DAVE - Seconds Out, Round Three...

Tony, I indeed discussed and tried the negative phase thing with Signals... but does seem system and setup dependent.... sometimes it makes a difference and in other setups it doesn’t make the blindest bit of difference... a real head scratcher...

indeed it was very interesting discussing stuff with Rob Watts at the recent Signals show.... lots of insight into the current product sets... So resfreshing to talk to a designer on this frank and honest basis... he certainly treads his own very independent path.... and he is not afraid to admit with that cheeky glint in his eye that he doesn’t quite understand yet  why some things  sound the way they do when you explore some design aspects with him..

I love Dave. A year and a bit since we met the love hasn’t diminished. I have phase set to POS, HF Fil ON But in all honesty I hear very little (or no) difference. What I did settle on very quickly was using him to n pre-amp mode with the volume dialled down to match the NAT01 and CD555.

He’s a hot little number though, and I do think I ought to buy the stand...

Tony, I'm pleased the problem you had with Dave - it was inexplicable to me but clearly that switch has a purpose! 

As for the stand, it does look nice on it, but that is a lot of money for a lump of metal, and it would challenge the space in which dave sits - great if you have Dave on display and want to make a statement.

Innocent Bystander posted:

Tony, I'm pleased the problem you had with Dave - it was inexplicable to me but clearly that switch has a purpose! 

As for the stand, it does look nice on it, but that is a lot of money for a lump of metal, and it would challenge the space in which dave sits - great if you have Dave on display and want to make a statement.

Does that stand improve the performance? Must say that from the pictures I've seen of it the performance improvement would need to be good to justify tolerating its looks.   

MDS posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

Tony, I'm pleased the problem you had with Dave - it was inexplicable to me but clearly that switch has a purpose! 

As for the stand, it does look nice on it, but that is a lot of money for a lump of metal, and it would challenge the space in which dave sits - great if you have Dave on display and want to make a statement.

Does that stand improve the performance? Must say that from the pictures I've seen of it the performance improvement would need to be good to justify tolerating its looks.   

Personally I like the look of the stand, making Dave something more than a rather odd shoebox with angled porthole, but no matter how nice it looks the cost to me isn't justified (unless it causes a second wow to the sound, which I somehow doubt.

Good stuff Tony. Nice to hear that you and Dave are finally getting along. I've been very impressed by an N1-Z feeding Dave at St Cecilia's.

Enjoy.

John.

Everybody loves a happy ending, and such a discrete box to hide amongst the myriad of others from the SWMBO. Do enjoy and keep us posted as you explore it’s virtues.

This is a relief for me actually,Tony you were the only person I recall that did NOT like what the Dave added,I have decided to save up for one myself.Hugo 2 is nice,but I am convinced,the Dave will work for me...and I have heard it several times,even with the blu2.

 Blimey,

Glad to know you're enjoying what Dave has got to offer.

I recall the first time I heard Dave compared to Hugo TT, it make the TT (which is a very fine DAC) sound broken to my ears, and there was no going back to a Hugo after that demonstration.

Interesting. I've tried the phase (positive or negative) and filters which add a delay to the sound on the Chord QBD76 previously and they did nothing to the sound. Perhaps I'll try again some other time.

Well, at least the DAVE has begun to unleash its potential now, which is certainly a happy ending after numerous failed attempts.

Uh oh, this could get expensive.

Please tell me that it sounds no better than the last time we heard it Tony ....

analogmusic posted:

 Blimey,

Glad to know you're enjoying what Dave has got to offer.

I recall the first time I heard Dave compared to Hugo TT, it make the TT (which is a very fine DAC) sound broken to my ears, and there was no going back to a Hugo after that demonstration.

 

 

I actually preferred the Hugo TT to Dave overall, I could hear Dave was better in many regards but in my room, with my speakers, with my ears, TT just sounded more coherent, and thought the all important vocal was better focused.

A little like Tony I was very surprised by this result as I really wanted to like Dave but after two home auditions I realised it just wasn't meant to be. I have made some adjustments to room  and positioning since so it would be interesting to find out if this would make a difference.

Foot tapper posted:

Uh oh, this could get expensive.

Please tell me that it sounds no better than the last time we heard it Tony ....

No, it didn't really FT. I just decided, seeing as how I've lots of surplus cash, I'd buy it so I can use the display as a nightlight in the bathroom. (This might not be entirely truthful...).

I've yet to establish that the filter thing's made all the difference; maybe later today, when I've got more time, I'll see the effect of switching it to positive phase. I'm sure there's no one here who will assume Dave will automatically work well in their system, it's got the potential to sound excellent, but there are so many factors involved here that you cannot take it for granted. Very revealing systems are just dying to ruthlessly show up any failings in kit, and recordings of course.  

Tony 

if you found DAVE harsh, setting Phase to Neg may well help. I find it provides a slightly warmer less forward presentation, some may say less digital. 90% i have Phase on Pos as i prefer the etched, detailed presentation but do switch to Neg on occasion.

I find setting the Filter to On can also help with harshness but this makes a minute difference compared with Phase.

Have a play, be interesting to hear how you find the settings.

analogmusic posted:

 Blimey,

Glad to know you're enjoying what Dave has got to offer.

I recall the first time I heard Dave compared to Hugo TT, it make the TT (which is a very fine DAC) sound broken to my ears, and there was no going back to a Hugo after that demonstration.

