[Bill13]

You might find these answers for yourself if you read through parts of the thread. Mr. Watts has explained many times, his research complete with pics, charts and diagrams. The DAVE thread is endowed with lots of information for your peroosal.

Well, I did look through this tread & the Dave treads, and still feel that I don't fully understand specifically what are the 'dominant' reasons why when an M-scaler is connected, the Dave is much more transparent than Hugo2 & Qutest. Yes, there are many technical design differences, but I still feel that the most significant 'dominant' ones have not been clearly identified/explained yet.

 

[514077]

Well, I did look through this tread & the Dave treads, and still feel that I don't fully understand specifically what are the 'dominant' reasons why when an M-scaler is connected, the Dave is much more transparent than Hugo2 & Qutest. Yes, there are many technical design differences, but I still feel that the most significant 'dominant' ones have not been clearly identified/explained yet.

I'm willing to bet that the dominant reason the DAVE/Blu2 sounds better than the Hugo2/Blu2, is
1) Better amplification in the DAVE,
2) As @raydude said, better power supply implementation.

 

[AndrewOld]

There are a host of other reasons why Dave has much better transparency than just the noise shaper - and with the noise shaper performance I have with Hugo 2 and Qutest, it's these other reasons that dominate.

And yes, Hugo 2/Qutest benefit enormously by using an M scaler!

Well hurry up and release an M Scaler, not this weird Blu2 thing with a springy lid and a spinning piece of plastic inside!

 

[rayl]

Well hurry up and release an M Scaler, not this weird Blu2 thing with a springy lid and a spinning piece of plastic inside!

So demanding.... Me, I would just settle for getting my black unit shipped already... it was due early April when ordered around new year's, but in response to my recent update request-- veeeery non-committal. I am no longer expecting it in early April...

On a positive note, the delay has saved me from spending on other tinkering as everything else audio is on hold until it comes in!

 

[Mython]

a spinning piece of plastic inside!

IMO, those 36 yr old plastic discs deserve a lot more respect than they seem to get, in these days of Hi-Res downloads and streaming.

I take your point about wanting an M-Scaler in stripped-down form, though.

 

[Dobrescu George]

IMO, those 36 yr old plastic discs deserve a lot more respect than they seem to get, in these days of Hi-Res downloads and streaming.

I take your point about wanting an M-Scaler in stripped-down form, though.

What is this discussion about, I don't know what pastic spinnig things inside it are , confused XD

 

[Alcophone]

What is this discussion about, I don't know what pastic spinnig things inside it are , confused XD

 

[adyc]

IMO, those 36 yr old plastic discs deserve a lot more respect than they seem to get, in these days of Hi-Res downloads and streaming.

I take your point about wanting an M-Scaler in stripped-down form, though.

The thing is that the CDs have limited shelf life. My 80s CDs have already a lot of spots. Some of my CDs are unreadable.

 

[Mython]

The thing is that the CDs have limited shelf life. My 80s CDs have already a lot of spots. Some of my CDs are unreadable.

'CD Bronzing' tends to be associated with certain pressings from certain plants, and/or with low pH (acidic) paper being used for some CD booklets/inlays.

I have experienced the kind of 'disc rot' deterioration you describe, but only on a tiny, tiny, minority of discs (only 2 or 3 of my discs, that I can recall, during the past 27 years). With around 1500+ CDs, I'm more than happy with their longevity, generally-speaking, and I can understand why JF still likes to cater for them with Blu2.

Hi-Res may have its merits, but I reckon there has been such a stampede for Hi-Res (AKA High-Profit

) music files, that many people have overlooked what (well-mastered) Redbook recordings have to offer. Humble 16/44.1 Redbook is still capable of sounding fantastic, under the right circumstances.

However, at the same time, I completely understand why many folks are clamouring for a standalone M-Scaler. Even I have all of my CDs ripped, to give me more flexibility in how I choose to play my music.

 

[HeeBroG]

@robwatts

When directly driving high efficiency speakers with DAVE, can speaker cables with high capacitance cause oscillation of the amplifier?
I don’t want to cause any possible damage to my DAVE.

Thanks

Geoff

 

[Rob Watts]

@robwatts

When directly driving high efficiency speakers with DAVE, can speaker cables with high capacitance cause oscillation of the amplifier?
I don’t want to cause any possible damage to my DAVE.

Thanks

Geoff

Yes capacitive loading is fine, it won't go unstable, as there already is a large loading capacitor as part of the RF filter structure. It was designed to work into capacitive loads.

 

[musickid]

With usb protocol and windows laptops i understand faulty data packets are handled in the correct manner as opposed to macs which may underperform in this regard. When considering optical from a mac am i right in saying there is no difference between optical out from a mac vs a windows machine as obviously here usb data packets/protocol do not apply. With optical a chord dac would employ DPLL and would not differentiate or be able to tell what kind of computer was the source?

 

[Rob Watts]

Yes that's correct. And the data failure rate from SPDIF is extremely low; you would soon hear a bit failure, and it would be easy to measure too. Using my APx 555 I have never actually seen a bit failure, and some tests I do takes all day; one failure would be measurable.

 

[musickid]

Thanks my understanding is gradually building.

 

[musickid]

Thanks my understanding is gradually building.

To check with optical it does not matter if the source computer is mains powered vs usb where battery powered laptops are recommended. Optical is already galv.isol ?