Just picked up a Chord Qutest

Or more importantly the Hugo, which I found prefereable to the Hugo2 after an extended home audition...

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Or more importantly the Hugo, which I found prefereable to the Hugo2 after an extended home audition...

Care to elaborate why?

Perol posted

....

1200 for the funny box with a simple wall psu, come on, can it really be that good ? 

I don’t have a personal view but Robb Watts has a strong one about switch mode supplies, I read his comments on this topic so on the Qutest dedicated Head Fi thread with interest 

M37 posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Or more importantly the Hugo, which I found prefereable to the Hugo2 after an extended home audition...

Care to elaborate why?

Yes, and I do stress this was most apparent with the 552DR, I found the Hugo had less frequency extreme capability than the Hugo2, as well as slightly less pronounced detail, but I found its performance more natural and flowing and had more an analogue feel.

i have used this term ‘Mandelbrot effect’ before which is what I use as a reference for truly performant Hi-Fi ... on many recordings you can listen into the recording to particular details, instrument, musicians, interactions from the audience etc without trying.. your mind just goes there..... it’s like being at a small floor singing (non amplified) folk concert, or small jazz concert where you 12 feet or so from the players... you can listen into the music and the experience.. and you start to do it unconsciously...

The Hugo does this in spades (unless the recording processed to b*ggery and then all bets are off), but with the Hugo2 I had to concentrate more to get a similar experience and sometimes I just couldn’t listen in the same way.. so ultimately less enjoyable and immersive experience... 

So my summary, Hugo more natural and immersive, the Hugo2 more technical and ‘hifi’

Hi Simon

Did you have a chance to listen to the Qutest?  Wonder how does it compare to H2?

Thank you Simon, most appreciated.

I myself is slightly reluctant to give up my 2Qute yet. I’ve never heard the original Hugo but I’m thinking 2Qute can’t be that far off.

The only slight issue is the fixed 3V output..

Hi NJB, I also just added a qutest to my system last week with streaming from a node2.

I'm really enjoying it so far. I started with a DSpeaker antimode2 in between streamer and DAC, but decided to try taking out the room correction unit. My room has a mode at 50hz and a lesser one around 80hz but somehow with qutest feeding a Hegel H160 amp the issue seems to have less of an impact overall, which illustrates the qutest bass control, clarity and detail. It may allow me to sell the bass DSP unit, but I'll try it both ways for extended periods and see.

Songstream's description of punchy and weighty is what I'm hearing, and I like the fact that the detail seems to be the more real and natural kind rather than the etched and tipped up treble which is passed off as 'detail' in some digital sources. 

I hope this will be my end game DAC and the first impressions are pretty good, although I felt that about schiit gumby for a while until I eventually couldn't get on with its bass timing in my system.

M37 posted:

Thank you Simon, most appreciated.

I myself is slightly reluctant to give up my 2Qute yet. I’ve never heard the original Hugo but I’m thinking 2Qute can’t be that far off.

The only slight issue is the fixed 3V output..

M37 I too am a 2Qute owner and also slightly reluctant to give it up.  I have found that using a streaming source or app that has it's own volume control that can be turned down before it reaches my 282 means that I have more use of the 282's volume pot and can turn it up past 12 o'clock.  I have no idea if this has any positive effect on the sound but it is certainly a lot easier to use when playing tracks that are recorded at different levels from each other as many digital files are.

I was offered a £5 or £600 pound trade in against a new Qutest but I'm not sure it would offer good value for money especially after hearing other peoples experiences with the Hugo v the Hugo 2.

Same here, not sure if it would offer good value and probably buyers remorse would kick in.

SongStream posted:

analogmusic posted:

I’ve compared them to analog vinyl and there’s no digital trickery involved. 

What have you compared to analog vinyl?  Below is the most informative explanation of how the Chord DACs work you're likely to get in my view, and what it adds up to for me, is a lot of digital trickery, although seemingly very effective.

I would call it advanced digital technology rather than trickery. 

And well, for reference, I grew up listening (like all teenagers from that era) to Metallica, Springstreen, Bon Jovi, Def Leppard, Bryan adams,  Phil Collins, Genesis, Prince, Madonna.

heard the albums thousands of times on Vinyl, been to the live shows multiple times, and if the Chord Dac were doing trickery, it would show up in the music and I would know the difference right away.

But instead I find it to be the most faithful (in terms of digital) to the original analog recordings. 

The Chord DAC can't create music that wasn't already there. It excels at avoiding all the mistakes that lesser digital sources make. The musical flow is the same as analogue Vinyl.... 

The older QBD76 was reviewed in these terms "it's all about fluidity, naturalness and the kind of cohesion that only the very best turntables can manage" and the DACs from Hugo onwards are better in this crucial area.

analogmusic posted:

SongStream posted:

analogmusic posted:

I’ve compared them to analog vinyl and there’s no digital trickery involved. 

