[ZappaMan]

It could well be the case that a Dave has the ability to reproduce the original track more accurately and engagingly than mscaled x or y.

Each component is responsible for a certain aspect. Maybe the 20 element noise shaper (or whatever), makes more sense of the source material then an mscaler signal rendered with 10 element noise shaper (or whatever).

Surely, the only way to true enlightenment, is to keen an open mind.

 

[Amberlamps]

I find it hard to accept level criticism of the TT2 sounding in any way that's it's been negatively described. (Words like ruthless or bleached are either a mistake, trash talk, or potential trolling.) The TT2 is a natural sounding as any Chord DAC, and more accurate than most.

I can relate to first impressions of the TT2 being a lot to take in. However it was no different for me going from:

Meridian Explorer to Chord Mojo
Mojo to Hugo 2
Hugo 2 to TT2.

When I got the Mojo is took almost two weeks before I realised the Mojo was right. Then many more weeks before I stopped longing for the thicker less detailed bloom of the Meridian Explorer. Similarly when I got the Hugo 2 there was so much detail, I could not see or hear straight. That was with music I knew on the Mojo. What I did was straight away focus on the tonal balance, and tonal warmth. I quickly decided tonal balance was perfect, and warmth was only a natural level or warmth. Just a case of sitting with it for month of solid music, which I did to adjust. Given what reviewers were saying about the Hugo 2, I knew I had no problems with it. Then it took me best part of a month to fully adjust to Hugo 2.

Then TT2. With music I knew, again I was outfaced. However with music that I didn't know, like I had two new unopened CDs, the TT2 was astonishing. I could barely take it in. It was so together, and so outright prefect. Over time I adjusted to the TT2 with music I already knew. Now six months later and for a long time, I am so relaxed with the TT2 that I don't even think about it.

Initially though with the TT2, I would sometimes find myself questioning some sounds. (I was like 'what?'.) However I knew the DAC was right. It was then a case of telling myself that was how that sound was supposed to sound. (Now months down the line, I was right.) However it doesn't detract from the fact that the TT2 was initially at times a lot to take in. That is only to be expected though. It is an extremely high end piece of audio equipment. It's going to sound unusual at times, if the listener is not used to that level of resolution and resolving power. It's going to make sounds, sound like we never heard them before, in ways we'd never thought.

(It reminds me of when I first got the Hugo 2. Not always but there were moments when it scared me with what it could do. I remember also clearly reading someone mentioned that the Hugo 2 was 'scarily good'.)


One of the other steps in the experience is what cabling and electronics you are using. Never underestimate analogue cabling. Having bright cabling is not going to do any favours. I never buy cables unless I can see reviews. Like I won't just go on the AudioQuest website and think, that one costs more so it must be better. Sticking to neutral partnering kit is paramount. If you don't and criticise, then who cares. Honestly, if you are struggling with the TT2 at first give it time. If you are still struggling months later look at your cabling, electronics, and headphones.

E.g. I recently changed a slightly bright cable for a neutral one. The result was that the soundstage that was a little forward, improved a noticeably comfortable amount. The overall quality of the cable was better too, and the sound was more civilised while more revealing. By civilised I don't mean boring or flat, I mean 'oh …. right'. (TT2 still instantly takes my head clean off if I give it some AC/DC.)

True story, TT2 is better than Dave, it is the better dac, price v performance v power. Dave although good is now an oap and it is starting to be overtaken by other newer dacs, just look at bartok for instance.

Mr darko thinks we should all buy one, I retort, we don't all get free schiit for writing crap on the internet mr darko.

Seriously though, if I was in the market for something, I would probably opt for a 10 - 12 grand box of tricks like the bartok, a one stop shop, dac, amp, streamer, server etc etc. But I would only be willing to spend say 5 grand on it, 12 is the height of stupidity.

 

[rkt31]

True story, TT2 is better than Dave, it is the better dac, price v performance v power. Dave although good is now an oap and it is starting to be overtaken by other newer dacs, just look at bartok for instance.

Mr darko thinks we should all buy one, I retort, we don't all get free schiit for writing crap on the internet mr darko.

Seriously though, if I was in the market for something, I would probably opt for a 10 - 12 grand box of tricks like the bartok, a one stop shop, dac, amp, streamer, server etc etc. But I would only be willing to spend say 5 grand on it, 12 is the height of stupidity.

What algorithm Bartok uses for interpolation ? Imho accurate interpolation is the key for digital to analog conversion as already told by rob watts a number of times.

