Unfortunately, many audiophiles listen to DACs, CD players, and Streamers with glaring imperfections that are easy to measure and detect upon listening. Those who are not in the know assume these differences in sound as "more detail and resolution" lmao rookies
@@h2ophilter Pathos Converto MK1, Denafrips Ares ii, Topping D90SE, brands: CEC, Sabaj, Loxjie, Focal are all very good. Despite what you may have heard online, each DAC has its own house sound or "character" if you will. This can be proven by using the same headphone amplifier and headphone with different DACs. Take notes during your listening session and compare thereafter. Super accurate gear is usually not enjoyable to listen to and can be quite fatiguing.
@@sp00ky1969 poor usability, it's ugly, channel variation/noise, non-ideal viewing angles on the screen, noise in linearity response, low power headphone output, pompous marketing material with no merit, designer himself explained many hurdles he faced that resulted in shortcomings, is outperformed by a DAC costing 100 times less insofar as measurements go, mscaler pollutes signal and results in less dynamic range (design flaw in terms of a duo of audio components that are supposed to go together, excessive tap count, wrong kind of dither used. Need I say more? If you like listening to the Chord DAVE with your system, that's fine. But for the love of God...don't use it for any pro audio tasks! I have no issue with cost - Providing that performance is superlative. And here it wasn't. I have yet to try the TAD DA1000TX. And it's 15 grand plus.
A $14k consumer DAC that's got poor interface with bad visibility...but you can buy a special stand for only $2k +. It goes down hill from there believe it or not. Thanks Amir for another reality check.
One year ago this was $10,900. Two price increases of almost 15% each in such a short time can't be blamed on the chips shortage or paying back tooling that has already been in use for some time.
Glad the Cord Dave was sent in for analysis, thank you , awesome review. All of the reviews I've seen hold the Cord Dave up as the standard ... it certainly isn't. Thanks again.
@@noself1028 Because unlike aeroplanes, the customers are not technically educated, and performance and specs don't matter. All that matters is that the money they spend leaves them with a sense of accomplishment, not unlike acupuncture.
Some audiophiles are very easily convinced by snake oil, magic rocks, costly gear with superfluous claims, illogical arguments, etc. The list goes on. It is simply that many of these guys want "the best out there" and judge based on price rather than having someone with a trained ear/and measurements to prove claims about performance.
As more it is hyped, as more critical & scaptical be in hifi!! I'm very exited to see EMM Labs/Meitner and Weiss DAC measurements, because those vendors are coming from a different angle! I own a Weiss DAC 501 and did a lot of listening tests. At the end its up to anyone what kind of sound you like and thats my personal shocking reality, why the heck we dont have so many neutral DACs?? I dont need over-precision, than I stick with AKM and roon and get totally upsampling excited. KEEP THE MUSIC AS IT IS!
Hi guys if I have a Topping A90 D90 and a Susvara and Utopia 2022 I was wondering what DAC would give me a mind-blowing experience in instrument separation and imaging compared to the D90? Thanks so much for your time ❤❤❤❤
It is a bit unfortunate that we don’t have more people doing this kind of measurements and reviews because we really need to clean up all this mess that is high-end audio. Some manufacturers work hard to provide great products and some others behave like scammers basically.
The scale of the problem is insane. There are literally thousands of DACs out there to test. I can't possibly test most of them let alone all. Hopefully the consumer mindset changes and they start to demand measurements like this form companies. The problem will then fix itself.
@@scudder2010 If I tossed $10k+ into a furnace I'd be pissed too. The great thing about the Chinese audiophile market is the ratio of engineering excellence to snake oil is rather high. Not cheap, just high value.
