Chord DAVE Review (DAC & HP Amp)

[AudioSceptic]

I think scaled back controls are often adequate. Double-blind tests can require a fair amount of effort to conduct, and we’re not landing a man on the moon here.

I reckon simple blind tests with a helper doing the switching would do in many cases. I’ve even done “half-blind” tests to confirm that there is no audible difference between two sources, by toggling the source button on the remote a few times (until I didn’t know which input was which) and then comparing back and forth.

Yes, as long as the helper isn't in a position to give any clues, unconscious or not, which then becomes double-blind anyway.

 

[zajogungster]

Well boys and girls, that was my contribution to the Chord Dave saga. I notice some tension in my body and I’m afraid that this goes on and on and on and on. So to protect myself I return to my safe house. When I was too rude I’m sorry. Love y’all!

interesting to read these contributions, insights and information that always serve a purpose. I haven't changed anything in the line-up for a long time, I'm satisfied, even though I can always imagine something better playing. Nevertheless, every day is different and we are also different, our ears seem to be always different too! The same songs, the same volume, but a different mood and suddenly the music is playing too sharp, other times hazy, sometimes fantastic, sometimes I would throw it out the window. When I know that it can also be like this, is it even necessary to change, for example, a DAC that measures -123dB SINAD??? I think not ...

 

[dtaylo1066]

interesting to read these contributions, insights and information that always serve a purpose. I haven't changed anything in the line-up for a long time, I'm satisfied, even though I can always imagine something better playing. Nevertheless, every day is different and we are also different, our ears seem to be always different too! The same songs, the same volume, but a different mood and suddenly the music is playing too sharp, other times hazy, sometimes fantastic, sometimes I would throw it out the window. When I know that it can also be like this, is it even necessary to change, for example, a DAC that measures -123dB SINAD??? I think not ...

Regardless of system transparency or cost, I find that the majority of recordings range from sucky to mediocre, and thus do not sound good on quality equipment. On the contrary, a well recorded and mastered album is a delight to listen to, and even more so on a transparent system.

 

[DonR]

Regardless of system transparency or cost, I find that the majority of recordings range from sucky to mediocre, and thus do not sound good on quality equipment. On the contrary, a well recorded and mastered album is a delight to listen to, and even more so on a transparent system.

I think you give too much credit to the general quality of recordings.

 

[Soulsound]

... for that sort of money one would expect a 100% SOTA DAC and surely a more luxurious look.

Here is under the hood;

View attachment 220047


JSmith

US$ 14.000,00... smh

 

[A Surfer]

There are plenty of well recorded works out there. Not nearly so many as the terrible to poor ones, but still quite a catalogue of material recorded well enough to be worth listening to.

 

[dtaylo1066]

There are plenty of well recorded works out there. Not nearly so many as the terrible to poor ones, but still quite a catalogue of material recorded well enough to be worth listening to.

Quite true, but it sucks to buy a CD or stream a favorite album or song and realize it sounds like crap on high performing audio gear.

 

[antcollinet]

What’s going on here?

Cognitive bias/placebo/confirmation bias - whatever you want to call it.

 

[YSC]

So to be honest, I feel a littlebit betrayed. I have been kept busy for years thinking that good measurements would also give you a good sound. And when dacs that I know are really good (Chord Dave and Mola Mola Tambaqui) are tested here they are immediately sabled down to the ground so that the minions here can say that their 400 dollar dac measures better.

What’s going on here?

To be honest I still believe it's psychoacoustics and gear acquisition syndrome in full action here, I had a friend who is using a DCS Bartok and after auditioning in his home with the new dac compared to my Holospring 2 he is convinced the DCS is completely another level (which in terms of SINAD, it is, just above audibility), but then once I pulled my dac, and a topping E30 to his home, using his streamer but I did a little trick, only the spring 2 is connected to the actual amp, with the display completely switched off, a channel switcher is connected to both the DCS and topping, so that when switched between DCS, topping and unconnected channel 3, the DCS and Topping will show a signal is feeding to them, and guess what, the friend actually heard a great difference and believed the DCS sounded way above the class of the 3 dacs, that was until I showed him both DCS and topping didn't actually connected to the speaker.........

