Review and Measurements of CHORD Qutest DAC

[VintageFlanker]

Does it blow the other well measuring Delta Sigma DACs out of the water in terms of naturalness and analogue like Sound?

Again and again, @Shoaibexpert: NO!

I don't want to be rude, but: why keep asking if you don't listen to our answers?! :

Sure. This is not the issue I'm talking about. Anyone may ask anything here. What bothers me, however, is that you're keep mentioning subjective reviews over and over while everyone already answered you can't trust them... For obvious reasons.

.
You have to make a choice between trusting either Subjectivists, who praise anything, anyway, or Objectivists, who bring technical arguments to the table... Keeping reading subjective reviews over and over between objective ones will just lead to a complete mindfuck.

If you want subjective stuff: I personally owned the Qutest twice and I don't miss it at all. Period.

Although much cheaper but I've got a bit of an experience myself in A/B'ing DACs... pretty basic ones. I've compared the Dragonfly Red with the SMSL SU-8...a difference in SiNAD of around 25-30. Volume matched, I could not tell them apart on my THX 789 and my Hifiman Arya/HD 650. For some reason though, I find my new M500 lot more inviting though...

Keep your M500 if you're happy with it and save your money for better speakers/headphones!The end.

 

[majingotan]

Thanks. Off course it won't be 5 times better sounding...my curiosity was around the differences being 'noticeable' at least for 5 times the price, volume matched.

Not gonna happen. If you succumb to your sighted desires of seeing the Qutest be part of your audio chain, you'll probably hear a difference (bias) but don't volume match it with any of the DACs you have or the M500. I have my Bifrost 2 R2R DAC and I listen to it like a normal subjectivist would. The effects of having a R2R DAC in the chain makes me think that my system sounded more "lifelike" than ever (that's perceived bias working on me BTW)

 

[Shoaibexpert]

Again and again, @Shoaibexpert: NO!

I don't want to be rude, but: why keep asking if you don't listen to our answers?! :


.
You have to make a choice between trusting either Subjectivists, who praise anything, anyway, or Objectivists, who bring technical arguments to the table... Keeping reading subjective reviews over and over between objective ones will just lead to a complete mindfuck.

If you want subjective stuff: I personally owned the Qutest twice and I don't miss it at all. Period.

Keep your M500 if you're happy with it and save your money for better speakers/headphones!The end.

Thanks for not being that rude. Don't be confused between questions and conclusions mate. I just asked if it makes a difference to pay for an expensive but similar measuring DAC...I don't feel I've heard enough DACs to make a conclusion myself. You may be happy with 'Choosing' to be a hard core objectivist...I don't wanna make that choice, period! I believe most if not all objective conclusions can be reflected in subjective listening...as they should!

Oh! And I do value members opinions here...it's why I'm here...

 

[VintageFlanker]

I believe most if not all objective conclusions can be reflected in subjective listening...as they should!

Couldn't agree more!... But unfortunately, the opposite doesn't exist.

 

[majingotan]

Thanks for not being that rude. Don't be confused between questions and conclusions mate. I just asked if it makes a difference to pay for an expensive but similar measuring DAC...I don't feel I've heard enough DACs to make a conclusion myself. You may be happy with 'Choosing' to be a hard core objectivist...I don't wanna make that choice, period! I believe most if not all objective conclusions can be reflected in subjective listening...as they should!

Oh! And I do value members opinions here...it's why I'm here...

BTW, if you're using IEMs, I find differences between the sources since IEMs are much more sensitive to the output load it receives. I have compared my iPod Touch 7G against the Sony DMP-Z1 and the DMP-Z1 clearly sounds different with quick volume matched A/B

 

[Shoaibexpert]

Couldn't agree more!... But unfortunately, the opposite doesn't exist.

Why not...don't poor sounding DACs also measure poorly...at least most if the time? Performance (measurements and listening) is like 2 faces of the same coin... otherwise all these measurements and the work Amir does would become jack shit...if one wouldn't be able to conclude whether a piece of equipment sounds better or not and vice versa.