What have you compared to analog vinyl?  Below is the most informative explanation of how the Chord DACs work you're likely to get in my view, and what it adds up to for me, is a lot of digital trickery, although seemingly very effective.

I would call it advanced digital technology rather than trickery. 

And well, for reference, I grew up listening (like all teenagers from that era) to Metallica, Springstreen, Bon Jovi, Def Leppard, Bryan adams,  Phil Collins, Genesis, Prince, Madonna.

heard the albums thousands of times on Vinyl, been to the live shows multiple times, and if the Chord Dac were doing trickery, it would show up in the music and I would know the difference right away.

But instead I find it to be the most faithful (in terms of digital) to the original analog recordings. 

The Chord DAC can't create music that wasn't already there. It excels at avoiding all the mistakes that lesser digital sources make. The musical flow is the same as analogue Vinyl.... 

The older QBD76 was reviewed in these terms "it's all about fluidity, naturalness and the kind of cohesion that only the very best turntables can manage" and the DACs from Hugo onwards are better in this crucial area.

You were doing OK until you got to the last couple of paragraphs.

And it’s all a matter of how you think music should sound.........Chord have their sound. 

i have just finished a 4 day demo with the Qutest as a direct replacement for my 1st gen Hugo... I found the Qutest to noticeably better in its resolution of background detail but with a slight reduction in soundstage. There also appeared to be a change in the overall balance of the presentation with vocals being somewhat recessed in favour of the mid range frequencies (which may have produced my   'increased resolution' perception)  My overall impression is that the Hugo is a little more 'organic' , which seems to mirror Simon's comments.

Will the Qutest burn in, or settle in? - not sure. As usual, a leap of faith required ( or is that 1195 little leaps)

analogmusic posted

..........

I think the Chord Dac technology is mature now, there will no further changes from this line up for another few years.

FPGA are not high volume devices, and hence there isn't much price reduction possible for the next decade.

The Xilinx FPGAs that Rob Watts uses, like all tech, continue to evolve. The Hugo used a Spartan - 6 FPGA, I believe the Hugo 2 uses a more powerful Artix -7 (note the Spartan is also in series 7 now). In a year or 2 or 3 they will have series 8 and then 9, 10 etc., and Rob will be able to deliver more taps for less money + other added goodies.  Moore's law for DACs.

SamS posted:

analogmusic posted

..........

I think the Chord Dac technology is mature now, there will no further changes from this line up for another few years.

FPGA are not high volume devices, and hence there isn't much price reduction possible for the next decade.

The Xilinx FPGAs that Rob Watts uses, like all tech, continue to evolve. The Hugo used a Spartan - 6 FPGA, I believe the Hugo 2 uses a more powerful Artix -7 (note the Spartan is also in series 7 now). In a year or 2 or 3 they will have series 8 and then 9, 10 etc., and Rob will be able to deliver more taps for less money + other added goodies.  Moore's law for DACs.

 

 

I agree,things are moving fast at Chord...after demoing Hugo 2 and Dave,and being a prior Hugo 1 owner,I decided to hold off buying any of their new products.Get the rest of my system sorted out first,then maybe revisit Chord in a few years.

Ali... not sure where you get this from but FPGA devices are very much high volume in the field of electronics, SDN, DSP and IoT to name but a few.. I am sure we will see much innovation especially in power reduction which when applied to DSP as with the Chord DACs will make continued significant differences. As Mr Watts told me last year, there is still much to develop still with his products... there are still some engineering paradoxes which result in wry smiles from Mr Watts.

I am looking forward to the post Hugo ‘class’ generation... one could argue DAVE is a step in that direction.. but there is a lot more to do especially at the Hugo price point.. and to me he has yet to surpass the magic of a good Hugo first gen sample fed by a precision SPDIF transport

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Ali... not sure where you get this from but FPGA devices are very much high volume in the field of electronics, SDN, DSP and IoT to name but a few.. I am sure we will see much innovation especially in power reduction which when applied to DSP as with the Chord DACs will make continued significant differences. As Mr Watts told me last year, there is still much to develop still with his products... there are still some engineering paradoxes which result in wry smiles from Mr Watts.

I am looking forward to the post Hugo ‘class’ generation... one could argue DAVE is a step in that direction.. but there is a lot more to do especially at the Hugo price point.. and to me he has yet to surpass the magic of a good Hugo first gen sample fed by a precision SPDIF transport

I don't know if that would represent a insurmountable technological task but one way to surpass the magic of the first generation Hugo would be to propose the same but with user replaceable batteries !  

maybe lots left to improve but after hearing the blu2 upscale with Dave I’d say it does really extract a huge amount of musicality and detail from recordings.

