[fixated]

I believe I read that you have/tried their DACs already. Do you have RS-05 as well?

No I do not, but I do plan on getting it after the holiday season blows over. Way too much expenditures, my wallet needs time to recover.

 

[BLacklWf]

No I do not, but I do plan on getting it after the holiday season blows over. Way too much expenditures, my wallet needs time to recover.

Haha, same here. The exact reason I could not order a DAC yet. When you get RS-05 with V850, I would love to hear more of your feedback!

 

[zhgutov]

I hope they don't release a V900 yet as I've just ordered my V850

It is possible that they can launch V850 v2, like they do with V800, but this is just a guess.
Anyway, it is very interesting to me what else they can improve in such architecture.

It added some weight to the Hugo 2

Have you heard Hugo 2? There are lots of people which tell this DACs have different sound.
It is hard to get such devices for demo in my country, so it is interesting to get some impressions.
Something beyond "the better detail", which is too much generalized.

 

[fixated]

Haha, same here. The exact reason I could not order a DAC yet. When you get RS-05 with V850, I would love to hear more of your feedback!

I believe someone already has that combo and did a short write up for it.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/vio...pressions-thread.761936/page-20#post-13732478

 

[BLacklWf]

I believe someone already has that combo and did a short write up for it.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/vio...pressions-thread.761936/page-20#post-13732478

Yup, I read it before. It was a great write up.

 

[fixated]

It is possible that they can launch V850 v2, like they do with V800, but this is just a guess.
Anyway, it is very interesting to me what else they can improve in such architecture.


Have you heard Hugo 2? There are lots of people which tell this DACs have different sound.
It is hard to get such devices for demo in my country, so it is interesting to get some impressions.
Something beyond "the better detail", which is too much generalized.

Yeah, I think its just hard to pinpoint what the Hugo 2 sounds like. You'll have to forgive me if it still doesn't make sense as I'm not great with describing sound in general.

I think when they call it "better detail", what they really mean might be that its incredibly resolving. If you can imagine listening to a DAC with that gave you great detail retrieval then the Hugo 2 was a small step beyond that, it was putting you in the space of the actual recording. Its like if you close your eyes, you can pinpoint exactly where the instrument around you is during the recording instead of it just being on the left or right of you. You had a sense of depth to where everything actually was. It actually sounds great on live recordings because it really gives you the sense of you being there.

Hope that makes a little bit of sense

 

[BLacklWf]

Yeah, I think its just hard to pinpoint what the Hugo 2 sounds like. You'll have to forgive me if it still doesn't make sense as I'm not great with describing sound in general.

I think when they call it "better detail", what they really mean might be that its incredibly resolving. If you can imagine listening to a DAC with that gave you great detail retrieval then the Hugo 2 was a small step beyond that, it was putting you in the space of the actual recording. Its like if you close your eyes, you can pinpoint exactly where the instrument around you is during the recording instead of it just being on the left or right of you. You had a sense of depth to where everything actually was. It actually sounds great on live recordings because it really gives you the sense of you being there.

Hope that makes a little bit of sense

Did you like Hugo 2 more than TT or? Anyway, it will be great if you could provide comparison between V850 and Hugo line ups later!

 

[zhgutov]

Yeah, I think its just hard to pinpoint what the Hugo 2 sounds like. You'll have to forgive me if it still doesn't make sense as I'm not great with describing sound in general.

I think when they call it "better detail", what they really mean might be that its incredibly resolving. If you can imagine listening to a DAC with that gave you great detail retrieval then the Hugo 2 was a small step beyond that, it was putting you in the space of the actual recording. Its like if you close your eyes, you can pinpoint exactly where the instrument around you is during the recording instead of it just being on the left or right of you. You had a sense of depth to where everything actually was. It actually sounds great on live recordings because it really gives you the sense of you being there.

Hope that makes a little bit of sense

Thanks for that. Well, this makes more questions than answers, but it is good, I think.
For me the question is what make such effect? Is it the clock or their digital filter (which is quite unique, so it is hard to estimate its effect)? Or maybe it is something else..
That's because your description is very similar to what I can tell about the difference when I add RS 05 to V800.

 

[Cobold]

You mean DAC+ sounded unnatural, right? Thanks for the feedback!

I mean I had the older version Mytek Brooklyn DAC not the newer Mytek Brooklyn DAC+.
No idea what are the differences between them.

 

[BLacklWf]

Thanks for that. Well, this makes more questions than answers, but it is good, I think.
For me the question is what make such effect? Is it the clock or their digital filter (which is quite unique, so it is hard to estimate its effect)? Or maybe it is something else..
That's because your description is very similar to what I can tell about the difference when I add RS 05 to V800.

I don't have neither, but from my reading the core strength of Chord was their custom hardware based oversampling where it adds a lot more pre-ringing compared to other software oversampling methods. To my knowledge, RS-05, of which has a lot of commercial functions that that, but does similar hardware based oversampling.

 

[fixated]

Did you like Hugo 2 more than TT or? Anyway, it will be great if you could provide comparison between V850 and Hugo line ups later!

Definitely the Hugo 2! I found the Hugo 2 a touch warmer and more resolving than the Hugo TT. But the Hugo TT had much more power in driving headphones.