Most of us are here out of our joint interest in music and listening (very very subjective) not what SINAD a particular piece of equipment is able to achieve!

Best not to lose sight of the bigger picture!

 

[Shoaibexpert]

BTW, if you're using IEMs, I find differences between the sources since IEMs are much more sensitive to the output load it receives. I have compared my iPod Touch 7G against the Sony DMP-Z1 and the DMP-Z1 clearly sounds different with quick volume matched A/B

Thanks. I don't use IEMs but need to buy one for my office. Any recommendations?

Btw, it's very interesting to note that you apple DAC virtually matches the Bifrost...not even subtle nuances like cymbals etc. sound different? Very interesting...

 

[majingotan]

Thanks. I don't use IEMs but need to buy one for my office. Any recommendations?

I haven't listened to many IEMs ever since I got my Campfire Audio Andromeda. IMO, if you're gonna use it for office, I don't know if noise isolation would be bad for you since earbuds like the Airpods or any wireless earbuds are far more practical than IEMs for office use. As for IEMs, I generally agree with crinacle's subjective opinion on the matter since he's spot on at his subjective opinion with the CA Andromeda that I have https://crinacle.com/rankings/iems/

 

[majingotan]

Btw, it's very interesting to note that you apple DAC virtually matches the Bifrost...not even subtle nuances like cymbals etc. sound different? Very interesting...

Nope. Cymbals sound like real life cymbals coming from both DACs. The reason I keep the Bifrost 2 is because it's a status symbol to own one in my country as R2R DACs and USA made/assembled DACs are uncommon there even amongst audiophiles there

 

[creativepart]

Question for @majingotan. What are you using for a source when commenting on the SQ of the Bifrost and the Apple Lightning Dac?

 

[majingotan]

Question for @majingotan. What are you using for a source when commenting on the SQ of the Bifrost and the Apple Lightning Dac?

iPod Touch 7G with 16/44.1 ALAC for the lightning DAC. For Bifrost 2, same 16/44.1 ALAC files played through Foobar2000 using DirectSound digitally volume attenuated on Foobar volume slider to match levels to <1 dB confirmed by my Apple Watch noise app and iPhone 6S tone generator. I use the Schiit Saga remote to rapidly switch between the inputs. Saga is turned at 4pm to obtain about 85dB SPL at 1 KHz tone

 

[majingotan]

BTW, I don't normally use digital volume to attenuate signal before it goes to the DAC, and I only use it when matching levels for A/Bing. I strictly use WASAPI Push without any EQ enabled and all samples are converted to 24 bits with sample rates untouched.

 

[Shoaibexpert]

BTW, I don't normally use digital volume to attenuate signal before it goes to the DAC, and I only use it when matching levels for A/Bing. I strictly use WASAPI Push without any EQ enabled and all samples are converted to 24 bits with sample rates untouched.

View attachment 44756

I see you have the Mojo too. Have you tried comparing those two or three?

 

[Veri]

BTW, I don't normally use digital volume to attenuate signal before it goes to the DAC, and I only use it when matching levels for A/Bing. I strictly use WASAPI Push without any EQ enabled and all samples are converted to 24 bits with sample rates untouched.

View attachment 44756

Why does it say 'DSD : WASAPI' ?

 

[majingotan]

Why does it say 'DSD : WASAPI' ?

That’s because the DSD can be sent as DoP through WASAPI interface. If you select the one without DSD, all DSD samples are automatically converted to PCM before it goes to the DAC

 

[majingotan]

I see you have the Mojo too. Have you tried comparing those two or three?