It’s strange how hugo1 was the original product deemed complete enough solution for a 552 preamp yet, the improvements made by blu2 and Dave for me are a huge leap over Hugo 1

I'm close to trying a Chord Qutest, but w/the new streamers right around the corner(hopefully no long delays). I'll likely hold off.  However I'm really interested in hearing any and all feedback on the new Qutest.  Please keep posting your thoughts

I am an incidental owner of a Hugo 1. I am still puzzled by the fact that it is so close to NDS/555DR. The tonal balance seems amazingly the same. The first gen Hugo is a bit more organic or fluid and airy indeed and gives a slightly deeper and less detailed base. But the NDS retains more details and texture or density of timbres with a greater cohesion overall. It is also a bit tighter in the lower spectrum. I always thought the NDS was sweet and subtile. I have found it on a very few occasions a little bit edgy compared with the Hugo. ????

Chag -

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Ali... not sure where you get this from but FPGA devices are very much high volume in the field of electronics, SDN, DSP and IoT to name but a few.. I am sure we will see much innovation especially in power reduction which when applied to DSP as with the Chord DACs will make continued significant differences. As Mr Watts told me last year, there is still much to develop still with his products... there are still some engineering paradoxes which result in wry smiles from Mr Watts.

I am looking forward to the post Hugo ‘class’ generation... one could argue DAVE is a step in that direction.. but there is a lot more to do especially at the Hugo price point.. and to me he has yet to surpass the magic of a good Hugo first gen sample fed by a precision SPDIF transport

Yet in a Naim/Chord Dealer demo the Dave absolutely showed Hugo TT a clean pair of heels Simon...

The Hugo 1 devices seem to be a be bright to my ears, and I can hear that Mojo and Dave are voiced to be more neutral. 

I could have purchased a  552 with my Hugo 1, yet chose to stay at 282/HCDR level and spent the money on Dave and eventually Blu2.

tonym posted:

analogmusic posted:

SongStream posted:

analogmusic posted:

I’ve compared them to analog vinyl and there’s no digital trickery involved. 

What have you compared to analog vinyl?  Below is the most informative explanation of how the Chord DACs work you're likely to get in my view, and what it adds up to for me, is a lot of digital trickery, although seemingly very effective.

I would call it advanced digital technology rather than trickery. 

And well, for reference, I grew up listening (like all teenagers from that era) to Metallica, Springstreen, Bon Jovi, Def Leppard, Bryan adams,  Phil Collins, Genesis, Prince, Madonna.

heard the albums thousands of times on Vinyl, been to the live shows multiple times, and if the Chord Dac were doing trickery, it would show up in the music and I would know the difference right away.

But instead I find it to be the most faithful (in terms of digital) to the original analog recordings. 

The Chord DAC can't create music that wasn't already there. It excels at avoiding all the mistakes that lesser digital sources make. The musical flow is the same as analogue Vinyl.... 

The older QBD76 was reviewed in these terms "it's all about fluidity, naturalness and the kind of cohesion that only the very best turntables can manage" and the DACs from Hugo onwards are better in this crucial area.

You were doing OK until you got to the last couple of paragraphs.

Says the man whom didn’t like Dave, had the audacity to tell Rob watts the older Qbd76 was better than Dave and then buys Dave despite posting all over the forums Dave wasn’t for him.

i think I did a bit better lol !!!!

I've had my Qutest running in and playing for around 100 hours so far, and it feels like there has been some subtle changes as it's going along. For this period I have been mostly running it direct from the Node2 over optical, bypassing my Antimode2 DSP unit. Bass seems to have tightened up and gained more texture, timing feels like it's improved a little as well as placement of voices and instruments within the soundstage (lead vocal is now perceived as placed centrally rather than a bit diffuse). Compared to the DAC in the Antimode2 (and the one in my Hegel H160), the presentation is spatially deeper and wider, and also a little more forward of the speaker.

Overall balance is very nice and weighty, but without the DSP room correction I'm hearing vocals a little bit chesty (although still the room issues seem less pronounced than with my previous DACs, possibly due to what I hear as very well controlled lower frequencies). It generally does a very good job of presenting music naturally but I feel there's more to come.

I tried adding the Antimode2 back into the chain also outputting digital optical to Qutest (without any DSP or correction set), but felt this sounded a shade brighter and flatter than Node2>Qutest. This may simply be down to the fact that Antimode2 outputs only 16/48k compared to the Node2's higher resolution output when playing my local higher res FLAC files. I need to do some longer comparisons with 16/44k material to check.

Next steps over the coming days/weeks:

- Get my room sorted a bit more as we had some fairly large cushions out for cleaning.
- Longer comparisons with Antimode2 in/out of the chain
- Run the Antimode2 auto- bass correction with Qutest & compare corrected sound with direct Node2>Qutest
- Get a coax-AES cable and try Node2-Qutest with coax vs optical connection
- If I stick with optical, try adding in my ifi SPDIF Purifier, but I would need to free up an extra wall outlet for this which currently I don't have

Updates to come, but I'm pleased so far. 

Are dealers offering reasonable trade-ins for 2Qutes etc?