"Chord Electronics FPGA DAC Technology Explained" - What went wrong?

[ribonucleic]

This stylish video sold me on the idea that Chord must have outstanding DACs. [The plummy British accent helped.] Then I read the reviews here and... well, you can guess the rest.

So what went wrong? Are these claims snake oil? Or just poorly executed?

 

[Somafunk]

Certain chord products are very good, some merely so-so.

Been done to the death on here.

 

[ribonucleic]

Certain chord products are very good, some merely so-so.

But 500x ! You can't just sneer at a number like that.

 

[Chrispy]

In audiophilia is it all that unusual on the other hand?

 

[dc655321]

But 500x ! You can't just sneer at a number like that.

Can and will!

500x what?

 

[oleg87]

The thing is, if the designers of your standard issue ESS/AKM/TI dacs wanted to make an overproduced video like this explaining their design rationale for various performance-enhancing implementation details (ignoring whatever tradeoffs are involved) they absolutely could. You don't design a DAC with 120dB+ of dynamic range carelessly.

The Chord stuff is perfectly fine, if you like their "quirky" industrial design. But it's not really anything special.

 

[Music1969]

Then I read the reviews here and... well, you can guess the rest.

So what went wrong? Are these claims snake oil? Or just poorly executed?

You read the reviews of Chord Qutest, Mojo2 , Hugo2, Hugo TT2 ?

All those are recommended by Amir based on technical performance.

I would hardly call those 'snake oil' products otherwise you are saying Amir is recommending snake oil in his conclusions.

Their marketing is absurb (including Rob himself talking about noise at -350dB being audible) but Rob Watts clearly has the capability to designed excellent discrete DACs.

The measurements prove it.

Next, someone will complain about price but that is separate from technical performance.

 

[Music1969]

But it's not really anything special.

There aren't many discrete design DACs in Amirms blue tier, in terms of SINAD.

It's not a trivial task to design that kind of performance without an off the shelf D to A chip.

Only Chord and Mola Mola are there in the top tier of SINAD rankings?

I would say those 2 are 'special' in their small way, in terms of engineering.

Not commenting about price or industrial design here.

 

[ocinn]

Chord products here are panned for being comically overpriced and borderline user-hostile to operate. But the Mojo2 and the Hugo TT2 have objectively great performance (Dave and 2Qute are bested by cheaper models in the lineup). Sure can you buy a $300 DAC that matches or beats it in every metric except for the exotic hi-tap filter? Yes.

I just don't think chord is the enemy when their designs are generally competent. Plenty of DAC manufacturers in the same and higher price brackets slapping together hugely flawed products built around off-the-shelf chips and shipping them out. If someone wants to blow $9k on some exotic discrete/bespoke DAC, at least with a Hugo TT2 they are purchasing a solid performer. Can even drive speakers and headphones with huge power levels as well from the rear XLRs.

Considering the R&D costs of alone to design your own discrete FPGA based DAC, the Mojo2 at $799 I'd actually consider a "bargain" (not for the objective performance as much as for the effort to produce). They are not like ESS, AKM or TI where R&D costs can be spread over millions of units.

 

[oleg87]

There aren't many discrete design DACs in Amirms blue tier, in terms of SINAD.

It's not a trivial task to design that kind of performance without an off the shelf D to A chip.

Only Chord and Mola Mola are there in the top tier of SINAD rankings?

I would say those 2 are 'special' in their small way, in terms of engineering.

Not commenting about price or industrial design here.

Don't get me wrong, Rob Watts and his team (despite their penchant for audiophile woo marketing) are clearly competent engineers in their field, but they are in a market saturated with measurably high-performance products. If someone gets a kick out of it being a boutique design (and is happy to pay accordingly) that's all well and good. But I'm not sure what the benefit is for folks who don't really care about how the same basic result is achieved.

 

[raif71]

I'm happy with my chord mojo purchase

 

[Music1969]

Don't get me wrong, Rob Watts and his team (despite their penchant for audiophile woo marketing) are clearly competent engineers in their field, but they are in a market saturated with measurably high-performance products. If someone gets a kick out of it being a boutique design (and is happy to pay accordingly) that's all well and good. But I'm not sure what the benefit is for folks who don't really care about how the same basic result is achieved.

That is fine but post #1 is asking if these are snake oil products.

I already mentioned price is a separate discussion.

Based on technical performance, the products I mentioned are not snake oil.

The measurements are here on ASR to see as well as Amir recommending them...

 

[ribonucleic]

You read the reviews of Chord Qutest, Mojo2 , Hugo2, Hugo TT2 ?

Just "the best one".

The DAVE DAC does not perform anywhere near where it should. It is bested easily by DACs at $150. Its headphone amplifier is good but no match for higher powered units. It is a pretty DAC but usability is left behind.

Chord DAVE Review (DAC & HP Amp)

This is a review, detailed measurements and listening tests of CHORD DAVE combination DAC and headphone amplifier. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $14,000. Having been frustrated with the user interface of lower end Chord products with their color Morse codes, I was really looking...

www.audiosciencereview.com

(He goes on to say that the sound is nothing special. But I take it for granted there neither are nor should be any audible differences between quality DACs.)

 

[Music1969]

Just "the best one".

Well that wasn't on my list was it?

Maybe for a good reason?

I looked at larger sample size of Chord DACs ;-) Not just 1 (and the oldest one)

Check the ones I listed? And recommended by Amir...

 

[NTK]

Can and will!

500x what?

It is actually 1000x. It took Watts 1 million taps to do what 1000 will do better. That's at least 1000x.

Chord quest, Vs Rme adi-2 dac fs + tap count.

Well it looks a lot more advanced than this. But is it really?

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[jonUK]

[The plummy British accent helped.]

Computer generated text to speech synthesis I'd say.

 

[Music1969]

So what went wrong?

And when you ask what went wrong...

In an interview a few years ago it was mentioned over 100k units of the original Chord Mojo have been sold.

Just the Mojo alone.

I think those are the kinds of numbers most companies in audiophilia dream of at night - and that is only Mojo.

 

[ocinn]

Just "the best one".

Chord DAVE Review (DAC & HP Amp)

This is a review, detailed measurements and listening tests of CHORD DAVE combination DAC and headphone amplifier. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $14,000. Having been frustrated with the user interface of lower end Chord products with their color Morse codes, I was really looking...

www.audiosciencereview.com

(He goes on to say that the sound is nothing special. But I take it for granted there neither are nor should be any audible differences between quality DACs.)

Yeah well the DAVE is not the best one, it's just the most expensive. Beaten by the Hugo TT2 in every metric for half the price

 

[Beershaun]

To answer your question directly, what is wrong is the price. The market has moved on and prices have come down to 1/100 the price for comparable performance and features. So they are just not competitive anymore.

 

[BigEarsBill]

Don't get me wrong, Rob Watts and his team (despite their penchant for audiophile woo marketing) are clearly competent engineers in their field, but they are in a market saturated with measurably high-performance products. If someone gets a kick out of it being a boutique design (and is happy to pay accordingly) that's all well and good. But I'm not sure what the benefit is for folks who don't really care about how the same basic result is achieved.

I like your point. People buying different products for different reasons. I just had a guy sneer at me because I purchased a turntable whose platter didn't look like a birthday cake. There's nothing wrong with a product that was designed to be furniture or an extreme indulgence in some aspect of audio design - or simply a trophy to their pocketbook. But, when all is said and done, I have bills to pay and what matters to me is how much sound quality I can get for my dollar.