 

[Amberlamps]

What algorithm Bartok uses for interpolation ? Imho accurate interpolation is the key for digital to analog conversion as already told by rob watts a number of times.

I have no idea, you'd have to ask dcs.

But whose to say that someones way of reproducing audio is the preferred sound ?

Rob is a clever chap, but he is only 1 man out of 7.5 billion people on this planet and no two people hear the same. His way is probably the correct way, but humans all hear differently and like our vision, it changes multiple times per day.

For some a mediocre pair of headphones and a £100 dac may sound the best to them compared to a dave or bartok etc, point in hand, last year some Dave and Mojo and Hugo owner contacted me and told me he bought a dave and a hugo, but he could only listen to his mojo, the others were not to his taste and he wondered if an mscaler would change this or would it in his eyes, be a £3500 waste of money like his £8500 dave was.

I schiit you not, a verified member, dave, hugo and mojo owner, yet only mojo rocked his world.

Strange but true and I'm sure there are many people like him in the world, especially mp3 lovers, they would probably find high end dacs to be bright/sharp/clinical compared to the mp3 mess that they are used to and love. I did, and then I thought uber bright was how music was meant to sound, then I got told no, thats just rfi.

Whilst my posts are still here, anyone want to buy a rare limited edition chord mug, I'm raising money for charity, lets say we start the bidding at £1000, any takers ?

 

[rkt31]

I have no idea, you'd have to ask dcs.

But whose to say that someones way of reproducing audio is the preferred sound ?

Rob is a clever chap, but he is only 1 man out of 7.5 billion people on this planet and no two people hear the same. His way is probably the correct way, but humans all hear differently and like our vision, it changes multiple times per day.

For some a mediocre pair of headphones and a £100 dac may sound the best to them compared to a dave or bartok etc, point in hand, last year some Dave and Mojo and Hugo owner contacted me and told me he bought a dave and a hugo, but he could only listen to his mojo, the others were not to his taste and he wondered if an mscaler would change this or would it in his eyes, be a £3500 waste of money like his £8500 dave was.

I schiit you not, a verified member, dave, hugo and mojo owner, yet only mojo rocked his world.

Strange but true and I'm sure there are many people like him in the world, especially mp3 lovers, they would probably find high end dacs to be bright/sharp/clinical compared to the mp3 mess that they are used to and love. I did, and then I thought uber bright was how music was meant to sound, then I got told no, thats just rfi.

Whilst my posts are still here, anyone want to buy a rare limited edition chord mug, I'm raising money for charity, lets say we start the bidding at £1000, any takers ?

I don't know about other high end DACs but to me tt2 and HMS is far from cold or clinical. In fact the beauty of this dac is that it has enormous details but without any edge. it reminds me of a vinyl of analog master.

 

[Amberlamps]

I don't know about other high end DACs but to me tt2 and HMS is far from cold or clinical. In fact the beauty of this dac is that it has enormous details but without any edge. it reminds me of a vinyl of analog master.

You said good things about TT2 and HMS, which I'm in total agreement with you, it's much less clinical and cold compared to my second high end dac, Hugo 2, mojo was my first stand alone dac that did not come in either a computer or stereo.

TT2 & HMS sounds like I'm floating on a cloud of TT's

 

[bluenight]

Sure. I found the TT2 a little ruthless on less well recorded material. TT is a better all rounder, for me. For my tastes, for my ears, and my system I also thought there was (comparatively) a bit of a ‘hardness’ to the sound compared with the less intense Hugo and TT, which I found made it harder to relax with the music. I also found that trick where the sound seems to blossom out of your speakers and make them sound twice as big, was more apparent with TT than the more accurate TT2. I also found it easier to get lost in the music and follow each musical strand on the TT more than the TT2, even though TT2 was more detailed and technically superior. The TT was like a Technicolor movie, the TT2 a state of the art 4K one. I do miss the TT2 sometimes though, and it obviously has far greater upgrading potential with M-Scaler. I think my ideal DAC would be a mix of TT2s resolution with TTs ‘joie de vivre’ and exuberance, which probably points towards a Dave

I was about to ask if TT2 sounds less harsh with sibilance then hugo2. Also if TT2 sounds smoother and more grain free.

I think the worst thing about hugo2 is the sibilance with vocals, some piercing ssss sounds when played loud more then needed i think with some recordings, i hear less of this with rca out to my Lake People RS02 amp from streamer then spdif from streamer to hugo2 direct driving HD800S which i know is not an forgiving HP.