@@scudder2010 Oh dear. The tragic irony is awfully rich in your case Anonymous Guy (or is it Dude?), as you appear to be proudly choosing racism, classism and the foolish parting of ways with your hard-earned cash, while the rest of us on here are enjoying the best performance a DAC can achieve at literally 1/20th of the cost you were suckered into. Technology caught up with the DA process awhile ago big guy, and while you were working to pay off your credit cards the rest of us read the memo about how it doesn’t cost more than a few hundred bucks to convert a digital sample of an analog master back to the highest quality analog signal our ears are capable of detecting anymore. AKM and ESS figured that out for us a couple of years back. That $14,000 you wasted on an expensive toy that has almost a decade old technology, the rest of us put into our headphones and amps, where money really makes a difference. It’s not too late to wisen up and sell that thing, because luckily for you (sadly for humanity) there’s still quite a few uninformed folks out there who would gladly give you at least ten grand for that thing. That could buy you two or three incredible pairs of headphones, I’m just sayin’…
I’ve owned a Chord DAC in the past (QBD76), beautifully made and I think the DAVE looks great too. I sold mine when I informally blind tested it against a budget Cambridge Audio 640 cdp, and couldn’t hear any difference. There are people on certain audio forums who are going to implode at this review.😂
Yep, i'm over it too.. Playing around with DIY speaker cured me when I realized that sq has much more to do with the way the speakers interact with the room than tiny changes in amplification and cables etc. I mean its not even close.
Hi all, I have a dave connected to an m-scaler played through an Eleven Audio formula S using a diana TC (source was chord 2Go/2Yu via USB) and thought it sounded good . Then I switch the source to the Aurender n200 via usb and it sounded good. Swithced to a focal utopia and it sounded good. I followed this with the Final Audio D8000 headphones and it also sounded good. Using the balanced output, i swithced the amp to a tube nautilus from ampsandsound and no appreciable difference and it sounded good. Now that's a lot of different separates in the 30000K range and a lot of headphones. The interesting thing is when I plug the headphones into a niam atom headphone streamer, it sounded good... really as good, the same. Cannot tell the difference at all. A sure fail should i do a A/B double blind study. The same goes for the same music on the matrix audio mini-i pro 3. Now i bought all these items this year before finding the ASR forum and you can imaging how much i wanted the dave /m-scaler to be the "best thing since sliced bread" but as a doctor I know and accept the importance of science and that reproducible results are the core of all claims. Honestly the hearing acuity of human should not be able hear some of the small distortions or noise nor should it be able to differentiate "increasing resolution and imaging" when there is none. The biggest difference i could make to the the quality of music was perhaps switching headphones and changing the volume of sound. There should not be such a wild difference in pricing for essentially the production of the the same appreciable quality of music. We really need people to measure and test equipment and make it known to the wider population who are still being caught up in the marketing hype be it online or in magazines about how great some items are. I am one such person. But I am also able to accept that i wasted a lot of money of items that cannot produce the type of improvement in music that they claim.
Hi I am a MD too, and music aficionado, i was tempted to spent grotesque amount of money in audio gear too, but something hold me, something was fishy in the multiple reviews, webpages I was checking on, until I found ASR, when scientific data emerges everything becomes clearer, but my wife told I went insane because the money I end up spending anyway, but my gear measure and sound excellent.
@@Lauren080508 I am happy for you to have saved money. I don't blame anyone else but myself. I have no intention of passing the equipment to a next "enthusiastic" buyer because I feel that it is morally wrong to do so. The m scaler dave combo still plays good music but I now feel strongly that performance must be matched with reproducible measurements and I really need to do research into items that are deemed "excellent". I am aware that incremental improvements in sound costs disproportionally expensive but as it has been pointed out and I can confirm as a physician, high frequency hearing loss with aging, ear wax, the shape of your head and hairstyle probably make more difference to the quality of sound, espoecially when using headphones. Loudness does definitely give an impression of better sound if not distorted so if tests do not that that into consideration, the logic of the test fails. I feel that like medicine, only double blind studies with a sizable number of tests would make sense but I don't think that will not be forthcoming from the makers of Audio equipment and most reviewers.
@@bladechai I completely agree, it is unfortunate that blind testing is actually hard to do in practical ways, specially when you have to test so many gears, I've tried only twice, and for sure the volume matching is the hardest bias to control if you don't have expensive measurement equipment, it was a lot of work to answer 2 specific question of the hundreds I had of different music gear, but that is science, a lot of work.