Thanks for that. Well, this makes more questions than answers, but it is good, I think.
For me the question is what make such effect? Is it the clock or their digital filter (which is quite unique, so it is hard to estimate its effect)? Or maybe it is something else..
That's because your description is very similar to what I can tell about the difference when I add RS 05 to V800.

Not sure but I would think that the digital filters and pulse arrays had a large to play in there. I haven't gone down the route of reading through the Hugo 2 thread so you'll have to confirm it for yourself I'm afraid.

 

[zhgutov]

I don't have neither, but from my reading the core strength of Chord was their custom hardware based oversampling where it adds a lot more pre-ringing compared to other software oversampling methods. To my knowledge, RS-05, of which has a lot of commercial functions that that, but does similar hardware based oversampling.

RS 05 has more "traditional" digital filter. The impulse response is very similar to so called "sharp" filter. V800, RS 06 and V850 use the same resampling method.
Chord DACs (at least Hugo1 and TT) have impulse response like the ladder DACs, but they reproduce the sine wave like the sine wave, without ladder, and they don't have aliasing.

There are some pictures to show the difference.

V800 impulse response (RS 05 has the same):

MyST impulse response (ladder DAC):

(phase does not matter here)

Chord Hugo impulse response:

But Hugo is not a ladder DAC. So, there are some more questions.
Does it make sense for sample rates of 96 kHz or higher?
Does it make 96 kHz source sound similar to 44.1 kHz, or it just makes the sound "better"?

 

[BLacklWf]

RS 05 has more "traditional" digital filter. The impulse response is very similar to so called "sharp" filter. V800, RS 06 and V850 use the same resampling method.
Chord DACs (at least Hugo1 and TT) have impulse response like the ladder DACs, but it reproduces the sine wave like the sine wave, without ladder.

There are some pictures to show the difference.

V800 impulse response (RS 05 has the same):

MyST impulse response (ladder DAC):

(phase does not matter here)

Chord Hugo impulse response:

But Hugo is not a ladder DAC. So, there are some more questions.
Does is make sense for sample rates of 96 kHz or higher?
Does it make 96 kHz source sound similar to 44.1 kHz, or it just makes the sound "better"?

Wow, it's impressive to see those graphs. So, I don't have any chord product, but I use Roon + HQ Player. I use the custom filters in HQ player along with oversamping, which is suppose to some what mimic what Dave does. At least with my humble DACs - Emotiva XDA-2 and Oppo HA-2 SE, they sound better using the HQ player oversampling. Not sure about Emotiva, but I think Oppo does oversampling as a default - but I could be wrong. Anyway, I have no Chord product, but if I get Chord product - the first test I was going to do was whether the external vs internal oversampling is better.

Since you have RS-05, why don't you try its oversampling with Hugo to see which you like better? You can also download HQ player for a trial and test it with both of your Violectric and Hugo DACs. I use poly-sinc-xtr-mp filter with HQ player (+ Roon), and again to my ears it vastly improves my humble DACs. The HQ player claims their oversampling is superior with only exception begin Dave because the computer has a lot more resource for calculations vs tiny chips in most DACs. The calculation is so intense that my relative new i7 CPU with 4 physical cores and 8 virtual cores can barely keep up to PCM384/DSD256. My computer stutters heavily when I try anything higher. That's why Chord and Violectric (to some extend) use or is exploring with custom hardware based oversampling/filters.

So, for your question on 96 or higher, I read both side of arguments one saying it's not audible vs other saying mathematically it's only better because the oversampling calculation never introduces anything not there to begin with. I'm not an engineer, but to my ears I like maxed out O/S with select digital filters I like. On some other digital filters, I don't hear any difference 48.1 vs 384.

 

[zhgutov]

I use Roon + HQ Player. I use the custom filters in HQ player along with oversamping, which is suppose to some what mimic what Dave does. At least with my humble DACs - Emotiva XDA-2 and Oppo HA-2 SE, they sound better using the HQ player oversampling.

Well, this is interesting. But I want to know for sure, if it does the same thing (probably it does, I will try it).

Since you have RS-05, why don't you try its oversampling with Hugo to see which you like better?

That's because I don't have Hugo. These graphs are not mine, they are made by another people http://reference-audio-analyzer.pro/en/
And I cannot find it in our shops to make such experiment. I think I need to simulate the filter by myself or to buy the DAC.

That's why Chord and Violectric (to some extend) use or is exploring with custom hardware based oversampling/filters.

I think Violectric does this to remove jitter. Their resampling (upsampling) does not affect the sound.
Another reason is to feed 96 kHz to the DAC (Best mode), because this DACs work better in 96 kHz (at least according to measurements).

 

[Ragnar-BY]

I think Violectric does this to remove jitter. Their resampling (upsampling) does not affect the sound.
Another reason is to feed 96 kHz to the DAC (Best mode), because this DACs work better in 96 kHz (at least according to measurements).

Somewhere at Hed-Fi I have already saw resampling explanation from Violectric official. It is intended to do many improvements, and jitter removing was also mentioned. If I remember correctly it also allows to use a digital volume control without any loss of useful bits.