[musickid]

Whats so special about 300B?

 

[AlexB73]

I owned 300B reissue for 5 years. Nothing special!
I used TJ Mesh 300B and liked it even more.
Now I use EML Mash 300B and it is other level compared to TJ and 300B reissue.

 

[dawktah2]

Whats so special about 300B?

 

[Boogie7910]

Difference in tonality and SQ between Qutest and Huggo TT?

 

[dc71]

I can't comment on relative differences between Qutest and TT, but I've now had Qutest in my system for over 3 months and have some feedback which some may find useful. Current system is NAS/Tidal/Spotify>Bluesound Node2>Qutest>Hegel H160>Quad S5 speakers.

I eventually ended up buying Qutest after going through a few DACs and being unsatisfied (NAD M51, DSpeaker Anti-mode2, Schiit Gumby). Gumby was the best of the rest, but its showstopper in my system was that the bass was too slow, causing the timing to sound 'off'. I guess this was a system/room matching issue since the Schiit DACs are known for good, full bass. My room has a 50hz mode of around 12db, and this probably contributed to the slow-sounding bass. The Qutest seems to exhibit more control of the bass especially overhang/stopping of notes, and is the first DAC to give full-sounding bass while not overly-exciting the mode in my room. Quite a feat, and it means that it's easily the best sounding DAC I've had in my system.

I fed it mostly from the Bluesound Node2. Differences between optical and coaxial cable seem very minor, although I feel that optical (QED Performance graphite) gives me a hair less organic warmth than the coaxial connection. I have ordered a Lifatec glass toslink to see if I can hear any improvement over the QED acrylic model.

I also tried an SoTM SMS-200 with stock power supply, feeding to Qutest USB input. SMS-200 gave a clear upgrade in sound quality over the Node2. Everything became more natural and dynamic, with richer tonal colours and a more convincing sense of realism and effortlessness. Exactly what I have been aiming for as my endgame, but the SMS-200 control was frustrating as I use NAS, Tidal and Spotify regularly, which required switching in the web interface, and it generally works much slower and more clunky than the fast and slick Node2/BluOS controller. I am now looking for the best of both worlds (sound quality and usability), so will try out Auralic Aries and maybe Pro-ject's new Stream Box S2 Ultra since their new control app is supposed to be good too. I'm expecting this to be the final step for me. I'll move the Bluesound to my less resolving second system once I get the better network transport.

Qutest is an excellent DAC and I feel like it has been a key piece of the jigsaw in my system, to move me towards my endgame sound. I don't know why there is such a clear difference between the transports, but in my system Qutest clearly responds to an improved source by showing better sound, so lower end streamers such as Node2, Arcam rPlay etc will not get the best out of it. Think minimum mRendu, SMS-200 or higher.

 

[Bastianpp]

hugo 2 and qutest sound the same?

 

[iceanddice]

Sort of the same boat as you. Got the Qutest in my chain but waiting on the WE300B's for the Cayin HA-300... that or the PS Vane plus replica. -- but this Hugo MScaler is a must hear once its out. Gonna decide what to prioritize first after I audition.

 

[sheldaze]

hugo 2 and qutest sound the same?

Yes and no. In my experience, the RCA output from the Hugo 2 sounded different from the RCA output (the only output) from the Qutest. While I enjoyed the direct headphone output from the Hugo 2, this was not the same "joy" I had when feeding Mojo into an amplifier or now Qutest into an amplifier. I have read since that the Mojo and Qutest output are more similar, while the Hugo 2 output has a topology difference.

I definitely enjoyed Mojo feeding a DNA Sonett 2 (now sold). And I enjoyed this same setup Qutest into Sonett 2. But during my brief time, with the Hugo 2 as a loaner, I did not enjoy it paired with any headphone amplifier I owned, including the Sonett 2. I much preferred Hugo 2 direct into headphones, and enjoyed this setup immensely.