@@Lauren080508 It is as near impossible to conduct blind testing as to render the whole concept as invalid. The only blind test that would work is take out the infinitely variable aspect i.e. the Human Being! so we are back then to microphones, Digital and Analogue instruments and computing to test gear. Yes it will come up with repeatable outcomes but ones that are completely meaningless beyond the most basic of parameters. The old maxim still holds true, 'the only person who has to like the sound of your system is you' since sound quality is an entirely subjective subject.
Amir, I’ve owned the M Scaler and Chord Dave for about a year before I sold it because I couldn’t tell much of a difference between the Chord combo vs. the built in DAC of my McIntosh MA12000 integrated amp, so I completely agree with your assessment. Especially, the M Scaler, I really couldn’t hear much of an improvement that it makes in the signal chain (great review on the M Scaler btw). Your videos are really opening my eyes to another way to look at expensive hi fi products which inevitably, is slowly closing my wallet :)
It is so heartwarming to read testimonials like this. Gives me hope that there are people who properly test these things and don't just run with the crowd.
It's not just paid reviews, many "audiophile" reviewers are more into flowery story telling than scientific analysis. Many people are sold on such, and I reckon monetary value is also a backseat when you think like this :)
@@moshet842 I am saying, that this nonsense with only looking at measurements is not very intelligent. Subjectivity is okay and some are paid, some are not.
Chord was designed and developed for dealer profit. Very little to do with customer utility. I had an opportunity to listen to three Chord DACs and none impressed me. I have two DACs, RME AD2 and Nuprime 9, that were approximately $1K and have excellent output stages and very versatile.
@@dillonsaudioI think they’re interesting, a lot more than the crappy black box amps that look like my old cable box from the 90s that dominate the scene now.
@@mikeg2491 designed to be art deco, different, so it must be expensive and great. Alot like Synergistic Research kit, clear tops, carbon fibre and oooooh leds lights inside the case, charge a fortune for what exactly?
Next up the MSB Select 2 DAC which is supposed to be the world's best DAC that can magically make tracks sound better than the original track. Some Harry Potter shit right there.
@@dihydrotestosterone I've heard a DAC from one of those brands..won't say which one. Differences? Some tonal coloration in familiar tracks that was rather pleasing to listen to. Some audiophiles notice this and assume it is rendering a more truthful stereo image, when it is not. Worth the money? Absolutely not.
What do you mean by Original track? The studio master analogue tape, the raw DSD file etc.. Also what do you perceive as better I have heard some DSD files that have been cut to Vinyl and I thought the vinyl sounded better that's to say I enjoyed it more, but clearly it isn't superior or better as the vinyl had to be compressed, except that It appealed more to me and the majority in that particular listening session. You see how complex things get very quickly.
Ha! This validates my thoughts on this Dac….it also validates that reviewers like Steve Huff that swear by this dac need to get their ears cleaned 🤦♂️
Steve Huff sold his after his rave review (and going into hoc to buy it!) then finding cheaper Dacs whose sound he liked more. The price makes it a no-go for the quality.
i've been AB/X testing equipment for about 30 years. as long as the DA conversion is happening and your output is getting adequate power, good luck telling the difference. to each their own, but my music enjoyment is not tied to a dollar sign.
@@dillonsaudio well the cables won't make a difference, and if a dac sounds different there must be something wrong with it. That goes for amps and speakers. I understand that speakers are all the most difficult to get right (if that's even possible). But DACs and Amplifier are very easy to get low noise and distortion with a flat frequency response.
based on your review, I bought almost 2 years ago Sabaj D5 that I am using as my main DAC (together with Rega Elex-R amplifier) as well as my only headphones amplifier (Sundara, using XLR). From the graphs presented in this review and Sabaj D5 review, mine seems to be much better than this one presented here. However I paid 400$ - kind of 40 times cheaper. Why would ANYBODY buy something that is 40 times more expensive, yet ... WORSE? My brain has limitations to understand some real time decisions made by people ;-) Amir, as usual: great job, well spent time - thank you
Because audiophiles automatically assume more expensive = better and then good old expectation bias kicks in when they listen. It's why people claim to hear differences between cables, and then when blinded can't tell them apart. As soon as you control for biases, differences disappear.
