Chord Huei Phono Preamp Review

[TCD333]

I for one think it looks incredibly cool. Yes, the color coding is not for everyone. True. But they went out on a limb with their design language, and IMO that takes a lot of guts. People choose with their eyes, not with their ears.

Also, their other products are extremely well measuring (albeit expensive), and they have the technical expertise to create their own FPGA designs that compete with industry titans like AKM and ESS. So it's not like they shouldn't be able to put together a functional product. Maybe this is just defective? I look forward to Chord responding!

Agreed, a bit perplexing, some of their other designs AKA Dave are absolutely SOTA. A well implemented circa <2nV / rt Hz OPA at the front end would have given much improved results.

 

[Deleted member 31750]

I have this phono preamplifier and my observations are different from the measurements. Since science starts with observations maybe this is something to take note of. I am not saying that the measurements are wrong in any way.

 

[Phorize]

I have this phono preamplifier and my observations are different from the measurements. Since science starts with observations maybe this is something to take note of. I am not saying that the measurements are wrong in any way.

Science started with observations in the 1700s. We don’t look at results that surprise our intuitions as if we haven’t learned anything since then. Secondly to be considered ‘observations’ you need to use experimental controls.

 

[Deleted member 31750]

Science started with observations in the 1700s. We don’t look at results that surprise our intuitions as if we haven’t learned anything since then. Secondly to be considered ‘observations’ you need to use experimental controls.

I am not sure what you are trying to say. Observation is step one in the science process. Anyway we are not discussing if measurements are science. Are part of science but not science by itself. We are talking about the phono preamplifier and I just wanted to share that my observations from having the unit for about 7 months and the fact that are different from the conclusions made. That’s all. Overall I found the preamp very well made, without any auditable noise/distortion, good connectivity for long cable runs and great flexibility in terms of settings & adjustments

 

[Francis Vaughan]

Overall I found the preamp very well made, without any auditable noise/distortion, good connectivity for long cable runs and great flexibility in terms of settings & adjustments

There is nothing in the above that is in contradiction with the measurements. Audible distortion is a rubbery beast, and this is especially true when starting from such a low base as phono reproduction, with its intrinsic distortion and lack of dynamic range. Noise is another low base with phono.
Galileo was the first scientist on record to realise the inherent weakness of human perception as a tool for science. From there on in we learnt to trust instruments with definable physical properties and operation over wetware. A human observation might be a starting point for a hunch. It isn't data (unless you are in the social sciences, and they have their own set of problems and protocols to address them).
Nobody says the amp is not a pleasure to own. But the measurements do suggest that it is way overpriced for the objective performance it delivers.

 

[Deleted member 31750]

Nobody says the amp is not a pleasure to own. But the measurements do suggest that it is way overpriced for the objective performance it delivers.

I've read through the measurements and the suggestion is that this is a terrible product. I just don’t think that the measurements taken confirm my observations. That’s all. It’s like saying the measurements measure sweet taste but I taste savoury.

 

[Phorize]

I am not sure what you are trying to say. Observation is step one in the science process. Anyway we are not discussing if measurements are science. Are part of science but not science by itself. We are talking about the phono preamplifier and I just wanted to share that my observations from having the unit for about 7 months and the fact that are different from the conclusions made. That’s all. Overall I found the preamp very well made, without any auditable noise/distortion, good connectivity for long cable runs and great flexibility in terms of settings & adjustments

I was being literal. Observations without controls aren’t observations in the way that you inferred, and are equivalent to saying nothing in this context.

Further, a rigorous scientific process doesn’t involve deducing a position from empirical data. Observations are followed by a conjecture, but the standing of what follows scientifically is judged on how modifiable that explanation is with reference to empirical data and established theory. The more variable the conjecture, the more compromised its is as an explanation. You say your empirical data (produced without controls) amounts to a preference for the sound of the phono stage. I say that a wizard put a spell on you to make you believe that you like the sound of your phono stage, but in reality you hate it. At this point my explanation for what your data says is a good as yours.

Edit- I’m not being obtuse BTW

 

[Deleted member 31750]

I was being literal. Observations without controls aren’t observations in the way that you inferred, and are equivalent to saying nothing in this context.

Further, a rigorous scientific process doesn’t involve deducing a position from empirical data. Observations are followed by a conjecture, but the standing of what follows scientifically is judged on how modifiable that explanation is with reference to empirical data and established theory. The more variable the conjecture, the more compromised its is as an explanation. You say your empirical data (produced without controls) amounts to a preference for the sound of the phono stage. I say that a wizard put a spell on you to make you believe that you like the sound of your phono stage, but in reality you hate it. At this point my explanation for what your data says is a good as yours.

Edit- I’m not being obtuse BTW

I will agree with you on the essence. I think you will also agree that measurements as well doesn’t constitute science but just a part of it. Anyway, my point is that from my observations this is a well design product, without design faults, great flexibility and versatility. I am not going into the sound of it because that’s subjective. But I like the way the device sounds and performs.

 

[Phorize]

I will agree with you on the essence. I think you will also agree that measurements as well doesn’t constitute science but just a part of it. Anyway, my point is that from my observations this is a well design product, without design faults, great flexibility and versatility. I am not going into the sound of it because that’s subjective. But I like the way the device sounds and performs.