 

[rkt31]

I was about to ask if TT2 sounds less harsh with sibilance then hugo2. Also if TT2 sounds smoother and more grain free.

I think the worst thing about hugo2 is the sibilance with vocals, some piercing ssss sounds when played loud more then needed i think with some recordings, i hear less of this with rca out to my Lake People RS02 amp from streamer then spdif from streamer to hugo2 direct driving HD800S which i know is not an forgiving HP.

May be your hd800s is the culprit. Try using green filter . I used Hugo 2 for over a year with speakers and very transparent amp but never had any such problems. It will however not hide any poor recording flaws but it will not make anything bright either. Also optical input is better. Usb with proper cable and usb noise elimination can sound equal or better than optical.

 

[musickid]

Everyone's missing one important point. A dave with 164k taps can never come close to an mscaler with its 1M interpolation tap filter for reconstructing the original analogue signal. That's set in stone like the 24 hour clock. Also Rob's design are not about personal preference or an individual "A" amongst 7 million. In fact if you study elementary physics you will quickly see that his dacs are the only one's that follow hard scientific and mathematical principles and proofs so it is a true engineering project in design to universal standards and that is why these chord dacs sound so good because the scientific and engineering rules governing them are real and adhered to in the truest sense.

Other dac chips are only approximations of this and that is why they sound off by comparison. Now i don't know what's going in the wider tech industry but at the moment only chord dacs are running to the real scientific and engineering boundaries and not artificially pushing them like you see so often in the high end audio world. Either chord is ahead of its time or the others are lagging and also lagging in the necessary understood theory to implement the digital to analogue conversion process in the truest sense. Finally if someone prefers the mp3 compressed sound then it's a free world but that is purely subjective and has nothing to do with pure science upon which chord dacs are ultimately built on.

Based on this it doesn't really matter who the designer is as there is either a firm grip on science, theory and its engineering implementation or there isn't. You can't change the universal laws of physics which govern the universe and everything in it. Nothing in practice is 100% perfect but we're closer here.

 

[Triode User]

Everyone's missing one important point. A dave with 164k taps can never come close to an mscaler with its 1M interpolation tap filter for reconstructing the original analogue signal. That's set in stone like the 24 hour clock. Also Rob's design are not about personal preference or an individual "A" amongst 7 million. In fact if you study elementary physics you will quickly see that his dacs are the only one's that follow hard scientific and mathematical principles and proofs so it is a true engineering project in design to universal standards and that is why these chord dacs sound so good because the scientific and engineering rules governing them are real and adhered to in the truest sense.

Other dac chips are only approximations of this and that is why they sound off by comparison. Now i don't know what's going in the wider tech industry but at the moment only chord dacs are running to the real scientific and engineering boundaries and not artificially pushing them like you see so often in the high end audio world. Either chord is ahead of its time or the others are lagging and also lagging in the necessary understood theory to implement the digital to analogue conversion process in the truest sense. Finally if someone prefers the mp3 compressed sound then it's a free world but that is purely subjective and has nothing to do with pure science upon which chord dacs are ultimately built on.

Based on this it doesn't really matter who the designer is as there is either a firm grip on science, theory and its engineering implementation or there isn't. You can't change the universal laws which govern the universe and everything in it.

The only flaw in your logic is the supreme transparency of the Dave which (IMHO) makes up for the tt2 + mscaler combination. In other words to my ears it is not just about taps. Listening back to back with the different combinations and with a variety of music over a period of time is what has driven me to arrive at my conclusion. It is that balance of where the 1m taps outweighs the sheer transparency of a different solo DAC. Luckily the Chord range has a number of options and so a listener can select the combination that suits their ear and budget.

 

[musickid]

Justifying the expenditure of a dave would be very difficult for me. I know without doubt the gap is very large from mtt2 to mdave. For now i'll just put my feet up and enjoy my new acquisition. tt2 is still silent under all conditions and brightnesses and display modes.

 

[Amberlamps]

Everyone's missing one important point. A dave with 164k taps can never come close to an mscaler with its 1M interpolation tap filter for reconstructing the original analogue signal. That's set in stone like the 24 hour clock. Also Rob's design are not about personal preference or an individual "A" amongst 7 million. In fact if you study elementary physics you will quickly see that his dacs are the only one's that follow hard scientific and mathematical principles and proofs so it is a true engineering project in design to universal standards and that is why these chord dacs sound so good because the scientific and engineering rules governing them are real and adhered to in the truest sense.