@@niallms83 that's patently false with many audiophiles now actually…lots of times people hear these units at shows or from friends and buy into the sound signature and look that certain rigs have. And if you got money you’re not buying budget gear black boxes
@@niallms83 you haven't heard it and measurements don't determine definitively how a piece of gear is gonna sound in certain setup. i'm willing to listen to it and then form an opinion.
Yes, as I noted the Mola Mola is one: www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/mola-mola-tambaqui-dac-and-streamer-review.10770/ I hope to test some of the higher end DACs in the future (MSB, dCS, etc.).
The Dave was released at least 7 years ago and still landed in the 'excellent' section of his SINAD list, if you believe that's all that matters. The Dave does perform well.
That brick wall filter is very impressive, but, the impulse response will have ringing that goes for a long time. I'll guess the optional rolloff filter is to 'fix' that and shorten the ringing duration. Non linear phase filter options to reduce or eliminate pre-ringing? Those types of options do affect the analog output waveforms, therefore could be audible.
@@AudioScienceReview Great! Perhaps this time you will try dual-BNC and go from 16x to bypass when listening. Watch out for that expectation bias though... 😉
Thanks Amir. The truth is that a modern DAC in the $400-$500 range is hard to beat for audio quality. Loudspeakers and room acoustics have way, way more influence on audio quality. Spending $14000 on a DAC is insanity. A fool and his money are soon parted.
People pay huge money for jewelry, cosmetics and clothes that often is produced for a tiny fraction of the cost you pay. There is no good reason from a BOM cost perspective why a superb DAC needs to cost you more than US$300. Audiophile DACs are priced with huge margin to help keep the company afloat as sales quantities are low.
Agreed, but a $400 to $500 dac, is like owning a Toyota Corolla, does the job it's designed for admirably, but where's the looks, the ego boost, the status, the fun? What's your point here? Who are you warning against buying this item? If your point is, that it is a waste of money to buy this dac, because of it's exorbitant price, you are talking to people who have the financial ability to consider buying a $14000 dac, and that would, obviously, mean that dropping $14000 on a hi fi item, is not going to hurt them financially. These people are going to be okay, so stop worrying about them, there are far greater problems out there.
This is the kind of review I love to see. A DAC with a pompous Latin moniker Digital to Analogue Veritas in Extremis (DAVE) from a supposedly high-end company like Chord marketing it as a SOTA product to only be exposed as a lack luster performer that sells for a price two orders of magnitude higher than competing products that can run circles around it. This is too funy... thanks Amir! 😁🤑
@@crapmalls just check the measurements on Audiosciencereview? And if you still have doubts for some reason perform a real blind test that is volume matched
@@crapmalls G'day mate, thank you for taking the time to chime in and share some thoughts. This small sample of DACs measure better and some are 100 times lower in cost (all prices in USD): Topping E30 $130; D50 $249; D30 $120; D10 $139 (balanced) Soncoz LA-QXD1 $199 (balanced) Loxjie D30 $260 SMSL Sanskrit 10th MK II $109 Sabaj A10d $299 (balanced) Does that make them better, it depends on one's needs like what kind of I/O one requires, etc., but they nonetheless measure better. Move up to only $500 USD, then there's an embarrassment of DACs that objectively measure better and are pretty complete in terms of I/O. In ASR's SINAD classification list, there are over 80 DACs that are positioned ahead of the Chord DAVE. Not all are from Chinese manufacturers, some like the Okto Research dac8 are from the EU and sell for $1250 and measure superior to the DAVE in every metric and not by small margins either mind you. And because a DAC is made by a Chinese company and sells for $500, a relatively cheap price, doesn't make it cheap in terms of quality. A lot of products, many from audio brands headquartered in North America, the EU, Japan, Korea and even Australia are made in China these days. The engineering and design along with the QC are the keys that make to a good pdoduct. The thing is that when you have a company with Chord's pedigree that market a product like this DAVE DAC, which they claim to be the most advanced in the world according to their website, then it should objectively measure beyond reproach. This is clearly not the case here and considering the astronomically high price they sell it for, they should be embarrassed.