 

[AudioSceptic]

To be honest I still believe it's psychoacoustics and gear acquisition syndrome in full action here, I had a friend who is using a DCS Bartok and after auditioning in his home with the new dac compared to my Holospring 2 he is convinced the DCS is completely another level (which in terms of SINAD, it is, just above audibility), but then once I pulled my dac, and a topping E30 to his home, using his streamer but I did a little trick, only the spring 2 is connected to the actual amp, with the display completely switched off, a channel switcher is connected to both the DCS and topping, so that when switched between DCS, topping and unconnected channel 3, the DCS and Topping will show a signal is feeding to them, and guess what, the friend actually heard a great difference and believed the DCS sounded way above the class of the 3 dacs, that was until I showed him both DCS and topping didn't actually connected to the speaker.........

The Bartok is £14k, but at least it includes a streamer and HP amp. Was that the streamer used in the comparison?

 

[YSC]

The Bartok is £14k, but at least it includes a streamer and HP amp. Was that the streamer used in the comparison?

No, it's a Lumin Streamer from another friend brought for the comparison purpose

 

[ahofer]

To be honest I still believe it's psychoacoustics and gear acquisition syndrome in full action here, I had a friend who is using a DCS Bartok and after auditioning in his home with the new dac compared to my Holospring 2 he is convinced the DCS is completely another level (which in terms of SINAD, it is, just above audibility), but then once I pulled my dac, and a topping E30 to his home, using his streamer but I did a little trick, only the spring 2 is connected to the actual amp, with the display completely switched off, a channel switcher is connected to both the DCS and topping, so that when switched between DCS, topping and unconnected channel 3, the DCS and Topping will show a signal is feeding to them, and guess what, the friend actually heard a great difference and believed the DCS sounded way above the class of the 3 dacs, that was until I showed him both DCS and topping didn't actually connected to the speaker.........

One wishes that people would try something like that before committing to a $14k purchase. Afterwards, there’s no convincing them, and they are extremely unlikely to even want to try.

 

[YSC]

One wishes that people would try something like that before committing to a $14k purchase. Afterwards, there’s no convincing them, and they are extremely unlikely to even want to try.

for someone having the disposible wealth I don't see that as a huge issue, as long as the said purchase did provide great results, I always see this as watches or say Exotic cars, objectively the mechanical watch don't tell time more accurate, as well as a Bugatti don't get you faster in city than a porsche GT or even a honda type R, but as long as you get the great objective performance, the nice casework, gimmick, R&D or the brand loyality is all fine in my book.

Of course if the said uber priced thing performs objectively poor, say can't get SINAD over 16bit range..

 

[antcollinet]

for someone having the disposible wealth I don't see that as a huge issue, as long as the said purchase did provide great results, I always see this as watches or say Exotic cars, objectively the mechanical watch don't tell time more accurate, as well as a Bugatti don't get you faster in city than a porsche GT or even a honda type R, but as long as you get the great objective performance, the nice casework, gimmick, R&D or the brand loyality is all fine in my book.

Of course if the said uber priced thing performs objectively poor, say can't get SINAD over 16bit range..

These comparisons always come up. They are always invalid.

Audio kit is sold on the basis it gives you better sound.

However, the expensive mechanical watch is NOT sold on the basis of better timekeeping - nor is the Bugatti sold on the basis of city speed, or even legal out of city speed. Nor does anyone buying those things have any manufacturer/industry created falsehoods influencing the purchase.

It is not the spending of big money on luxury gear people care about. It is the lying, and the deception of punters.

