[Torq]

  How do I count the ways? Bass depth and transparency. Inner glow and richer texture of mids. Silkyness of highs. Better more natural boundaries of musical objects.
Much better handling of digital glare (in fact as good in this aspect as I have heard on digital and amazing still not being rolled off or sacrificing resolution). Better layering and placement of sounds. More natural overall.
I used the Hugo for almost 2 years and liked it, but right out of the box the TT was a different animal.
 
In many approaches to redbook digital over the years, digital fatigue and glare is often approached accompanied by a queasy-like softening of the upper bass and lower mids (I could name some high end ones that do this).
The Chord TT somehow avoids this terrible trade-off, and that really impresses me. Therefore you can use headphones (or speakers I would guess, too) that would normally be too intolerant of digital recordings that have glare or shrillness or sound peaky.
I can use all my headphones without EQ, which I think is a major achievement.
 
The Hugo, subjectively was more forced and I did use EQ many times.
 
For what it's worth, although it's reported that the Dave is a league ahead of the TT and I have not heard it, I'm so comfortable with my TT I'm leaving well enough alone for quite awhile.
I was planning on trying the Yggy, the Pavane, even the Dave, but I never got around to it because I'm just very happy with the TT, a lot more than I expected.
I do use my own amps though for the best sound. The TT really scales with better amps and cables, but that's another story...

Any gear be it DAC, amp or headphones that needed EQ to be enjoyable and musical in any of my listening-for-pleasure would be an absolute non-starter.  So, for me, being able to use all my headphones without EQ isn't something I'd consider an achievement of any kind - it's a simple requirement for them to even be a consideration in the first place.
 
Not that EQ can't improve various aspects of some headphones - but if it was needed, nope.  For mixing (or checking a mix at least), sure, for listening - not for me.
 
Those differences do sound signifiant - and you make them sound a lot bigger than I would have expected for a modified power-supply  and some tweaks to the output stage (as I understand it the FPGA, code and filters are identical between the Hugo and the TT).  I figured most of the cost increased cost would be eaten up by the case
 
I'll be interested to see how it fares.

 

[Torq]

  If you have an open mind and ears

and don't reject ESS chip based DACs right away, maybe you check out exasound.
They don't get much love here. From my perspective the e20 MkIII does not sound spectacular in any special way, it just gets out of the way of the music. It's all there, bass, detail resolution "plankton"

, natural sound of voices and acoustic instruments and it sounds relaxed, no fatigue ... at least not for 3 to 4hrs. There are several other models, the e20 is already out of production. 30 days money back if you don't like it.

 
 

 
Oh, there's not much I'm not willing to listen to ... and I'll always buy based on what I hear rather than specs or my engineering-led assumptions.
 
I looked at exaSound when it was announced that they were a Roon partner, and when they get an end-point running I'll likely check them out again.  They're probably at the upper limit, price-wise, at what I would consider for an off-the-shelf DAC-based implementation.  They fall foul of my general issue with off-the-shelf implementations - all the engineering work seems to be in the clocks and PSU stages (and some proofing for a future that may well never come) ... with the conversion and filtering being left entirely to the chip they've chosen to build on.
 
Thanks for the input!

So, exaSound now have Roon end-point certification in their Play Point product.
 
However, at $2000 and only supporting USB output for DAC connectivity, it completely misses the mark for me.
 
Pity.

 

[rgs9200m]

Torq, I think it would help to read the Hugo TT thread to get opinions other than mine where your questions are addressed by some good posters. It's a good thread and I used it for guidance before I got it.
I just dived into this because my comments are from my own experience as an owner and not based on other's opinions (although I concur with them). 
 
I mean, since you are looking at the DAVE, I'm sure the DAVE is worth every penny of its 13K and probably can even be considered a bargain in the land of rarified sky-high audiophile equipment if it's as good as has been reported. But if you are not quite ready to spend that kind of money for whatever reason (and I think that is most of us here), the TT has a unique goodness that is a breakthrough sound to my ears, and well worth its premium extra price over the Hugo IMHO. I don't know how or why this magic occurs, but as I hear it, if I did not know better, I would think this is an entirely different DAC than the Hugo. If I only had the Hugo and I was told the TT was the DAVE, I would be fooled into believing it. Again, just my opinion, but that's my honest feeling.
 
Just fyi, FWIW.
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2015/08/chord-electronics-hugo-tt-dac-headphone-amplifier-review/
http://www.stereophile.com/content/chord-electronics-hugo-tt-da-headphone-amplifier#GKKd8xWS9QG5He3V.97
 
Good luck.

 

[Torq]

  Torq, I think it would help to read the Hugo TT thread to get opinions other than mine where your questions are addressed by some good posters. It's a good thread and I used it for guidance before I got it.
I just dived into this because my comments are from my own experience as an owner and not based on other's opinions (although I concur with them). 
 