Yep. As DAC for speakers, I also cannot tell the difference volume matched but as DAC/amp for my CA Andromeda IEM, it’s a noticeable difference from the lightning DAC where Mojo sounds fuller (frequency response of the Andromeda is different than the dongle since you noticeably hear a difference)

Someone measured CA Andromeda’s frequency response against a DAP output
impedance.

https://www.superbestaudiofriends.o...o-andromeda-iem-measurements.2088/#post-56933

Most headphones aren’t this sensitive as IEMs in the output impedance so A/Bing against the dongle might yield zero difference whatsoever unless that headphone needs a lot more power than the dongle can provide.

 

[Veri]

That’s because the DSD can be sent as DoP through WASAPI interface. If you select the one without DSD, all DSD samples are automatically converted to PCM before it goes to the DAC

Right, OK. It confused me since as far as I know, Schiit doesn't support DSD nor DSD over DoP

 

[majingotan]

Right, OK. It confused me since as far as I know, Schiit doesn't support DSD nor DSD over DoP

I have my foobar SACD setup for PCM output so it doesn't really matter whether I choose DSD: WASAPI, but I occasionally switch to Mojo when I want some good DSD session

 

[Shoaibexpert]

Yep. As DAC for speakers, I also cannot tell the difference volume matched but as DAC/amp for my CA Andromeda IEM, it’s a noticeable difference from the lightning DAC where Mojo sounds fuller (frequency response of the Andromeda is different than the dongle since you noticeably hear a difference)

Someone measured CA Andromeda’s frequency response against a DAP output
impedance.

https://www.superbestaudiofriends.o...o-andromeda-iem-measurements.2088/#post-56933

Most headphones aren’t this sensitive as IEMs in the output impedance so A/Bing against the dongle might yield zero difference whatsoever unless that headphone needs a lot more power than the dongle can provide.

So what you're saying is that the Amp section of the Mojo created the difference not the DAC....that too on sensitive IEMs only. Interesting indeed...so I guess the argument of paying more for "THAT UNIQUE CHORD SOUND SIGNATURE" goes out the window...

 

[majingotan]

So what you're saying is that the Amp section of the Mojo created the difference not the DAC....that too on sensitive IEMs only. Interesting indeed...so I guess the argument of paying more for "THAT UNIQUE CHORD SOUND SIGNATURE" goes out the window...

That would be correct in this case. Rob himself is proud how he handles the amplification stage of his DACs: minimum signal path and ultra low output impedance to preserve the frequency response of any IEMs or sensitive headphones you throw at it.

Here's some Amir's quote about how Chord does its upsampling:

The FPGA is not performing the DAC function.

In simple terms, the Chord DACs first upsample the audio to much higher rate so that they don't need as many bits to convert to analog. The FPGA performs this function as would any other upsampling DAC. Where it differs from other DACs is that its reconstruction filter uses far more audio samples to perform its filtering than off-the-shelf filters do. Rob Watts says this improves fidelity but that is a hand wave. What is implemented in mass market DAC chips is already at point of diminishing returns. Going 1000 times more taps (audio samples) doesn't amount to much improvement. The asymptop has already been reached.

FPGAs are inefficient to use by the way compared to hard silicon such as what is in a DAC chip. The main benefit of FPGA is that it can be programmed over and over again whereas a custom IC cannot. The price for that is higher cost and higher power consumption. An ASIC can be produced from an FPGA to get those benefits but it will have NRE up front costs north of a million dollars plus that much in engineering design cost (and tools). So it is not done in the scale that Chord sells these DACs.

As an analog, think of a car with 100 exhaust pipes instead of two. That is what Chord says will produce more horsepower. For measurements though, they show 0.01% more horsepower and can't show anyone actually feeling the improvement. They incur the expense, heat, etc. but the benefit simply is not there.

I don't really think there is that unique Chord sound signature as subjective impressions on them vary so much from being "warm sounding while having excellent pace, rhythm, timing and clarity" to outright bright, shrill and fatiguing: https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/24/17273218/chord-hugo-2-review-dac-headphone-amplifier

That's quite the spectrum to have such "house sound" lol.