I hope to get my hands on one as they sure make lofty claims about their measured performance. Please do me a favor and send them a note and ask them to send a sample in for testing. How they respond to you will tell us a lot about the reality here.
hey Amir thanks for the video. I am a member of ASR but also other forums. The fact that you post this measurement and other Chord owners also stepped up to try validate your measurement vs their own experience is very heartwarming. Even the owner of this DAVE ordered a D90SE to test it for himself and evaluated that the DAVE is no better than D90. It really helps because I've read posts in other forums and some of them are now open to the possibility that this DAC is just not the almighty of digital converting.... but it's just another good DAC.
Thanks for watching the video. Yes, it seems people now have some oxygen to share their experiences. The online/gorilla marketing of the company and sponsorship of forums has been so loud that people felt compelled to follow.
My first post since I found your YT channel! Bought the SMSL M400 based on the review and I am eager to find out whether a video was made for that here. Would be interesting to compare some of the budget DACs (SMSL, Topping, and etc.) and see the differences..this video is awesome too by the way, the result made me laugh a bit knowing that someone in my circle had purchased this DAC and was laughing at me for even be interested in these Chinese DACs.
Sorry do they measure differently eg ladder. Vs chip dac? Do they sound differently? Can you make recommendations of yr favorite Dax’s. Keep up good work
I cant detect it sounding different. Measurements don't indicate that either. Only marketing hype does. :) Ladder DACs tend to have more problems but there are some good ones out there. My favorite DACs are on the ASR forum. Just go to the index and search based on your budget: www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?pages/Reviews/
@@RennieAshit’s all gobbledygook to me, measuring the capabilities of audio equipment off a sine wave is like trying to measure the contrast ratio of a television off a lone white pixel on a black screen.
Hi Amir, love your reviews supported by good technical measurements. Would you be able to check the DAC performance of the Oppo disc players, e.g. BDP-93 to BDP-203?
Thanks. I have measured Oppo players. Please see: www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/review-and-measurements-of-oppo-udp-205-uhd-player.3660/ www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/measurements-of-oppo-bdp-105-blu-ray-player.2421/
I think the Chord DAVE second hand market is in for a boost! I cannot state how important it is for someone to take the time, patience and exposure to conduct a factual and objective measurement's base review of such stratospheric products. Thank you, Amir!
Being an audiophile shouldn't also require being insane with how you spend your money. Unfortunately, a lot of audiophile product manufacturers are counting on a degree of insanity amongst their customers.
If people are so into fancy boxes, why not buy 250 grams of gold with that 14K dollars, make yourself a fancy-looking gold box, then put the mainboard of a Topping d10s inside. Imagine the quality of sound you can get from this amazing piece of device!
Yup, if I was going to throw money away, I would toss it to Denafrips - or any unit that has filter settings that work (RME comes to mind). Can't wait to see a review of some of their units...
I believe he has already reviewed the Ares ii and 3 of the RME on the Audio Science Review forum. The Ares wasn't bad but if looking for a full featured Dac the RME measures and performs very well
@@sergeysmelnik I think there is a lot on the internet about it, I personally would describe it as an “unrelenting” sound but that’s just not my own taste see the review on ASR comparing the ess version of the RME dac with the previous version
As usual you nailed it Amir. Usability studies! So many companies could benefit. These days you need to have a PhD in hieroglyphics to navigate almost anything. And the fewer unlabeled buttons it has, the cooler it is. It’s enough to drive you mad. Especially when your paying good money for this stuff.