I mean, since you are looking at the DAVE, I'm sure the DAVE is worth every penny of its 13K and probably can even be considered a bargain in the land of rarified sky-high audiophile equipment if it's as good as has been reported. But if you are not quite ready to spend that kind of money for whatever reason (and I think that is most of us here), the TT has a unique goodness that is a breakthrough sound to my ears, and well worth its premium extra price over the Hugo IMHO. I don't know how or why this magic occurs, but as I hear it, if I did not know better, I would think this is an entirely different DAC than the Hugo. If I only had the Hugo and I was told the TT was the DAVE, I would be fooled into believing it. Again, just my opinion, but that's my honest feeling.
 
Just fyi, FWIW.
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2015/08/chord-electronics-hugo-tt-dac-headphone-amplifier-review/
http://www.stereophile.com/content/chord-electronics-hugo-tt-da-headphone-amplifier#GKKd8xWS9QG5He3V.97
 
Good luck.

 
I had a read ... some interesting stuff there.
 
I'll still be auditioning both it and DAVE, though I think the physical design of the Hugo TT is going to prevent it being a viable option regardless of how it sounds.
 
Net cost isn't the big driver here (this is my cheapest hobby by far) - if an audition of any of these DACs prompts an immediate "Oh my god!" reaction, then the price won't really be a factor.  If it's just down to minor signature differences or improvements so subtle that I can only hear them if I am listening the way I do when I audition, then value will become a much bigger issue.
 
Excited to hear them all and see what's what!

 

[murphythecat]

I dotn know if youve read this thread but this is the most epic shoot out of high end dacs ive ever read an is still in action! he will try the chord dave soon I think.
 
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/absolute-top-tier-dac-for-standard-res-redbook-cd?page=9
 
a guy compared jeff aeris, lampy big 6, OverDrive SE , the PS Audio DS and the Aesthetix, Meitner MA-1 DAC,  APL DSD-S,  MSB Diamond DAC, DAC2X, Allnic D5000 DAC
 
however the user dd not use a good usb to spdif and some dac would really have benefited from.
 
 
 
 
his rankings are (i can be  reading 55 pages)
 
 fav to least fav (i'm gonna get SO much $#!+ for this!!!):
 Emm Labs DAC2X
ODSE
Aeris
DSD-S
Lampy Big 6
Meitner MA-1
PS Audio Direct Stream
PS Audio Perfect Wave 2
 
 
 
 
Anyways, you should maybe try the Overdrive SE and the emm labs. if you have the money lol

 

[smial1966]

Just for information, Steve Nugent (Empirical Audio) has a new Overdrive SX DAC available that's not currently listed on the website. The SX uses upgraded parts, e.g. Duelund capacitors and costs around $12K. 
 
Quote:

  I dotn know if youve read this thread but this is the most epic shoot out of high end dacs ive ever read an is still in action! he will try the chord dave soon I think.
 
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/absolute-top-tier-dac-for-standard-res-redbook-cd?page=9
 
a guy compared jeff aeris, lampy big 6, OverDrive SE , the PS Audio DS and the Aesthetix, Meitner MA-1 DAC,  APL DSD-S,  MSB Diamond DAC, DAC2X, Allnic D5000 DAC
 
however the user dd not use a good usb to spdif and some dac would really have benefited from.
 
 
 
 
his rankings are (i can be  reading 55 pages)
 
 fav to least fav (i'm gonna get SO much $#!+ for this!!!):
 Emm Labs DAC2X
ODSE
Aeris
DSD-S
Lampy Big 6
Meitner MA-1
PS Audio Direct Stream
PS Audio Perfect Wave 2
 
 
 
 
Anyways, you should maybe try the Overdrive SE and the emm labs. if you have the money lol

 

[Torq]

  ...
 
Anyways, you should maybe try the Overdrive SE and the emm labs. if you have the money lol

 
I have the money ...
 
Though I'm thinking that some of these DACs are likely to fall off the list just because of the utter nonsense involved in trying audition one.  I have very low tolerance for jumping through other people's hoops when it comes to buying things.  The higher the price, the lower that tolerance becomes.

 

[deuter]

   
I have the money ...
 
Though I'm thinking that some of these DACs are likely to fall off the list just because of the utter nonsense involved in trying audition one.  I have very low tolerance for jumping through other people's hoops when it comes to buying things.  The higher the price, the lower that tolerance becomes.

curious to know what you listen to, headphones or speakers.

 

[Vonsbaek]

Aqua La Scala MKII
 
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews2/aqua/6.html
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2014/03/aqua-hifi-la-scala-mkii-dac-review/

 

[wink]

Life after the Yggdrasil can only mean another Yggdrasil..........   

