Unfortunately, MSB doesn't provide the performance of their noise shapers.
Quote:
As is the theory that all a separate amp is bringing to the table is adding coloration. Nothing about better grip on the transducer, blacker background, more dynamic, firmer bass etc. Don’t get me started on the proclaimed sound of tubes. Second the THD, DR etc.
No, I never said this. As I stated, amps are necessary for gain but an outboard amp, as with any analog component after the DAC, will add coloration, some more than others. Even the type of glue used for your speaker cones has been shown to add coloration. If transparency is the goal, then you do what you can to minimize these colorations. As to better grip, which I define as control, some outboard amps provide better grip than others, I think most of us have experienced this but an amp will not have better control than the DAC because no amp can match the speed and agility of a DAC. The higher the gain your amp provides, the slower the speed and the less the agility is the rule. Even the best electrostatic amp can't outdo the speed of a DAC, the best it can theoretically do is match it. Blacker background, I already addressed this. Look at the noise floor of your favorite amp if it is provided and it will not come close to a DAC. If it isn't provided, look at THD (which is another measurement of the noise that your amp produces) and it won't even be close. Regarding "dynamic", if you're talking about gain, yes, an amp can produce a louder sound but as far as dynamic contrasts or dynamic range, they probably won't be close. The DAC will win or else the amp could be as good as the DAC but never better because the DAC is the originator of the signal. You can't outdo the original. As far as firmer bass, if you mean enhanced or artificial bass, yes that is a coloration that an amp or transducer can provide but that doesn't mean it's real. As to tighter bass or better bass definition, again DAC wins because it comes down to control. Again, the signal begins with the DAC. An amp can alter the signal and maybe alter it to your preference but it will be at the cost of transparency. It's like saying the original Star Wars wasn't so good and that you could write a better version of it. Well, guess what? That's how George Lucas wrote it and while you can re-write it if you wish, then it would no longer be Star Wars. But this brings up a good point, if you don't have a good recording to start with, sometimes it is necessary to add tuning but that is not the fault of the DAC.
Dave is not measured at full load with headphones. Maybe they are still good, but they will be affected negatively the more it is pushed.
It is still
that good. The unique thing about the DAVE is it has no measurable noise floor modulation, something that cannot be said for the Hugo or any other DAC or amp. Here is what Rob had to say:
"Now the really unusual thing about Dave is the residual noise (no signal) is 2.6uV, THD and noise at -60dB is still 2.6uV, and THD and noise with 2.5v OP is still 2.6uV. This completely unvarying result is remarkable for any analogue device, let alone a DAC/amp. This measurement is more telling, as it relates to sound quality, as the smallest amount of noise floor modulation is very audible, in terms of things sounding harder and less smooth."
Before I move on, pay attention to the fact that noise with the DAVE is measured in uV and not millivolts, which is how most audiophile amps are measured. And this insanely low noise doesn't worsen as you increase gain. This represents a difference of 1000 fold. Talk about black background.
“As to natural and organic sound, 3D soundstage, precise image, inner details, black backgrounds, do you really think an amp can provide these things better than a good DAC because those parameters are more the responsibility of the DAC than the amp?” The short answer is yes! The Hugo was not my cup of tea, to lean and not enough drive for even the LCD 3/Hd800. I have also asked one person who owns the Totaldac D1 how it sounds direct out with HD 800 compared to use the Master 9 and the answer was not a big difference, a bit better clarity and a bit less liveliness.
Then we agree to disagree. Again, if you are using the Hugo to decide how the DAVE sounds, then I can see why you think the way you do but I can assure you, they're not the same. Not even close. As to the person you spoke with who owns a TotalDac d1, people will have their own opinions and if they prefer one presentation to another, that's fine. Having been a TotalDac owner and having compared the d1-single to the d1-dual to the d1-monobloc, while they each have the trademark TotalDac richness in tonality, as you go up the chain, what you glean more of is space and air. You go from 2D to a more 3D presentation with finer layering of details. If the person you spoke with was using a d1-dual using the headphone port in the back, that connection, while direct, uses only half of the resistors of the DAC amounting to listening to the d1-single which has a flat 2D sound compared to d1-dual via balanced XLR outputs and especially compared to the monobloc that I owned. The DAVE goes even further than the monobloc. I can assure you, as you go up the TotalDac chain and eventually to the DAVE, this direct-to-DAC connection results in a greater degree of depth and realism. Regarding the HD800, while this headphone presents a very wide soundstage, there is not much depth, at least compared to my HE-1000. As I'm currently comparing my new HD800S to my HE-1000, this is what I'm noticing.
Quote:
Don’t get me wrong I do find Dave to be a very interesting DAC/amp and I definitely will hear it then I get an opportunity. The ability to drive a headphone direct from the DAC/amp is a nice future if it can provide the same amplifying capacity of a good standalone amp, including good tuning and driving force etc etc. The “immunity” to the quality of the source gear and digital cables is another attractive aspect.
Yes, you really need to hear it before you judge it and what I say shouldn't matter, your ears will tell you.