Just out of interest how do you find the controls? I could just about cope with my qutest when I had it, but I think the huei would blow my mind,

 

[Deleted member 31750]

Just out of interest how do you find the controls? I could just about cope with my qutest when I had it, but I think the huei would blow my mind,

To be honest I don’t have an issue with it. Mainly because you set it up once and you forget about it.

 

[Chrispy]

I've read through the measurements and the suggestion is that this is a terrible product. I just don’t think that the measurements taken confirm my observations. That’s all. It’s like saying the measurements measure sweet taste but I taste savoury.

Terrible in terms of performance and measurement. Taste has little to do with it, and there's no accounting for taste as they say. Doesn't mean that someone might not like the way it sounds....but for that kind of money I want better performance but then I don't find Chord to be a brand that has products that interest me at all.

 

[Angsty]

Crappy measuring products can still produce pleasurable sounds. Take the majority of tube amp you’ve ever seen, for example.

Accuracy is simply different from enjoyability, but the two are not mutually exclusive.

 

[amirm]

I have this phono preamplifier and my observations are different from the measurements. Since science starts with observations maybe this is something to take note of. I am not saying that the measurements are wrong in any way.

The LP format is so flawed that it will likely overwhelm what this device adds to it. This doesn't excuse the device's poor engineering however especially given its high price. In other words, your observation of some content sounding good is consistent with this review and measurements. Your hearing is simply not able to tease apart what is wrong with this phono stage.

 

[Deleted member 31750]

The LP format is so flawed that it will likely overwhelm what this device adds to it. This doesn't excuse the device's poor engineering however especially given its high price. In other words, your observation of some content sounding good is consistent with this review and measurements. Your hearing is simply not able to tease apart what is wrong with this phono stage.

I understand that the conclusion is that my hearing is the problem. In this case could you take apart with your hearing and confirm the measuring results? Also as a note to add the before the chord Huei I had the Cambridge audio duo.

 

[Deleted member 31750]

Terrible in terms of performance and measurement. Taste has little to do with it, and there's no accounting for taste as they say. Doesn't mean that someone might not like the way it sounds....but for that kind of money I want better performance but then I don't find Chord to be a brand that has products that interest me at all.

I am not challenging the measuring results. All I am saying is why I am not able to confirm these results. For my improvement and understanding, because personally don’t know much if anything. For example. When you say this item is horrible measuring machine, let’s say in terms of SNR, what does it mean? What is the observation that will make relevant the measurement between something with amazing SNR vs something with poor SNR? Also for my understanding on your thought process, you’ve said you have no interest on their products due to poor measurements and performance. Would that be applicable to chord Qutest? From the results that’s one of the best measuring dacs.

 

[Deleted member 31750]

To keep it civil I just want to say that I am asking these questions out of my personal ignorance but willingness to learn and understand

 

[Deleted member 31750]

Crappy measuring products can still produce pleasurable sounds. Take the majority of tube amp you’ve ever seen, for example.

Accuracy is simply different from enjoyability, but the two are not mutually exclusive.

For my understanding let’s leave the personal taste out of the argument for the moment. I just want to understand how I can use these measurements. So, since you seem to understand, how would you translate the measurements to performance? What a poor SNR will result to? My previous phono was the Cambridge audio Duo with SNR 90. My current, huei, has SNR 44. What that means?

 

[Deleted member 31750]

There is nothing in the above that is in contradiction with the measurements. Audible distortion is a rubbery beast, and this is especially true when starting from such a low base as phono reproduction, with its intrinsic distortion and lack of dynamic range. Noise is another low base with phono.
Galileo was the first scientist on record to realise the inherent weakness of human perception as a tool for science. From there on in we learnt to trust instruments with definable physical properties and operation over wetware. A human observation might be a starting point for a hunch. It isn't data (unless you are in the social sciences, and they have their own set of problems and protocols to address them).
Nobody says the amp is not a pleasure to own. But the measurements do suggest that it is way overpriced for the objective performance it delivers.

I will not argue with your statements because I am ignorant in the subject. So, how you will or can confirm the difference between the Cambridge audio duo with SNR at 90 and the chord huei with SNR at 44?

 

[Chrispy]

I am not challenging the measuring results. All I am saying is why I am not able to confirm these results. For my improvement and understanding, because personally don’t know much if anything. For example. When you say this item is horrible measuring machine, let’s say in terms of SNR, what does it mean? What is the observation that will make relevant the measurement between something with amazing SNR vs something with poor SNR? Also for my understanding on your thought process, you’ve said you have no interest on their products due to poor measurements and performance. Would that be applicable to chord Qutest? From the results that’s one of the best measuring dacs.

I just think they're overpriced and their marketing is a bit woo. You may like any audible distortion it adds to your vinyl, hard to know how audible it may be otoh. The reviews here aren't to affirm someone's gear selection based on "listening" criteria they may have come up with.

 

[Deleted member 31750]

I just think they're overpriced and their marketing is a bit woo. You may like any audible distortion it adds to your vinyl, hard to know how audible it may be otoh. The reviews here aren't to affirm someone's gear selection based on "listening" criteria they may have come up with.

I am not looking to affirm my gear based on listening. I just want to understand what the measurements mean. So when you see high or low SNR or other measurements what that means? Surely a test is to confirm something such as observation. That’s part of the science process. Isn’t it? All I am saying is that I don’t know but I want to learn and understand