Fantastic video ! I always wanted chord products because of the look,they are different from the usual I chose Marantz headphone amp/dac and felt it sounded superb With all my headphones. LCD 2 LCD 3 hd800 . It’s scary to spend over 10k on a product cause it’s supposed to be the best just cause it’s expensive. Thanks for your time and knowledge. I love when you expose the nonsense. Especially the high end
The audiofool community was initially thrown out of balance by Amir's rational knockouts, but it found a solution : Double-down on the baseless claims. Just as in politics demagogues talk of "alternate facts", snake oil salesmen defend their cynical practices by placing themselves behind the made-up boundary of a post-truth, post-ethical world. Between the dozens of cocky morons who review gear on RU-vid without a shred of qualifications, and the half-assed engineers who try to justify outlandish prices by making outlandish claims, one has to wonder if in the end, all of these pedlars only succeed because there's a willing public to this sort of abuse ; much like the dynamics of cults. The sort of individual who forks out 14 grand for a DAC, and doesn't work for a mastering studio, is likely to be the same type who buys a gold-wrapped Lambo and Patek Philippe covered in pink diamonds. No need to save these types; they are the "more is more" breed.
This is why I settled for the denafrips ares ii. A little hype product, but still good measurements. Not to overpriced. Must say, I like it alot over my smsl su 9. Only problem it won't work with my Cambridge cxc. Micro skipping alot. Audiolab 6000cdt is fine tho.
As always, thanks for your great review. It is good to see that someone is cleaning up the myth of "audiophile high end" gear. I have heard many devices over the last decades. And the best of the best always has been good engineered studio equipment with no magic unicorn dust. That's at least what my personal listening experience tells me.
In a way I agree with you I have Tim De Pavaracini designed EAR Tube based systems, derived from Studio equipment. Pride of place going to the 912 Pre-Amp, Likelihood this and his other studio gear wont measure particularly well but his gear is peer renowned, his thinking innovative and uncompromising and still used today in some of the best mastering studios around the world They are also part responsible for some of the finest recorded music you will hear. It is also true to say that much modern studio equipment is also designed to have a neutral characteristic something that doesn't suit all personal human auditory systems but it does then reflect the users choice of music and reproduction equipment, a good thing in my book
THE funny part is some will argue that this clearly overpriced DAC is a good value and it perform way way above its price and that is the best DAC you can have for under $15,000 lol
I have measured the original Yggdrasil. It did not do well. See: www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/review-and-measurements-of-schiit-yggdrasil-v2-dac.3607/ I think a Freya+ has just arrived so look for its review soon.
Thank you for your bravery for telling the truth and go against mainstream/ paid reviewers. No wonder this 15,000$ dac performs so poor, it uses 10$ switch mode PSU. Look at Hans Beakhuyzen channel. He removed the psu from his unit and replaced it. Looking at the internals, this dac is worth 300$. Every Topping has more going on inside.
I listened to this dac a few years ago and the sellers were raving about how good it sounded. once we left the room i was telling my friend they must have been hearing the cost not the sound quality which did not even stand out to me as good or even great. Mind you I had an nad m51 at home as my reference which sounded at least as good if not better.
You can find them all in the Review Index of ASR: www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?pages/Reviews/ Select "Audio Electronics" and then you can see subsets in the advanced search.
DAVE just lost $13700 of it's value , why are you doing this kind person who send it to you like this Emir 😂. Jokes aside excellent review as always thank you for your dedication and integrity .
I sometimes can't understand why companies do this, but the only rational answer is that it's easier to sell high-priced products with hype and magical words than to show the lab results. I'm okay with companies selling high-end equipment, but I've been around awhile and so far have found that high-end brands are nothing but scammers that depend upon very gullible rich people to send them money. Apparently, super-expensive products *cannot* be sold on specifications as it becomes obvious that their products offer 1% better performance (if any) at 500X the price of their competitors. *That's* why we don't see actual test results. It's a shame, really, as a company could probably make itself stand out by simply publishing it's lab results, even if it does over-charge for the actual improvement in performance over competitors. No one does this because their livelihood depends upon fools that can be parted with their money and fools don't care about lab results; they care about magical words that cannot be measured. And such fools aren't affected by Amir's "pessimistic" knowledge and equipment; they believe the magicians selling the products and their own ears, which hear plenty of magic after spending 14 grand on a DAC.