 

[AudioSceptic]

for someone having the disposible wealth I don't see that as a huge issue, as long as the said purchase did provide great results, I always see this as watches or say Exotic cars, objectively the mechanical watch don't tell time more accurate, as well as a Bugatti don't get you faster in city than a porsche GT or even a honda type R, but as long as you get the great objective performance, the nice casework, gimmick, R&D or the brand loyality is all fine in my book.

Of course if the said uber priced thing performs objectively poor, say can't get SINAD over 16bit range..

Yes, up to a point, but I have 2 objections:-
1. The expensive product is sold (and bought) under false pretences;
2. The excess expenditure could be better spent elsewhere (or just saved!).

 

[YSC]

These comparisons always come up. They are always invalid.

Audio kit is sold on the basis it gives you better sound.

However, the expensive mechanical watch is NOT sold on the basis of better timekeeping - nor is the Bugatti sold on the basis of city speed, or even legal out of city speed. Nor does anyone buying those things have any manufacturer/industry created falsehoods influencing the purchase.

It is not the spending of big money on luxury gear people care about. It is the lying, and the deception of punters.

can't agree on being this straight, if spending more don't give you worse performance, I call it a personal choice, say my friend, maybe it's on his sown pride defense, but if the spending did give him performance way past audible transparency, spending 100x isn't a huge problem as long as it performs, and tbh, I personally pay respect to Magico or DCS in this regard, their products are way overpriced if compared to the race to the best C/P ratio, but all their choices, be it marketing or not, did pay off as good performance, in this regard Chord is similar, the story/ gimmick telling is one side, but as it performs, if it gives the buyer more satisification and not giving audible inferior performance, I would call it a pass, say for topping, I respect their great value vs performance, but some of their product, like the PA5 which have some disasterous reliability and the lack of customer service on that is what I don't appreciate. The only audio products which I am really against are those who objectively and audibly not performing as well, but charges an arm and a leg due to the marketing BS only.

 

[YSC]

Yes, up to a point, but I have 2 objections:-
1. The expensive product is sold (and bought) under false pretences;
2. The excess expenditure could be better spent elsewhere (or just saved!).

I partly agrees on 1), as for the DCS, at least in SINAD land it did performs better than the practically indistinguisible Holo that I own, but it did perform better, just not practically better, for CS or reliability it did give confidence also, though that could be largely invalid in one's lifetime

For 2), though I am of the normal income group where my personal spending on cars, audio, camera etc. are all at the low to mid tier, I do respect those who have practically unlimited wealth, for those class, only money spent are real money, the rest are just crazy numbers in the bank, and the luxury branding of wine, cars, speakers, dacs, shoes.... etc.is part of what they are spending after, it's in their class, same goes for those using $10 earbuds and enjoys music and think we are crazy to pay $400 for a pair of studio monitor for music, what is considered poorly spent money to them can be very logical for us. as along as the extra money spent on the DCS compared to topping don't make them cheap out on other things, and extra savings don't matter to their wealth, it's money well spent, of course the opposite is true if I am to buy a DCS but having to eat sliced bread only for a year....

 

[Theta]

Cognitive bias/placebo/confirmation bias - whatever you want to call it.

The polite abbreviation for this is BS

 

[ahofer]

for someone having the disposible wealth I don't see that as a huge issue

Not a huge societal issue, but I know billionaires that get annoyed at misspending $1000.

 

[YSC]

Not a huge societal issue, but I know billionaires that get annoyed at misspending $1000.

lol, that's true, but likely those won't spend the extra on the luxury, or in their view, spending 99% on a known luxury brand is well worth it, that's why I say if it ultimately did deliver on audio transparency, they are not really tricked into mis-spending, this is not true for a lot of high end BS speaker brand delivering inferior audio performance while costing 100x more though, or even futher into this, some just don't really listen critically, having the uber (exterior) designed, furniture like speaker is what they are spending on, to look "tasteful"