Other dac chips are only approximations of this and that is why they sound off by comparison. Now i don't know what's going in the wider tech industry but at the moment only chord dacs are running to the real scientific and engineering boundaries and not artificially pushing them like you see so often in the high end audio world. Either chord is ahead of its time or the others are lagging and also lagging in the necessary understood theory to implement the digital to analogue conversion process in the truest sense. Finally if someone prefers the mp3 compressed sound then it's a free world but that is purely subjective and has nothing to do with pure science upon which chord dacs are ultimately built on.

Based on this it doesn't really matter who the designer is as there is either a firm grip on science, theory and its engineering implementation or there isn't. You can't change the universal laws which govern the universe and everything in it.

You're missing the point, an mscaler is not a dac and as has been discussed numerous times, an mscaler and dac in one box is unlikely at this time due to various reasons. And, at the end of the day, it is all about personal preference, otherwise you would of bought your TT2 without needing to demo it first, same with your headphones, your H2 etc.

We very rarely spend an inconsiderable amount of money on blind purchases, we have either researched or heard or saw or played/demoed whatever it is that we want to buy, before getting the cash out.

Also, a 24 hour clock is not set in stone, the 24 hour clock is actually decreasing, thus the need to add a leap second to keep uber precise atomic clocks in check.

Bet ya didn't think of that when you said the 24 hour clock is set in stone

 

[Amberlamps]

There is nothing


The only flaw in your logic is the supreme transparency of the Dave which (IMHO) makes up for the tt2 + mscaler combination. In other words to my ears it is not just about taps. Listening back to back with the different combinations and with a variety of music over a period of time is what has driven me to arrive at my conclusion. It is that balance of where the 1m taps outweighs the sheer transparency of a different solo DAC. Luckily the Chord range has a number of options and so a listener can select the combination that suits their ear and budget.

Here here, couldn't of said it better myself.

Don't spose you wanna buy an unused Chord Mojo uber special limited edition mug for £1000 by any chance ?

It's for charity

It's not for sale

 

[musickid]

Maybe the things you say are all true and yes i did audition my tt2 purchase. But chord dacs are the only ones that fully adhere to the correct theoretical, scientific and engineering implementations if we are comparing to the true laws of physics. I don't know how else to put it because it's a fact. Only flaw means one flaw and that was the dave vs mTT2 argument which is really subjective as to which sounds best.

 

[bluenight]

I found exactly the same when moving from TT to TT2. On first hearing the TT2, I missed the 'warmth' of the TT, and found the TT2 a little 'ruthless' too.
I think that I may have 'gotten used to' the sound of the TT2 over the last couple of months, so I don't notice the difference as much. Also, I changed the RCA cables from Atlas Mavros Ultra Grun, to Chord Super Sarum ARAY, which tend to mitigate a little against the slight 'hardness'.
There's no doubt in my mind that the TT2 'brings you closer to the music' compared to the TT, but that occasionally makes for a less relaxed listen IMO.

Good that you have found a cable you like.

Did you use the grun cables atached to the cable? https://www.atlascables.com/featured-grun.html

I have listened for about a month with atlas mavros grun rca cable with mains power adapter(which drains away rfi that can make the sound harsh and sibilant if not taken care of and lowers the noise floor) connected to my aq niagara 1000 mains power cleaner with ground noise dissipation system.

I dont think this cable sound particullary harsh and sibilant just slightly overedged compared to the tellurium q silver diamond cable which sounds smoother and more grain free. Grun Mavros cable is more bright and more fatiguing but i have heard worse, the vocals is quite smooth with little ssss sounds imo.

With mavros grun rca the articulation with vocals is the best i have heard so i hear almost every word now which i dident hear with cheaper cables next best before was the TQ SD. I think the mavros cable overall has less veil then TQ SD so some sounds can sound more realistic.

What TQ SD does better to my ears is seperation of instruments, better tonality so it sounds more natural and organic less edge therfor i can play it louder with more reward. Sounds more musical/euphonic mavros sounds more analytical.

Both of these are high resoultion cables letting sounds through in an open way. Best ive heard and most expensive. I will choose one of these my analytical brain wants the mavros rca and my heart want the TQ SD. It will be a tough choice. On mavros rca i have 60 days money back guarantee from future shop uk which is nice i demoed only TQ SD for 2 weeks so memory fades also.