddenly it was more focussed, tonally richer and more saturated, with a quieter background. This was a big surprise since I had always understood the USB input to be preferred. I wonder if this is unique to the Singxer SU-1 or if the coax input is in fact better generally.

I posted on last page how DXIO usb-spdif converter bested Qutest usb input, so it's not just Singxer. I suggest trying BNC-BNC adapter between Singxer and Qutest to skip the coax cable altogether...

0307191626 by drjlo1, on Flickr

 

[Deftone]

I have just bought a Qutest to use as a stopgap, having just sold my DAVE/Blu 2, and while I look for my next DAC. I really liked the DAVE/Blu 2, but it wasn't quite perfect for my tastes, so I am looking for something a bit different. Nevertheless, once I sold it, I immediately missed the Chord sound - there is something quite addictive about it - and decided to buy the Qutest just to see how close it came to the DAVE.

Surprisingly, the Qutest does retain a lot of the character of the DAVE. No, it does not have the depth, transparency or detail of the DAVE (and you wouldn't expect it to), but it does have a strong family resemblance, particularly in the sense of naturalness and lack of listening fatigue. I wouldn't be surprised if I ended up buying an M Scaler just to see just how close it can get to the more expensive Chord DACs.

However, the real reason for my post has to do with input selection. I was using the USB input on the Qutest from my Ultrarendu, just as I had done with the DAVE/Blu 2. I noted that the sound was just a touch dry and lacking the last degree of tonal saturation. This wasn't entirely unexpected, since Chord DACs do tend towards the drier end of the spectrum in my experience. This was one of the reasons why I sold the DAVE and Blu 2 (and also why I had sold its predecessor, the QBD76HD).

However, today I tried switching to the SPDIF input, running my Ultrarendu through a Singxer XU-1, with a Black Cat Silverstar BNC cable. I wasn't expecting to hear a difference, but the sound was vastly improved. Suddenly it was more focussed, tonally richer and more saturated, with a quieter background. This was a big surprise since I had always understood the USB input to be preferred. I wonder if this is unique to the Singxer SU-1 or if the coax input is in fact better generally.

Did you try optical with Dave? I couldn’t go back to using anything other than spdif now.

 

[Ross]

Did you try optical with Dave? I couldn’t go back to using anything other than spdif now.

No, it never occurred to me to try optical, mostly because I have not had good experiences with optical in the past.

 

[x RELIC x]

No, it never occurred to me to try optical, mostly because I have not had good experiences with optical in the past.

Given that Rob's designs are immune to jitter (as he's measurably shown) then optical is the reference standard since it does not transmit electrical RF noise in to the analogue components of the DAC, which hardens and brightens the sound unnaturally which can get fatiguing quickly.

Seems like the differences you describe when you changed from USB to coaxial. I reckon optical may give a bit more.

Yes optical is the best input - its really a question of getting the other inputs to match optical.

 

[Ross]

I'll have to dig out a glass optical cable I have lying around somewhere and try it on the Qutest. In theory optical should be the best input for any DAC for exactly the same reason, but when I last tried it (which was many years ago!) optical sounded a bit too, um, glassy, and I preferred coax. But I will give it another try.

 

[Arniesb]

I'll have to dig out a glass optical cable I have lying around somewhere and try it on the Qutest. In theory optical should be the best input for any DAC for exactly the same reason, but when I last tried it (which was many years ago!) optical sounded a bit too, um, glassy, and I preferred coax. But I will give it another try.

Maybe try it different cable?

 

[Ross]

Turns out the Singxer has no optical output, so that solves that problem.

 

[Ross]

But not so fast! I tried a Matrix X-SPDIF 2 which I took from another system which does have optical output, and tried it with a cheapie optical cable. Yes, optical sounds better with the Qutest than coax from either the Matrix or the Singxer, and quite noticeably so.

Any current recommendations for optical cables?

 

[Baten]

But not so fast! I tried a Matrix X-SPDIF 2 which I took from another system which does have optical output, and tried it with a cheapie optical cable. Yes, optical sounds better with the Qutest than coax from either the Matrix or the Singxer, and quite noticeably so.

Any current recommendations for optical cables?

lifatec toslink glass