 

 

Only you would describe the TT as sounding broken. What utter rubbish. I have both in my systems and can fully appreciate why some would prefer its presentation.

To me DAVE is the better DAC, but not by the margin some make it to be.

tt and dave in direct demo  ,  9  listened 9 didn't know for sure

Foxman50 posted:

analogmusic posted:

 Blimey,

Glad to know you're enjoying what Dave has got to offer.

I recall the first time I heard Dave compared to Hugo TT, it make the TT (which is a very fine DAC) sound broken to my ears, and there was no going back to a Hugo after that demonstration.

 

 

Only you would describe the TT as sounding broken. What utter rubbish. I have both in my systems and can fully appreciate why some would prefer its presentation.

To me DAVE is the better DAC, but not by the margin some make it to be.

To my ears, and my musician son's, in the system heard (Mac Mini/Audirvana fully optimised source, no pre amp, Bryston 4BSST2 into PMC Fact 12), Dave was in a completely different league to TT - as I have recounted before, literally a 'wow' moment, my son uttering that under his breath just a couple of bars into the first piece. However I would certainly not describe TT or even Hugo as sounding broken - they sound as good as ever, and if I could not have afforded Dave I would be happy still to have either. 

BTW, to me, comparing  TT to Hugo(1) in the above system (Hugo with Gustard U12 isolator between it and Mac Mini), TT sounded better than Hugo, but only marginally - in terms of sound quality alone if I might not consider enough to change, however it has other benefits including remote control and better connectivity.

audio1946 posted:

tt and dave in direct demo  ,  9  listened 9 didn't know for sure

System and room details?

analogmusic posted:

 Blimey,

Glad to know you're enjoying what Dave has got to offer.

I recall the first time I heard Dave compared to Hugo TT, it make the TT (which is a very fine DAC) sound broken to my ears, and there was no going back to a Hugo after that demonstration.

 

 

When I compared my existing Hugo (original) and Dave, I came to the conclusion that Hugo  was one of the best value for money bits of Hi-Fi hardware I’d ever heard but Dave was irresistible.  

But then I could spring for the extra.

Gary Shaw posted:

When I compared my existing Hugo (original) and Dave, I came to the conclusion that Hugo  was one of the best value for money bits of Hi-Fi hardware I’d ever heard but Dave was irresistible.  

But then I could spring for the extra.

Precisely my conclusion!

I'm not that keen on Hugo or Hugo TT anymore, to my ears Mojo actually sounds better....

analogmusic posted:

I'm not that keen on Hugo or Hugo TT anymore, to my ears Mojo actually sounds better....

Interesting and curiou: so hierarchy to you is Dave 1, Mojo 2, then others? Or do you mean more simply that Dave is the flagship and primary model, and Mojo is good enough for non-critical use, especially for mobile, so H and TT just don’t figure?

Or are you suggesting that to your ears if you didn,t currently have Mojo or Hugo, and could afford Hugo but nor more you would buy Mojo, and ditto if you could afford as much as TT?

Hierarchy now is Dave, Hugo 2, and then all the other like Hugo TT, Hugo 1, 2Qute, and Mojo. 

I sold my Hugo for mobile use (to fund Dave) and Use Mojo for mobile, and over a period of time, it never ceases to delight me musically.

The FPGA in Mojo is more advanced than Hugo 1 and Hugo TT by the way. It consumes a lot less power (maybe also less noisy electrically) , and has a lot more processing capability. Rob Watts has never really disclosed how many taps Mojo has.

Chord knows that Mojo offers Hugo like sound at much lower price, and that is why they brought out a Hugo 2.

Chord also say instead of Hugo 1, the one they really wanted to make was Mojo (first) but the FPGA technology just wasn't ready yet. 

I agree with them, the Mojo makes hi-end musicality portable, something of a miracle of hi fi engineering.

But it's all relative, when I had Hugo 1, it never ceased to amaze me too. I agee with Gary Shaw one of the best values in hi fi..... 

I know I said Dave makes Hugo sound broken, but it's only when you play them side by side, on a hi-end system with speakers like Dynaudio Confidence (which is one of the most revealing speakers in production) that one hears this.

on my Dynaudio Focus 260, I can't hear that day and night difference between Dave and Hugo, that I heard on the confidence model. Having a Dave means all the components need to be at that level too.

as I reported at that time, Dave is more 3 dimensional, musical, detailed, better bass, more refined high's, more realism.

But yes at a LOT more money.

 In terms of sheer processing power, the Blu2 is the top of the range, the million tap setting  can only  be used with Dave or Hugo 2.

I'd also add that the differences between Hugo TT and Dave maybe were a lot more day and night due to the demonstration using Nordost interconnects.

I'm not that keen on Nordost cables, so I didn't look into those further. 

The next time I heard Dave like the demo was with Sonus Faber Amati Futura speakers, with Superlumina Full Loom and a 552DR .300 DR Naim system. I don't think it's the system as it as a 172/250.2 in the demo.

The 3d Stage was back, and so was the amazing musicality. At home, I'm not quite getting that 3D stage. But maybe it's my room, placement, mains, who knows.

I guess must also be speakers, and also the cables? The focus 260 is a long gap away from the confidence range in performance.

Hope TonyM doesn't mind this discussion on his thread. Apologies if he did.