Engineering gone wild! Anything that costs this much should at minimum be atleast 115 db, and even then should be into the 118db to maxed out 123db range. What exactly are we paying for at this point if $200 DACS have better performance? There's just no accountability, but thanks to forums and videos like yours we can now hold these companies up to a very high standard. The real key is if they design a new DAC with improved measurements, then it's a win for them and a win for customers.
Yep. Love my SMSL dac with 116 sinad and only 300 bucks combined with my 700 dollar hypex amp. Imagine people spend 20 to 100k for a dac and amp that is no better or possibly worse and think a system for any less money is less resolving. I have many hobbies including cars, gaming, rc, aquariums etc and no hobby comes close to the amount of bullshit and snake oil the hi fi industry does. I despise most of it.
The SINAD number past our audibility is mainly just for proof of great engineering, there's really no big point to achieve for a 115dB SINAD dac to jump to 123, 130 or a random number we set. What I love about ASR is the mainstay members actually don't circlejerk a product (or a standard) and they respectfully provide proof of why something is true or false to its marketing.
Going after high SINAD has its tradeoffs. I've heard many design engineers claim that they could easily implement circuits that would yield way higher SINAD but sound worse. I used to think this way of thinking was insane, but then I tried 2 high-end amps from the same company, one Class A/B and one Class A. It didn't take long for me to definitively decide the Class A unit sounded way better, even though the A/B unit measured way better. That experience was all the proof I needed to believe what these engineers are saying.
@@sergeysmelnik Class A amps typically have intentional 2nd or 3rd harmonic distortion added, or something done with the phase that basically makes the sound more three dimensional and holographic. It has nothing to do with defects. These were brand new amps from a respected high end brand. I'm not talking about a showroom demo here. I owned both of these amps back to back. This is why audio is a journey. We start off by going for stuff that checks off boxes in terms of features and specs. As we get more experienced and learn our preferences we start going after stuff based on sound, not specs.
My god there is so much commotion in the world of so called audio reviewers, it is insane. They were praising chord products out of stupidity or as paid marketing, and now they dont now what to do :) Some are silent, some are posting videos in defence..... and than there are consumers who are either in denial or are sooo dissapointed..... bravo Amir!
Indeed. You are basically guaranteed to get a positive review if a) device is sent in for loan and b) it is expensive. I don't know how people realize that it is not possible that 99.9% of every expensive audio product tested is the fantastic.
At what point does marketing become criminal? scam- misleading is all I was thinking watching this. Although I have never owned a Chord product, I have considered them in the past- bullet dodged I think.
@@AudioScienceReview I call BS. Tell me you get a hold of a $14,000 DAC and you don’t bother listening to it in your system. The headphones can never produce such aspects as soundstage and imaging the same way a good pair of speakers can within the right system. So your “review” and the statements such as I can’t tell it apart from any other DAC don’t really hold water.
@@z.s.9855 soundstage and imaging are byproducts of room reflections and speaker placement. Any responsible reviewer would avoid taking these into consideration while reviewing electronic equipment. You don’t need a 14k DAC to make sound stage and imaging if you are knowledgeable of room acoustics .
Whilst I agree the price is rather high an that there may be some merit to these measurements I always thought of the Dave as a technical Marvel. I always thought that the seperation and transients that this DAC delivers as flat out amazing. Especially when fed with a quality streaming source and clock like the Grimm MU1... However; given the comments here I think it must be all in my head. I must have been decieved by the device and by my preconceptions. Thank you all - now I see the light!
Rob watts has said a thousand times that no dac from his company has any modulation of noise floor at all. And within the first graphic we see this claim being contradicted. Am i missing something.
Just think of how much great sounding hifi you could buy for 14000. The Genelec 8361 or the Dutch&Dutch 8c are world class speakers, with amps included and cost less than this dac ! In case of the Genelec you get a transparent measuring dac, room correction and the total package cost 4000 less (!)
