[Skampmeister]

@Rob Watts no comment on my post directed at you at the top end of this page?

 

[Triode User]

@Rob Watts no comment on my post directed at you at the top end of this page?

Well, how to win friends and influence people perfectly demonstrated just there!

 

[Skampmeister]

Well, how to win friends and influence people perfectly demonstrated just there!

What on earth was wrong with what I asked?

 

[jayz]

For Hugo 2/Qutest the signal path is:

1FS to 8FS input > 16FS WTA1 filter (49,152 taps) > 256FS WTA 2 filter > 3rd order 2048 FS filter > pulse array noise shaper at 104 MHz > analogue

When an M scaler is connected, the WTA1 filter is not used, and it is passed through to the 256 FS WTA 2 filter.

Bit depth is not important per se; what is important is that small signals are perfectly resolved, and to do this each OP of each filter is noise shaped to the appropriate bit depth for the next module; these truncation noise shapers are tested (by Verilog simulation) to ensure >350 dB THD and noise performance; each module must pass a -301 dB sine wave with perfect amplitude reproduction; this is done to ensure the perception of sound-stage depth reproduction, as minute amplitude errors - no matter how small - damages the perception of depth.

All other non chord DAC's don't bother (or physically can not) filter above 16FS; this filtering performance is essential to recover transients timing accuracy, and to ensure no jitter problems or noise floor modulation problems. The measurements shown earlier in this thread and the Hugo 2 thread show zero measurable noise floor modulation and zero source and master clock jitter aberrations; you could not get this level of measured performance without the extensive 2048 FS filtering, or the pulse array running at 104 MHz.

My previous posts in this and other threads (plus my blog Watts up?) covers the reasons for doing all this in much more detail!

Rob

Thanks for that. I will indeed go back to your previous posts to get a better understanding. DSP fundamentals are a bit sketchy but simulation tech r&d of all shape & form is my day job so that might make up for that.

 

[miketlse]

Thanks for that. I will indeed go back to your previous posts to get a better understanding. DSP fundamentals are a bit sketchy but simulation tech r&d of all shape & form is my day job so that might make up for that.

I think you have also to keep in mind the distinction between the mathematical theory, and how it is physically implemented in hardware.
All dacs are trying to use the theory that says that 16bits, 44.1 khz, is enough to capture all the information in a music signal.
From that start point, you get plenty of people who will then tell you that all dacs are trying to decode the same data, using the same communication theory, so will all sound the same.

They conveniently ignore the fact that the physical implementation:

• chip dac, with a ground plane that is constantly fluctuating, and approx 16 taps
• resistor dac, with manufacturing tolerances on how accurately you can create each resistor element
• FPGA dac, with no ground plane issues, and many thousands of taps

greatly affects how closely a dac designer can achieve the theoretically perfect decoding of the digital signal.

 

[Rob Watts]

@Rob Watts
I absolutely adore my 2qute, immensely, the only thing I don’t like about the new Qutest is the fact that I might not like it more than my 2qute, and that might be a disappointment.
So with all things created perfectly equal (cables/source etc) in a A/B shoot out between my 2qute and the Qutest when I get it, in you honest opinion, what differences will I expect to hear, again in your honest opinion of course
There’s and wonderful sound signature the 2qute has in my system, and I don’t want to lose that unless it’s better. But if I’m being honest, and I don’t want to think this way, I don’t think it’ll be better, just different.
I’ve had both a Hugo and a Hugo 2 on my system, and 3 people including me when not know what we were hearing, all picked the 2qute as the better DAC, in my system of course.
But my fingers are tightly crossed.

@Rob Watts no comment on my post directed at you at the top end of this page?

Because I can't comment on whether you will like something or not; only you can decide that. I can only state that Hugo 2 and Qutest is technically and measurement wise, sonically and musically much more advanced than Hugo 1 and 2 Qute.

 

[dawktah2]

For Hugo 2/Qutest the signal path is:

1FS to 8FS input > 16FS WTA1 filter (49,152 taps) > 256FS WTA 2 filter > 3rd order 2048 FS filter > pulse array noise shaper at 104 MHz > analogue

When an M scaler is connected, the WTA1 filter is not used, and it is passed through to the 256 FS WTA 2 filter.

Bit depth is not important per se; what is important is that small signals are perfectly resolved, and to do this each OP of each filter is noise shaped to the appropriate bit depth for the next module; these truncation noise shapers are tested (by Verilog simulation) to ensure >350 dB THD and noise performance; each module must pass a -301 dB sine wave with perfect amplitude reproduction; this is done to ensure the perception of sound-stage depth reproduction, as minute amplitude errors - no matter how small - damages the perception of depth.

All other non chord DAC's don't bother (or physically can not) filter above 16FS; this filtering performance is essential to recover transients timing accuracy, and to ensure no jitter problems or noise floor modulation problems. The measurements shown earlier in this thread and the Hugo 2 thread show zero measurable noise floor modulation and zero source and master clock jitter aberrations; you could not get this level of measured performance without the extensive 2048 FS filtering, or the pulse array running at 104 MHz.

My previous posts in this and other threads (plus my blog Watts up?) covers the reasons for doing all this in much more detail!

Rob

Thank you so much for posting on this thread. I am waiting anxiously to get my unit here in the US. I have listened to the Mojo and could hear a noticeable difference from my current DAC. As the Qutest is a better DAC than the Mojo, I believe my Qutest will give me many years of enjoyment.

 

[Skampmeister]

Because I can't comment on whether you will like something or not; only you can decide that. I can only state that Hugo 2 and Qutest is technically and measurement wise, sonically and musically much more advanced than Hugo 1 and 2 Qute.

Cheers, and thanks for your time to respond, looking forward to the Qutest hitting Australian shores.

 

[plsvn]

14 days since Future Shop listed the Qutest as available for purchase (in 7-10 days) so... anyone (in UK) has finally got one and cares to report, please?

 

[jayz]

14 days since Future Shop listed the Qutest as available for purchase (in 7-10 days) so... anyone (in UK) has finally got one and cares to report, please?

Futureshop as of today also says "Usually ships within: 7 - 10 Days" so assuming another 1-2 days for delivery, we are talking almost another 2 weeks. Then it's Bristol Audio show time.

I am waiting till my local dealer says they've got stock. Cannot see how some dealers managed to get enough to sell and others didn't.

 

[Triode User]

Futureshop as of today also says "Usually ships within: 7 - 10 Days" so assuming another 1-2 days for delivery, we are talking almost another 2 weeks. Then it's Bristol Audio show time.

I am waiting till my local dealer says they've got stock. Cannot see how some dealers managed to get enough to sell and others didn't.

Quite often in the first few weeks of sale for a popular item the dealers don’t actually have stock and they are merely fulfilling pre orders.

 

[jayz]

Quite often in the first few weeks of sale for a popular item the dealers don’t actually have stock and they are merely fulfilling pre orders.

Okay that makes sense. I don't like to pay full price and wait for weeks. That is why I might just wait till there is ample stock.

 

[Triode User]

Okay that makes sense. I don't like to pay full price and wait for weeks. That is why I might just wait till there is ample stock.

As you are the uk why not pick the phone up to your favoured dealer and ask them if you can reserve one for a deposit. Or at least speak to a human being rather than just looking at web sites and assuming.

 

[agedbest]

seem to view the same isteria compulsive buy of an apple new item
an iphone or a qutest doesn't change life
seem other people think the same
other people like me are not in hurry, waiting the trial and a good price
that's wrong?

 

[dmance]

post deleted...