 

[Torq]

  curious to know what you listen to, headphones or speakers.

Right now most of my listening is on headphones; my girlfriend is not much for music she can't dance to (though she loves live jazz, opera and the symphony).
 
I have a nice speaker setup as well, but for the amount of time I currently spend using that I'm not looking to change anything there at the moment.
 
Gear is all in my profile if you want the specifics.

 

[Torq]

  Aqua La Scala MKII
 
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews2/aqua/6.html
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2014/03/aqua-hifi-la-scala-mkii-dac-review/

Interesting ... (still not a a PCM-1704 fan though).
 
Like several of these units, getting an audition looks like it's going to be a challenge.  Maybe too much of a challenge to bother with ... 
 
Appreciate the suggestion though!

 

[deuter]

 
Right now most of my listening is on headphones; my girlfriend is not much for music she can't dance to (though she loves live jazz, opera and the symphony).
 
I have a nice speaker setup as well, but for the amount of time I currently spend using that I'm not looking to change anything there at the moment.
 
Gear is all in my profile if you want the specifics.

I would definitely recommend trying some of the new DSD DACs, read up on DSD on Lampizator, and Lukasz explain how DSD is a very simple decoding and is probably the most pure way to recreate that analog signal.
 
There is the HQ player that can do the PCM to DSD conversion on the fly  feeding into an excellent DSD DAC.
 
As for your gear, I wouldn't worry too much about a 10 Grand DAC, there are like a million limitations to a headphone listening system, the most important being that almost all recording have been mastered with speakers in mind, what this means is even an excellent DAC will be bottlenecked by your sound delivery.
eg- panned imaging for close mic recordings, not taking advantage of huge soundstages that some of the elite DACs can offer, etc
 
I would recommend sticking to the Yggdrasil price range unless you will look at moving the DAC in the stereo setup.

 

[Torq]

  I would definitely recommend trying some of the new DSD DACs, read up on DSD on Lampizator, and Lukasz explain how DSD is a very simple decoding and is probably the most pure way to recreate that analog signal.
 
There is the HQ player that can do the PCM to DSD conversion on the fly  feeding into an excellent DSD DAC.
 
As for your gear, I wouldn't worry too much about a 10 Grand DAC, there are like a million limitations to a headphone listening system, the most important being that almost all recording have been mastered with speakers in mind, what this means is even an excellent DAC will be bottlenecked by your sound delivery.
eg- panned imaging for close mic recordings, not taking advantage of huge soundstages that some of the elite DACs can offer, etc
 
I would recommend sticking to the Yggdrasil price range unless you will look at moving the DAC in the stereo setup.

I'm already quite familiar with DSD ... both from an engineering and mathematics perspective.  I've read what Lukasz/Lampizator have to say, specifically, as well.  However, my first post discounted Lampizator as an option and it's not a point that's up for debate for me.
 
DSD has its benefits and, like everything in engineering, it has it drawbacks as well.  I remain unconvinced that, overall, it's any better than PCM.  The arguments for DS vs. R2R conversion are, likewise, technically interesting but ultimately immaterial and there are trade-offs and benefits to both.
 
I do have DSD DACs on my audition list.  One (or two) of which converts everything to DSD and then exploits the benefits of pure 1-bit PWM DS conversion, so we'll see where those fall out in my auditioning.  They are, at least, two of the units that won't be too hard to get to listen too properly.
 
I create and master my own music so I'm well exposed to what's involved mixing and mastering.  It is, at best, a massive compromise since there is such huge variety in the performance of speaker based systems that no one mix is ever going to sound correct on anything anyway, so other than the right qualitative aspects being observed it's a bit of a crapshoot and I wouldn't use it as an argument against headphone listening.
 
While I wouldn't consider a headphone system to be superior to a speaker system, there are plenty of limitations and issues with speaker based setups.  And, generally, excepting soundstage, they're a lot harder to compensate for than anything going on in a headphone system.  Yes, speakers will throw a much better soundstage, push enough air so that you can literally feel the music, and can be designed for a flat response since they get the benefit of the natural frequency shaping affects of the ear's pinnae.  At the same time they have issues with crossover points (in multi-driver units), time-coherence/alignment, cabinet resonances and room modes.
 
I don't place a direct correlation on price to performance ... so the notion that a $10,000 DAC is misplaced in a headphone setup doesn't wash with me.  If Yggdrasil remains the best sounding DAC I've heard when I get done with this, I'll happily buy another (and be very happy about it), and if not, then I'll buy something else.

 

[yage]

Have you considered anything by Ayre Acoustics? The Codex or QB-9 DSD might be a nice change of pace from the Yggy.