Thx Amir! Yeah that DAVE is pure ENTERTAINMENT. Company marketing line says: "DAVE stands for ‘Digital to Analogue Veritas in Extremis’, a moniker that best reflects the product's capability; a device so advanced and with so few compromises, that it is absolutely truthful in the extreme - a standard that all other DACs on the market simply cannot hope to match." Or rather: DAVE stands for Designed for Amir's Veritable ENTERTAINMENT
When confronted with a product like the DAVE every audiophile should ask what incremental performance could it offer over a $200 DAC with a 120db Sinad. How is that incremental performance is achieved, and can the seller prove that performance with independent measurements. Finally, is that incremental performance (asuming it there) worth the difference between the DAVE and the already superlative $200 product. Unless whoever is selling that product can give clear, cogent and convincing answers, that product is a rip-off.
You could apply that reasoning to why anyone would buy a $16,500 McIntosh 462 Amp when a $2500 Brooklyn AMP+ @ 7 times less expensive than the McIntosh will produce nearly as much power (or even 1200watts if you push the budget to two in mono mode), with more efficiency and with better measurements. Does that make the Mytek Amp+ better or does it mean you pay $14000 for the oversize completely useless Power Meters and a Hernia
@@Gez492 Actually even the Mytek is overpriced. A $500-1500 Hypex NCore amps will do everything the Mytek or the Mac will do--and that can be proven with measurements, If you still want to pay through the nose for the fancy case and label, be my guest. But absent evidence, it really can not validly be asserted that the higher priced product is somehow the better performer.
I was using a Chord Qutest and not impressed by the sound quality: just too shrill in my system. I bought a Topping D90LE as soon as Topping offered the D90 without MQA and couldn't be more pleased.
@@thomasmoeller7731 Since these DACs "sound terrible", I'm happy take the TT2 off your hands...happy to swap you for a "better sounding" DAC like a Cheapo Topping? 😅
@@tfj100 😂😂. I have no complains in regard to sound, but will admit that M-Scaler might be a bit overrated.. only real issue is this white noise I have.
At this price point it should have stellar performance, indeed deception is served. The fancy interface/box design/marketing etc might be worth something for some...but the performance requires to be top notch specially if they advertise it so. No compromise should def fall in the top 5 or don't mention it at all. Again another superb video . !! 🥰
That non-standard output voltage is an intentional trick to fool people who compare dacs. It's a well known phenomena that if a test subject gets played the same signal with two different volumes, he'll subjectively think the louder signal is better.
For such an expensive equipment the company should have already quadruple times checked that everything is okay before selling it to the unfortunate guy who bought it.
If they send me a product, yes, absolutely. They even get to see the measurements before publication. When a member sends it, no. I provide a service to members using standardized tests. If the company cares -- and some do -- they contact me and do offer to send me other samples. I doubt this will be the case with Chord. When I reviewed the M-scaler from them, the designer got on a youtube video days later and still claimed to not have read my review! When there is this kind of apathy, what I have is what you will get. But sure, contact them and see what they tell you as far as sending me a sample. Better yet, let's have them measure it the same way and show different results. Note that there is at least one other measurement online which agrees with my SINAD rating.
I guess the only thing I would say is this is a 2016-17 design , so is it competitive with current design, and is the tested unit defective from transport some of the results seem pretty odd
Dave is their flagship DAC. In every talk the designer highlights it as the best DAC possible. It is represented as flawless. So nothing wrong with testing and comparing it to today's products. Or even last year's products. As to this unit, other measurements agree with it so nothing is broken about it.
@@AudioScienceReview yes, well then it’s a bit of a scandal, the m scaler and Dave both with serious flaws by your measurements , clearly not competitive, and I agree the price is outrageous for that level of performance, but it was designed actually in 2015 that’s 7 years ago
@@lindsaywebb1904 well generally the life expectancy of a product in audio is 5 to 7 years, and yeah cheaper dacs are so much better the topping are amazing for the money