To describe the difference I heard, I lack the words. Only I would expect a Sonett 2, which is a tube, to have a tube-like quality. It had less of this euphoric, laid-back quality when using the Hugo 2 as my source. Using the Qutest, I have no problems with any of my amplifiers. The tube quality of the Sonett 2 and a few others (using Massdrop ZDT Jr. these days) is quite clear, despite the Qutest source. Note also, I'm talking about very minor variance. But to answer your question, I have used Hugo 2 (loaner) and Qutest (I own this) via their RCA outputs. I heard a difference.

 

[Sound Eq]

hi everyone

i got myself the chord qutest and i hooked to my ifi ican pro amp, using decent audioquest tower rca, and I love this combo alot with my hifiman he x v2

https://www.audioquest.com/cables/analog-interconnects/bridges-falls-series/tower

I was wondering if using differnetrca will make noticeable difference in sound quality

another question I have, i am connecting the qutest to a regular usb hub that has 6 usb inputs, do u recommend certain usb hubs to connect to or does it not matter which usb hub I use

 

[smodtactical]

I HAVENT heard the cutest but the benchmark dac is can confirm that it is too hyped and it really does not sound that great. qutest would be my first choice to try.

Are you talking about Benchmark DAC 3?

 

[smodtactical]

I've been very impressed with the Sennheiser HDV 820's analog circuitry. Read that it has been improved. Well I'm running an LTA ZOTL 10 amplifier off of a headphone jack! Sounds completely amazing with my Harbeth P3ESRs. Waiting for my XLR cables to arrive. Best of all worlds HD800S and P3s. I'm tempted to try a Benchmark DAC3 HGC but just have a feeling the Qutest with my HDV 820 or maybe a Pass Labs HPA-1 would be the ticket. I like amps such as the V281 and HDV 820 that run my HD800S headphones balanced over my Cardas cable. I know John Grandberg was using a Jeff Rowland Capri preamp in a Hugo review and he noticed a "subtle shift in tonal balance, where the presentation was simultaneously fuller and a bit darker up top." Would want something small for the desk where you wouldn't hear the difference between Qutest > headphone amp vs. Qutest> pre (pre-out) > headphone amp.

FYI. Thought the V280 sounded just the slightest more laid back then the V281. If my memory serves me right, HDV 820 sounds more transparent, has greater resolution with just as much macro dynamics as the V281. Nothing etched and wonderful transients. I can't wait to try a Qutest with my HDV 820. Dave Hanson, you better be right. lol

This is good news and gives me hope since I just bought an HDV 820 which had some negative views on head fi.

 

[Lodwales81]

hello all,
Had my qutest now around 2 months and still fiddling around with the settings. One question is that I find tidal cd quality streaming sounds better than all my digital high res music files 24 bit and dsd.is there a reason for this, dsd just sounds quiet and lifeless for me all my music is played through Audirvana plus.

 

[Triode User]

hello all,
Had my qutest now around 2 months and still fiddling around with the settings. One question is that I find tidal cd quality streaming sounds better than all my digital high res music files 24 bit and dsd.is there a reason for this, dsd just sounds quiet and lifeless for me all my music is played through Audirvana plus.

It might depend on what you regard as 'better'. Are you sure it is better really or is it just that you prefer it the sound of streamed Tidal?

Do you stream through the same server that stores your hi res digital files and are you sure that they are proper hi res sources rather than merely upsampled?

 

[Lodwales81]

It might depend on what you regard as 'better'. Are you sure it is better really or is it just that you prefer it the sound of streamed Tidal?

Do you stream through the same server that stores your hi res digital files and are you sure that they are proper hi res sources rather than merely upsampled?

Thanks for reply being doing a bit of research on dsd as most of my music files are pink floyd and the doors which I guess were never recorded and mastered in high res so at some point have been upsampled.

 

[plsvn]

Thanks for reply being doing a bit of research on dsd as most of my music files are pink floyd and the doors which I guess were never recorded and mastered in high res so at some point have been upsampled.

issue only is with digital recordings (so post 'early 80'). anything before that was analogue and you can digitize it to whatever resolution you like: yes, even DSD
(then... quality of recording/mastering itself is a whole different issue, but that's true for any digital or analogue recording )